The whole of the Sherlock fandom on tumblr these days is "if Johnlock isn't a real thing on your show, then your show is anti-gay and offensive." They're out of control over there and it's dividing a formerly friendly fan base and irritating the creators. Moffat and Gatiss are constantly saying how much they love the fans and everything they create, fan fiction and art and they encourage all of it including the Johnlock stuff and all the totally non-canon pairings, but saying "okay you can keep drawing/writing it all you want but our two main characters do not happen to be gay" is NOT ACTUALLY HOMOPHOBIC. You can't get what you want and force them to rewrite their characters and change the story by screaming 'MY FAN FIC IS BETTER THAN YOUR SHOW SO DO WHAT I SAY!!!1!!"

I can't get over the nerve of some of these people calling the creators anti-gay. Like, you do realize Mark is married to a man, right? For Christ's sake.

Last edited by KatyHolmes (August 4, 2016 2:31 am)

KatyHolmes wrote:

You can't get what you want and force them to rewrite their characters and change the story by screaming 'MY FAN FIC IS BETTER THAN YOUR SHOW SO DO WHAT I SAY!!!1!!"

Could you post an example of the fans demanding that Mofftiss should do what they say?
Thank you.
 

Last edited by nakahara (August 4, 2016 6:40 am)

besleybean wrote:

Well a long time ago, I posted a tweet from Ian, citing just this: the bullying of his husband, by some fans demanding he write Johnlock.

Well, I would like to see just one such post from fans. If you have it, please, release it here.

Ian´s tweet would serve as an evidence based on hearsay anyway... I would like to see a real thing, posted by an actual fan.
Those of you who claim that you saw fans demanding that Mofftiss writes what they order them to do should have no problem to post at least one of such posts here...
 

I posted a tumblr rant on the "Is Johnlock Canon?" debate thread if you want to see some of the vitriol that's been posted there. 

In terms of direct tweets to Mark on twitter, here are a selection from last week:













 

Well I think you're splitting hairs, there. As Besleybean says, there were historic tweets demanding Mark did that. The tweets from last week are in response to him saying it wasn't going to happen so the conversation has moved on more recently. But the implication from all these angry tweeters is clearly that he is wrong and he should have written the show in the way they wanted it. Saying this to him directly at this stage - after what he'd just stated - would have been pointless. You originally asked for an example of tweets from fans demanding that Mofftiss should do what they say. If the above quoted tweets aren't sufficient for you, I'm not sure what other evidence you are expecting to be provided.

Last edited by Shani (August 4, 2016 9:26 am)

Shani wrote:

Well I think you're splitting hairs, there. As Besleybean says, there were historic tweets demanding Mark did that. The tweets from last week are in response to him saying it wasn't going to happen so the conversation has moved on more recently. But the implication from all these angry tweeters is clearly that he is wrong and he should have written the show in they wanted it to. Stating it explicitly at this stage - after what he'd just stated - would have been pointless. You originally asked for an example of tweets from fans demanding that Mofftiss should do what they say. If the above quoted tweets aren't sufficient for you, I'm not sure what other evidence you are expecting to be provided.

Accusing people that they stand by Mofftiss and dictate what they should do and then being able to only provide tweets that complain about another thing entirely is quite low.
I too think that what Mofftiss did constitutes queerbaiting. And I object that you should accuse me or others like me that we dictate what the authors should do when we point out that putting "gay jokes" into the storyline and not delivering on them is a bad thing, because it leads the audience to the mistaken opinions about the show itself.


 

nakahara wrote:

Accusing people that they stand by Mofftiss and dictate what they should do and then being able to only provide tweets that complain about another thing entirely is quite low.
I too think that what Mofftiss did constitutes queerbaiting. And I object that you should accuse me or others like me that we dictate what the authors should do when we point out that putting "gay jokes" into the storyline and not delivering on them is a bad thing, because it leads the audience to the mistaken opinions about the show itself.


 

I don't think anyone's accused you personally of dictating what authors should do. But I don't see how you can deny that it is an attitude that exists. Scrolling through the tjlc or johnlock tags on tumblr, it won't take you long to find people insisting they have a right for their ship to be made canon. And although I have better things to do than keep a historical store of screengrabs of tweets from years ago directed at Gatiss and Moffat, you may just have to take my word for it that they have been directly addressed on the subject. If you don't believe me, then fine. I'm never going to be able to convince you. As Besleybean has already said, it did happen. So much so that Gatiss' partner commented on it.

As for queerbaiting, as I've said elsewhere, I think the most you can accuse Gatiss and Moffat of here is naivety. I don't think they understand the passion with which some young LGBT people have embraced Johnlock (that TJLC Explained video being the most obvious example). It wouldn't surprise me if they still regard the majority of Johnlock shippers as straight, teenage girls who are fetishising and therefore demeaning gay relationships. 

As far as I understand it, queerbaiting is defined as TV creators deliberately inserting hints into their shows in order to attract an LGBT audience who become invested in the idea that same sex characters will end up in some kind of romantic or sexual relationship. The creators will also encourage this impression through interviews and statements, whilst never having any intention on delivering what their LGBT audience are hoping for.

And the difficulty here is that this definition is based on intentions. And we can never truly know what Moffat and Gatiss' intentions are or were.

I really do find it hard to believe that when they created the show, Moffat and Gatiss sat down with the calculated aim of attracting an LGBT audience by inserting some humorous moments where other characters mistakenly assume that John and Sherlock are romantically involved with each other: hoping that that LGBT audience would believe that the relationship would become canon, but knowing that it would never happen. It's possible but I think it's really unlikely.

Also, by the definition of queerbaiting, surely the plan would be to string viewers along, as opposed to the outright denials we get from them? (And yes I know, they're lying liars and all that, but as I've also said elsewhere I definitely see a difference in the passion and sincerity with which Gatiss spoke in Mumbai, as opposed to the jokeyness when they lie or deflect questions about other plot points.)

And ultimately, Sherlock is a massive mainstream hit show. Probably the BBC's most successful and popular drama in the past ten years. It does not need to go seeking a specifically cult LGBT audience in order to gain viewers. It's doing very well and would be doing well with or without them.

So if some viewers see queerbaiting, but it wasn't done intentionally, is it still queerbaiting??




 

I would say not.  Funnily enough, I'd just posted in the debate thread, a quote from a Gay Times interview with Mark Gatiss, where he talks about that and specifically denies that they're gay.   That seems a really odd way to try to convince the LGBT audience that they're gay without actually delivering!   So I think we don't probably even need to know their intentions.   If queerbaiting was their intention, they were doing it very, very badly! 

nakahara wrote:

 it leads the audience to the mistaken opinions about the show itself.


 

 
But it doesn't lead the whole audience to this opinion, only a very small section of it. Johnlockers/TJLCers are not the entire audience for the show.