This one does really seem to touch a nerve. Like I say, I'm not a shipper, I have zero interest in fanfic or Johnlock or the rest. But its fairly clear to me what is being, at the least, hinted at, and I appreciate that this is considered as a possibility. That even John's extremely defensive (at times) response is never rooted in homophobia and that he, at least, has a gay sibling who he accepts. The simple fact that the only words ever used are "gay" or "lesbian", nothing even borderline critical. I know there is a generation of kids that this will make a huge difference to and you know what? The show's writers will too, I am sure of that. They've handled this whole situation in an amazing sensitive and positive way. 

I think there can be a desire for things in neat boxes.. But that's not how the world is. And Sherlock, like other reboots - Dr Who, for example-is emotionally literate enough to recognise this. I'm personally glad, for the sake of my kids, that we have such complex shows to show that human sexuality is a continuum not a binary thing. And that struggling with your sexuality, questioning it, is actually normal. 

Last edited by beekeeper (March 29, 2013 8:03 pm)

beekeeper wrote:

but "bromance" isn't really something that actually exists in real life. Not IME anyway. In many years on this planet, having known many, many different kinds of people, I have never known a bromance. I cannot think of a single pair of male friends I know who are each other's world like this, who would write a suicide note to each other or reach out hands to touch before death. "bromance", imo, is a word invented to circumvent what's actually happening, which is that sexuality isn't fixed for any of us and that gay relationships don't necessitate sex any more than straight ones do. You can and do have long term, chaste, same sex relationships where there is a lot of love. 

I'm so not a shipper. But I do struggle a bit here because to me, this is obviously a relationship with a lot of things in common with a same sex relationship. And part of me thinks, why the protest?
 

I don't trust the bromance concept either    And if there was such thing as bromance, I'd find it soo boring.

I'm a part-time-shipper, btw.  I think one shouldn't take this too serious or anything for granted

ah but there is Word of God against Sherlock's asexuality. The writers have said he is not asexual but resisting temptation. But as I say, I find John's sexuality more interesting here and certainly more helpful from the point of view of giving kids something to work with. 

And as to sex scenes-they don't bother me either way, and I do appreciate the even handed nature of Sherlock as regards what they show of gay and straight relationships. But I would not say its a show that avoids sex. What about most of A Scandal in Belgravia? Its about a dominatrix! My ten year old loves Sherlock Holmes and loves the little he's seen of Sherlock but no way on this earth would I let him watch that one. Even HotB has a dogging scene (dogging, geddit?)
 

"There is a running Sherlock joke about Sherlock being a couple. The joke being on the stupid characters, the clever viewers know they are not.".

What, stupid people like Mrs Hudson and the two gay men who run the pub in HotB? Like Mycroft Holmes and, tbh, Jim Moriaty? Irene Adler?  Actually there seems to be a direct correlation between how well people can read them and/ or what experience they have of same-sex attraction and
percieving something there.

"Sherlock is described as a virgin and hasn't been seen in any relationships, indeed has rejected at least one advance.
John has  had a series of girlfriends and could possibly get married."

Well aside from the fact that I'd say that it is strongly hinted that Sherlock is no longer a virgin, you know, this is exactly the point I am making. People don't fit into boxes. Someone like John who sees himself as straight can still find himself attracted to a man and think "what the-?". And even if thats a non-sexual attraction-whcih it probably is-there's no code, no place for that to fit in. Its not friendship really, and its not necessarily sexual. But what it is is one important part of any marriage. Like I say I think this is really about John having feelings that make no sense given his understanding of the world. 

oh and "emphasise doggging?" how did I do that? I put it in brackets at the end! Its pretty clear to me that they put that in, entirely gratuitiously, because John had gone looking for a hound. And what did he get? Dogging. I dunno, I think that's pretty clever. There's certainly no other reason for that scene to be in there.

A dominatrix isn;t just about power. Its about people getting off on power. Its about, I'd say, a form of sex that isn't necessarily one i want to introduce to my pre-teen kids. Which is fine, by the way, Sherlock isn't a family show, it does have a lot of sexual references

I'm going to make my point a final time though. I don't think theres any evidence for a sexual relationship between them. I think the issue for me is with not considering a relationship to be a proper one unless there is sex involved. And I have a problem with that because, as someone who isn't straight, I don't like putting people and their relationships into little boxes, and I don't like the double standards whereby a straight relationship has many,many shades but a gay relationship has to be consdiered to be about sex in order to exist.

Last edited by beekeeper (March 29, 2013 8:29 pm)

Ok, I was having a little joke.  But I think what people see is the love between our boys.  Mycroft absolutely knows they are not in a relationship, but possibly enjoys teasing them about it.Mark says Mycroft is gay.  Mycroft virtually scowls at John, on his return from Sarah's.
Where is the hint about Sherlock no longer being a virgin?
I must confess, I don't see John experiencing any difficulty over his love for his friend, only at his loss...

EDIT:  I can't think of any other way Steven could have presented Irene as being scandalous.

Last edited by besleybean (March 29, 2013 8:27 pm)

I agree with you, Harriet. We should take Mycroft's words with a pinch of salt. 

Well, if you say so - it's amazing what (and what not) one can read from a few words 

besleybean wrote:

Funnly, people seem to think virginity is funny or odd. A point of view I do not share.

Please don't put us in this box.
 

So do you believe I think virginity is funny or odd? Or did anyone here say that?

It is a generic statement which specifically does not direct itself at individuals nor does it refer necessarily directly to any statements previously made on the forum by anyone. It is a personal observation based upon life experience.