Lue4028 wrote:

Um... what connotation does "blood" actually have? I'm not very familiar with the word. I was kind of confused when Sherlock used it.

There's a forum discussion thread about it here:
http://sherlock.boardhost.com/viewtopic.php?id=4154

I don't know if it was an ad lib, or actually part of the script. Mycroft is Sherlock's "blood" (a blood relative) and also a kind of blood brother.  I think the expression came up out of American gang verbiage, I think of it as something you'd hear in South Central LA, amongst African-American male gang members.  But maybe it's common in the UK too. Some spell it Blud, but it's actually Blood. I thought it both looked and sounded stupid, coming out of patrician Sherlock's mouth, but that's just my opinion.

  Also... a broad question. Why do you guys like the idea of Johnlock.. or specifically a sexual relationship between J and S?

Why not? *smile*

I'm shallow, and I admit it; I like the idea of two hot men together "that way". Plus I'm a romance hound, so the idea of the two of them in an exclusive, forever, romantic relationship turns my crank just right.

One reason for debating its existence is because you want it to be true right?

It doesn't have to be canonically true to make me happy. I have all the fan fic to read I'll ever want.

I guess I don't really understand why you would want to turn what John and Sherlock have right now into your common homosexual relationship- nothing near as unique as the indescribable relationship they have on screen

Do you think those two could ever have any kind of "common" anything between them? Really? The both of them are hunky, smart, savvy, brave, good, and endlessly clever, so....  IMO, together they would be even more so (like the 2 musketeers, all for one and one for all!) But again, I don't need to see it on-screen.

I can't imagine a more brilliantly human relationship. One reason for that is they really love each other for their minds and not their bodies. They're just so damn soulful because the relationship isn't reliant on the physical. It's made from what's on the inside, what makes a person more than just a body - the intangible, internal, sentimental.

*nods*
And those folks make the best kind of lovers--  the ones who are your friends first.

So I'm wondering, what could a physical relationship possibly add/improve? Do you not feel like you're losing something when you switch from a purely intellectual relationship to a physical one?

If one were a man and one a woman, would you be asking this question?

Which is neither here nor there.  In fact, none of this is neither here nor there. To me, it's all for fun, all of it, the UST we're fed on the show, the full blown Johnlock of fan fic, the discussions about it; it's all delightful. And again, to me, I just wouldn't spend much time wondering why adding sex to a deep, trusting, fun relationship would be anything but delightful. But that's just me.

 

I see. Sounds like you're talking from personal experience. I respect that and thank you for your honest answer. Some of it doesn't make sense to me, but I suspect it's because what you said is not meant to be analyzed logically.

For example, "You feel like you want" "You want to be" "You can't get enough" doesn't sound selfless to me, it sounds self-serving. However, making the other person happy does sound selfless. But I feel like John already does that sufficiently, powerfully, and more meaningfully by just talking to and working with Sherlock. Instead of doing something physical to make S's body feel good, J can talk directly to S and make his soul feel good. J can use his personality and emotions, rather than his body, to make S happy.

Which I think is more personable and intimate- instead of going from mind body body mind, you go directly from mind to mind, and can incorporate information about your sentiments/thoughts. Why do you also need sex to accomplish a task that is done more efficiently, more effectively, and more personably with an ulterior method? 

It must be because you think being physical is more powerful than being psychological. While I think J and S can communicate more soul and love with the effect of a few lines and facial expressions than an entire sex scene could manage, johnlockers must think otherwise, perhaps for reasons that are not logically derived.. Can’t argue with that. *shrug* Can’t hope to understand it either.

Oh wells, I was hoping to be able to understand so Johnlock wouldn’t continue to annoy me as much.

Oh, and I say “common” because S and J would move to the catagory of men who love each other and have sex, which is huge, rather than be in the small (maybe even nonexistant?) catagory of men who love each other passionately but don't want to have sex.  
 

Last edited by Lue4028 (April 22, 2014 5:19 am)

KeepersPrice wrote:

Lue, for some of us, that intangible, soulful relationship you speak of that they already have would not be sullied or destroyed if it tipped over into physical expression. Often when you love someone deeply and selflessly, you want to be as close to them as you possibly can. You feel like you want to climb inside their skin and know them from the inside out. You almost can't get close enough. You yearn to touch, smell, embrace, caress and "be as one" as the expression goes. But most of all, you want to make the other person happy. You want to make them feel close and loved and give them physical pleasure because it can be wonderful to do that for the person you love.

For the Johnlock fans who enjoy imagining them in a physical relationship it isn't a far stretch to have that perfect relationship they already have embody all the aspects of a perfect relationship - including the physical aspect. In our minds, theirs would never be a "common homosexual relationship". What they have is way beyond anything "common" or gratuitous. In the Johnlock fanfiction I enjoy, theirs is a true marriage of body and soul. That's my personal concept of Johnlock anyway....

