I don't know if they really are the majority.  I don't know anybody "in real life" who believes in TJLC (even though they understand shipping them). 

Yes I meant Johnlockers are a minority of Sherlock's audience as a whole - all the hundreds of millions of viewers out there across the globe. As Liberty says, I think most of them would be utterly baffled if you explained to them how some people have interpreted the show.

But yes, within fandom, particularly on tumblr, Johnlockers are undoubtedly the majority.

Last edited by Shani (August 4, 2016 10:45 am)

besleybean wrote:

See I just think Johnlockers are the majority of viewers...I wouldn't mind being proved wrong.

I think the way the subject is dealt with on any mainstream interview - like Graham Norton - proves that. If the subject of John and Sherlock as a romantic couple is brought up at all, which it usually isn't, it is dealt with in a non-serious way, and predominantly with the attitude that it is only the hardcore shipping fanbase who are interested in it: eg that Gay Times interview.

If the majority of the viewers both believed in it and were invested in it, it would come up as a topic a lot more. Significantly, that withanaccent interview is actually a comparatively rare occasion where Moffat and Gatiss get asked about it. And that was from a niche, cult interviewer who says she has shipped pairings in the past (although not this one). If you look at interviews with major newspapers, TV stations, it doesn't really get asked about at all.

Last edited by Shani (August 4, 2016 2:00 pm)

Shani wrote:

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.

I haven´t searched all the internet either and so I can´t readily preclude that such posts might exist out there somewhere.

But I stand by my assertion that fans, Johnlockers or not, should only be blamed for things they have actually done, not for things you just presume they have been doing. Shameful posts or blogs have their authors you can call out and concrete wording you can object against. And you should only protest against these, individually marked matters and be prepared to point them out as the sources of your discomfort, not just rant against an unspecified mass of people allegedly engaged in some activity, lumping them together as a group based on their hobby. When most of them were never engaged in any harmful activity you blame them for.

Telling me that some thing has happened, because it is proven by the post only Ian Hallard has read and which none of us can produce to verify statements written inside... surely you realise such "proof" gives you "carte blanche" to accuse anybody of practically anything? And who knows if Ian Hallard understood the post correctly? How can I be sure this is not the case of "garbled mistranslation" either?

Also, if fans are hurt and disappointed by the harsh treatment their admired creators have unleashed upon them or complain about queerbaiting, it is their God given right to do so, as long as they remain polite. I really can´t find fault with any of that, especially if most of the post I have seen look like this:

http://sussexbound.tumblr.com/post/148331810531/obsessivelollipoplalala-sussexbound-things-i

Why should I try to shame people for their feelings in an effort to protect the person who gives absolutely no shit about all that and who uses much harsher language to denounce people HE dislikes, for example certain columnist:

https://twitter.com/Raphaelite_Girl/status/760096579021922304

If Mark Gatiss can publicly suggest that we should cut oxygen altogether to his female enemy (with his follower helpfully suggesting that they spray her with napalm), I don´t really think he has any moral right to object that people write him tweets decrying their disappointment over his statements.

Shani wrote:

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??
 

Once again - I don´t relly see into Mofftiss head and read their intentions or thoughts there. I agree with you that we will never know for sure. But if I judge from their work which was delivered to us, I cannot but suspect that queerbaiting was the case here. I simply cannot believe that proffessionals like Mofftiss are "naive" and were unaware of their own doings and impact thereof. And I am not the only one, unfortunately. Sherlock already made certain "name" for itself in the academia engaged in queer reading already:

http://cuddlytogas.tumblr.com/post/61803092067/queer-identities-in-sherlock-a-study-in

Queerbaiting is the practice, in modern media, of referencing or joking about the idea of queer main characters, but constantly reaffirming, particularly in interviews, that this will never happen and is just a delusion made up by obsessive and degenerate fans. The increasing popular awareness of the subculture of fandom – particularly slash fandom – has in turn led to the exploitation of these interpretations by creators; and Sherlock has a very poor record in this regard. The show trivialises any possibility of queerness in its main characters, systematically erases minority identities, and dismisses queer characters and the fans who would prefer more nuanced characterisation.

Now I don´t say that this academic has an absolute truth. It is just one, probably overly harsh and serious, assessment of the show among many others, which are more positive. But at the same time - this person did not target Sherlock as the qeerbaiting show randomly, just choosing "oh, which show from the BBC programme will I massacre today". The issues that the writer speaks about exist in the show and yes, they may be perceived like that, regardless if you are Johnlocker or not.

besleybean wrote:

Well if people are not happy with the show, you know what I'm going to say, well 2 things actually:
1. It's a drama and I believe in full creative licence.
2. Nobody has to watch it.

In fact 3:
I don't see queer baiting.

4. Nobody has a right to prevent you from stating an opinion about the show that has already been written and broadcasted.
 

I think tweeting to Mark Gatiss (or anyone else directly involved with the show) with the stuff posted in this thread - and other voiced complaints in that tone - is absolutely disgusting. There more I see stuff like that, the more sympathy for Moftiss I get. This is fandom at it's worst, and I can only hope Mark is able to brush it off as the pathetic jabs they are, and not let it get to him.

(And before I get jumped on - no, I don't automatically think people's opinions are pathetic jabs. But I think directing them to Mark in the way done here is so low I struggle to keep myself civil when writing about it).

Oh I didn't realise it was her!

I love him.

nakahara wrote:

I am sure some hurt Johnlockers are no worry for this utterly sarcastic, self-assured man.
 

So - not really a fan of his then? 

But seriously - I think you're right. If you give it out, you have to be able to take it. I'm not suggesting he's sobbing in a corner because some TJLCers got angry and swore at him. I'm really more concerned that it will mean communications between fans and TPTB deteriorate further. And I don't think that's entirely fans' fault either. I don't think Moffat or Gatiss do fully understand all the nuances of what is going on here. But then I don't really expect them to. They're busy men writing and filming the show we love. They don't have the time to trawl through tumblr to get all the different opinions and viewpoints from different fans. As I said in my long post on the debate thread, I don't think they're perfect by any means. They've made mistakes and communicated things badly in the past. I just wonder where we will end up in terms of future fan interaction like conventions if people on both sides get angry, frustrated and upset.

Last edited by Shani (August 4, 2016 9:21 pm)

And he gives us the best TV show ever.