Stop acting like a disgruntled pelican.

Alex Manes: *Gets distracted by his face* "Wait what? We aren't even together."

Michael: "I can't do this anymore, Alex." *Stares into his eyes* "We aren't good for each other."

Alex: *looks away sadly* "Then let go of my arm."

Michael: "I can't live like this." *tries to sniff Alex's hair* "We can't be together."

Alex: "Then stop coming to find me, Guerin. I moved out here in these godforsaken boonies for a reason."

Michael: "BREAKING UP IS THE ONLY ANSWER."

Alex: "Yeah I get that. I got it the first thousand times you said it."

Michael: "I CAN'T TAKE IT WHEN YOU LEAVE ME."

Alex: "Okay but I've been here for months now and you're dating someone else."

Michael: "BREAKING UP"

Alex: "Oh my fucking god, would you let go of me?"

Michael: "I'm so tired of you being in my face everywhere I turn. It HURTS"

Alex: "Then stop following me. I'm trying to move on."

Michael: "Fuck Forrest."

Alex: "I'm literally TRYING Michael."

Michael: *shoves his face into Alex's personal space* "Breaking up is hard to do you know."

Alex: "If you start singing that, I swear to God."

Michael: "I can't stand seeing you with him. But I also can't stand seeing you in front of me without him even anywhere around."

Alex: "What exactly do you want me to do?"

Michael: "I want you where I can see you even though I want to date someone else. I don't want YOU dating because if you do, it cuts into my Alex on Demand time. I would like you to be available to me whenever I text you but you can't bring over information to me that I don't want, and you need to just know ahead of time that I don't want it. I want you to constantly be aware of how bad I feel when I see you, but I don't really want to put in the emotional energy it takes to fix us. But you're not allowed to go anywhere."

Alex: *pays someone to kidnap him*

Me: Why? WHY NOT SHANE? Why are we removing the very dynamic that is at the CORE of Hollanov (the fucking rivalry)? Why is Shane not the star and Ilya the "nobody" if you love that idea so much?

AUs where the summary basically starts out with, "Superstar Ilya Rozanov and his husband"

Me: Why? Do you not remember his name? You mean husband Shane Fucking Hollander?

AUs where Rose is Ilya's friend but Svetlana isn't Shane's? WHY? Why are you giving Shane's support network to someone else? Why when canonically (at least in the show) Svetlana would kill to be friends with Shane?

INCOMING RESPONSE I'M SURE: "IT'S JUST FANFIC. YOU'RE MAKING A BIG DEAL OUT OF NOTHING."

But the concept of Ilya not "believing" in cheating because he doesn't "own" anybody is both a fascinating way to introduce the topic into a book but also disappointing because it became a way to have Shane get mad (again) for "no reason." Or maybe another reason to make Shane look like he is overreacting or not appreciating Ilya's sacrifices? (I say this because that suggestion was framed as Ilya sacrificing Shane's loyalty in order for Shane to have more experience and to fully understand what he wanted? You know it's framed as a sacrifice for Ilya because otherwise it would have been framed as a fully open relationship with both of them sleeping with other people. Ilya's willingness to somewhat "let" Shane do it because he doesn't own Shane = the sacrifice in question.)

Where was the exploration of how this belief impacts Ilya's behaviors long term? He is fully in the relationship at the time, so it's not a "still casual sex/situationship time frame" thing. And where was the follow up about how this belief impacts his jealousy?

Also, does this mean he wouldn't have cared about sleeping with a married person because he doesn't see it as cheating or would this mean he wouldn't sleep with a married person because while HE doesn't see it as cheating, the person's spouse would?

(I KNOW it was a way to introduce drama between them.)

But if Ilya truly felt like this, it should have been addressed beyond the plot line of "Shane doesn't want to do it."

To me, it's another dropped ball. I'm not talking about Ilya saying he doesn't want to sleep with others because he only wants Shane.

I mean things like slapping the puck at Shane and the Reporter.

Regardless of when the discussion happened, Ilya apparently has always held this belief but just hadn't shared it. If Ilya truly believes he doesn't own Shane, then this would have been a perfect time to bring it up (or again because I can't remember which conversation came first and I'm not bothering to look it up).

The slapshot introduces the concept of why Ilya is okay with "offering it" to Shane but it wasn't okay with him for someone else to approach and "offer it" to Shane (which of course the Reporter wasn't even doing to begin with).