I have nothing to add. 
 

I assure you, KP was not just talking about fanfic. 

ancientsgate wrote:

KeepersPrice wrote:

Lue, for some of us, that intangible, soulful relationship you speak of that they already have would not be sullied or destroyed if it tipped over into physical expression. Often when you love someone deeply and selflessly, you want to be as close to them as you possibly can. You feel like you want to climb inside their skin and know them from the inside out. You almost can't get close enough. You yearn to touch, smell, embrace, caress and "be as one" as the expression goes. But most of all, you want to make the other person happy. You want to make them feel close and loved and give them physical pleasure because it can be wonderful to do that for the person you love.

For the Johnlock fans who enjoy imagining them in a physical relationship it isn't a far stretch to have that perfect relationship they already have embody all the aspects of a perfect relationship - including the physical aspect. In our minds, theirs would never be a "common homosexual relationship". What they have is way beyond anything "common" or gratuitous. In the Johnlock fanfiction I enjoy, theirs is a true marriage of body and soul. That's my personal concept of Johnlock anyway....

*stands and applauds*   No one could have said it better, KP! Yay!

 

I would like to sign here, too. Perfectly put!

Schmiezi wrote:

ancientsgate wrote:

KeepersPrice wrote:

Lue, for some of us, that intangible, soulful relationship you speak of that they already have would not be sullied or destroyed if it tipped over into physical expression. Often when you love someone deeply and selflessly, you want to be as close to them as you possibly can. You feel like you want to climb inside their skin and know them from the inside out. You almost can't get close enough. You yearn to touch, smell, embrace, caress and "be as one" as the expression goes. But most of all, you want to make the other person happy. You want to make them feel close and loved and give them physical pleasure because it can be wonderful to do that for the person you love.

For the Johnlock fans who enjoy imagining them in a physical relationship it isn't a far stretch to have that perfect relationship they already have embody all the aspects of a perfect relationship - including the physical aspect. In our minds, theirs would never be a "common homosexual relationship". What they have is way beyond anything "common" or gratuitous. In the Johnlock fanfiction I enjoy, theirs is a true marriage of body and soul. That's my personal concept of Johnlock anyway....

*stands and applauds*   No one could have said it better, KP! Yay!

 

I would like to sign here, too. Perfectly put!

Same with me, couldn't have expressed it any better.

besleybean wrote:

Johnlockers seem to imply that the bromance isn't enough.

Where do Johnlockers (and you mean all Johnlockers here...? Wow...) imply that? And what exactly is bromance, anyway?
I almost can't believe that once again we're comparing deep friendship to a sexual relationship in a way that says "one of those things is superior to the other", we've been over that again and again and again. That's not what Johnlock is about, at least not to me. I am not saying that a deep friendship can't be enough and is only worth something when sex comes into play as well. But why does sex have to ruin everything? I'll never understand why to some people sex seems to be the worst thing that can happen to a friendship.

 

Last edited by SolarSystem (April 22, 2014 7:57 am)

SusiGo wrote:

Good question. What is bromance? Sorry, but for me it is something that does not really exist. Something artificial applying to a very small specialised group of people. Coined by a skateboard magazine in the 1990s. Well. 

Since I do have a vivid imagination, I guess I know what it's supposed to mean.
But I am happy to repeat myself by saying that I totally agree with Jude Law here... why do we need a new word for something we already do have a word for? The word is 'romance' and it fits just beautifully with the boys.
 

But can it stay that way forever? There will be an end of the series one day and I would hate to be left with that ambiguity. 
And it would not have to be an unconventional happy end. But a bit more than what we have at the moment which is basically nothing where Sherlock and John are concerned. 

I still find it difficult to see. Love without sex? Something like that? 

"Where do Johnlockers (and you mean all Johnlockers here...? Wow...) imply that? And what exactly is bromance, anyway?
I almost can't believe that once again we're comparing deep friendship to a sexual relationship in a way that says "one of those things is superior to the other", we've been over that again and again and again. That's not what Johnlock is about, at least not to me. I am not saying that a deep friendship can't be enough and is only worth something when sex comes into play as well. But why does sex have to ruin everything? I'll never understand why to some people sex seems to be the worst thing that can happen to a friendship."

Totally with you on this one Solar.  A relationship is not automatically better or worse depeneding on if it includes a physical aspect.  Yes, sex in our society has been abused and sensatonalized but it is not in and of itself bad.  It is a beautiful part of our human nature.  And it is best when shared between two people who already have a deep emotional/intellectual connection.  When friends turn into lovers it is as much spiritual as physical.