they connect!

Yes, within canon Will doesn’t DRESS particularly feminine. But he is perceived as having feminine TRAITS, especially within the 80s. I think a lot of the confusion here is people not understanding where Will’s homophobic bullying came from. Many gay men who were bullied at a young age weren’t bullied because they showed attraction to boys, but because they were perceived as feminine. Feminine men are seen as gay.

Will is called a “fairy” in s1 which is defined as a derogatory term against effeminate men. This is CANONICAL confirmation that Will is feminine. The insistence that Will is masculine is incorrect and erases a very important piece of Will’s character. He’s GNC. He possesses both feminine and masculine traits, but leans more feminine.

Claiming that Will fans who say he’s feminine are being “stereotypical” and making “the gay one the girl” is ridiculous. We are not the ones saying sensitivity, shyness, and a damsel role are feminine. That’s just factually how society views those traits. We aren’t agreeing with gender norms, we’re explaining how Will fits outside of them. If you have an issue with making a gay character feminine, take it up with the writers who made him that way.

I agree that Will isn’t hyperfem in canon. If we were to keep closest to canon, I think Will would explore gender expression by dabbling in nail polish, maybe a little eyeliner and mascara, and lots of jewelry. But if someone wants to push his exploration even further into dresses, there’s nothing wrong with that. Will wore a purple robe that was akin to a dress. It’s not that far of a stretch to say he would wear dresses considering he already enjoys the way wizard robes look/feel on him.

And all this hullabaloo about “canon” is silly. Mike is canonically straight, yet no one has an issue with making him gay. They only seem to have a problem with fanon when it comes to a feminine gay man. Remember “making the gay one a girl?” Oh so they agree Mike is straight now? Interesting how Mike’s canonical straightness is only believed when it’s time to hate on FemWill. Hm.

Then they’ll say it’s heteronormative to make byler a mascfem relationship because it feminizes Will. How is putting a man in a feminine role heteronormative? How is making two men kiss heteronormative? That’s a misunderstanding of how queer relationships work. Mascfem and butchfemme relationships have always been subversive. In media, most queer ships are two feminine women and two masculine men. If you believe otherwise, you’re just wrong. I wish I lived in your world.

Most of this backlash against “stereotyping” is likely a dislike for people who are visibly queer. Are they stereotypes? Do they set back progress for existing? FemWill antis think they’re above gender norms for insisting that a gay man is super masc, but they’re actually just arguing “let men be masculine.” That’s why these conversations always end up at: “They’re both BOYS! Stop making him a GIRL!” Wearing feminine clothing or having a feminine personality doesn’t make someone a girl. That’s a homophobic and transphobic ideology.

And sexist. Because why is feminine Will ridiculed but not masculine Will? They yell about “stereotypes,” yet turn around and say Will is masculine because he shot a gun and killed some demogorgons. Who’s being stereotypical now? They only take issue with stereotyping femininity because society has negative connotations with it.

Feminine gay men already face enough vitriol from heterosexuals, they don’t need fellow queer people acting like they’re catering to heteronormativity. Notice how that makes no fucking sense? How is something heterosexuals DESPISE heteronormative?

If Will weren’t canonically GNC, maybe this would be a different conversation. Maybe it would be harmful stereotyping. But he’s GNC. He’s feminine. Not in clothing, but the idea of Will finding comfortability in femininity and exploring it outwardly is not a bad thing. In fact, he already has with more jewelry in the finale. Woah? Canon?

reading time