Why does Ilya get to control that and ONLY Ilya? When Shane says no, Ilya doesn't immediately take Shane's no for a final answer, which he should have if he believes Shane is his own person and that Ilya doesn't "own" him.

Deep down, I KNOW it's because of the inconsistency in how Ilya is written.

But it also has to do with changes in fandom and audience expectations over the years. When a certain dynamic gets popular, other creators look for that dynamic or recreate it themselves (hence the gradual development and use of literary tropes).

When you look at how the narrative treats Ilya versus Shane, or at least when I do, what I also see are narratives that came before them that are the exact same dynamic.

PARTNER A: This one is not to be criticized and all of their trauma/troubled past explains/justifies all of their crappy behavior and if you disagree with that, you're in the wrong. This partner can do whatever they want and act however they need to in order to prove that they are the better partner in this relationship, even if the actual dialogue and behaviors shown prove that that just isn't true. This is almost always the writers' favorite character, and it's definitely most of the fandom's favorite character.

PARTNER B: And over here with the other partner, what you see is the suggestion that anything bad that happens to them is their own fault. They deserve it. They deserve their trauma. If their partner treats them horribly, they deserved it. If they stand up for themselves, they are selfish. They are usually mocked or made fun of or even destroyed by the narrative. If they want something to be just theirs and they don't want to give that up, they are punished narratively. Other characters are written in ways that push the narrative, even if you can prove through the text/context that it just isn't true.

The relationship doesn't even have to be Canon for this to happen. Some of the most popular ships have this same dynamic even if they never become Canon.

For most heterosexual relationships, A is almost always the male lead and B is the female lead. (A good Het example of this might be Dawson and Joey from Dawson's Creek).

Fandom examples (using TV/Book Source only) *mostly queer because that's just about all I watch or read about and as I stated the Het examples are usually the Male Lead and Female Lead*

Also I'm sure there are other examples from fandoms I have not been a part of, but since I haven't been a part of them, they aren't included here for obvious reasons.

Canon and Non-Canon (meaning romantically) Relationships:

KLAINE (Glee) - A is Blaine Anderson. B is Kurt Hummel.

A minor Het example for Glee that actually goes against the usual Het trend is - A is Rachel Berry. B is Anybody She Dates).

MALEX (Roswell, NM) - A is Michael Guerin. B is Alex Manes.

(Older show) BRITON (US version of QAF) - A is Brian Kinney. B is Justin Taylor. (Case of a milder example of the trend because Brian has a lot of "haters (deserved)" in the fandom).

MALEC (Shadowhunters) - A is Alec Lightwood. B is Magnus Bane. (Trend is more obvious in the books).

CALZONA (Grey's Anatomy) - (multiple queer and het examples but the most glaring queer one is this one) - A is Arizona Robbins. B is Callie Torres.

(Older show) JANTO (Torchwood) - A is Jack Harkness. B is Ianto Jones. (Also a milder example of the pattern simply because they didn't get enough screen time for it to be more obvious).

PATRICK/DAVID (Schitt's Creek) - very very mild example because this is the best written show out of all of them and the pairing is the most equal of the examples - A is Patrick Brewer. B is David Rose.

SCILES (Teen Wolf) - completely fanon obviously but this also goes for their canon friendship - A is Scott McCall. B is Stiles Stilinski. (Another rarity in this pairing is that Stiles is usually favored over Scott in fandom and this isn't the biggest ship for Stiles).

BUDDIE (911) - A is Eddie Diaz. B is Evan Buckley.

(Older show) BO/LAUREN (Lost Girl) - A is Bo. B is Lauren.

(Older show) SHANE (L Word) - Shane is just an A. Regardless of the pairing she is in.

Which brings me back to:

HOLLANOV (Heated Rivalry) - A is Ilya Rozanov. B is Shane Hollander.

End of examples.

Why I pay attention to this is because PARTNER B is almost always my favorite character out of the pairing (and in most cases my favorite of the show). And that is true for every example I mentioned.

These patterns continue because they drive the fandom responses. Comparisons to toxic Het ships are valid comparisons. One queer character gets treated like the sole male lead and the other gets treated like the sole female lead.

One "can do no wrong" and the other "can't do anything right."

This pattern is never going to change unless this dynamic is talked about. Yes, it's "just" fiction. But fiction is important because it's a reflection of culture changes/dynamics.

It is important to look at these relationships critically BECAUSE they are popular.

And he is just livid about it? Like Cliff he could understand because they picked up together, but HUNTER???