BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 / Johnlock: The Official Debate

**Posted by tonnaree** January 12, 2014 3:20 pm

Re: same sex relationships in entertainment. In general, although there's still a long way to go, great progress has been made.

Just like the progress of gay rights in real life.

**Posted by besleybean** January 12, 2014 3:24 pm

Quite and I believe full equality in real life, is the answer.

Last edited by besleybean (January 12, 2014 6:54 pm)

**Posted by VaticanCameoBrooch** January 12, 2014 7:03 pm

Look...the fact that Sherlock is alone is IN PART because of his own doing. The other is because he's not met a person who can meet his"special needs." He will need something different from the norm, because it would surprise him. So enter John. John provides a type of PURELY FRIENDLY love that is his own unique brand. He fills the duties of "best friend," & "caretaker." He's also a bit of an interpreter for Sherlock. He does all of this because JOHN HIMSELF is, at his core, a man of love. As we've seen, overtime, Sherlock learns to like it. Then comes to NEED it. And due to the fact that all if this is a new way to love altogether, we don't know what label it falls under. You've not seen two men be that close of friends before...so......Lovers? Yes. Lovers. They must be. It's the only reason why two men would openly express their fondness of one another. Right? Nope. Isn't it just possible that the reason their love isn't normal is because it ISN'T NORMAL. And is that wrong? No. They are just a couple of dudes who like to openly express their fondness for eachother. Just because something isn't macho, doesn't mean it's automatically gay. Not that there is anything wrong with Macho, gay, or anything in between. We live in a world where if I told you I hate you, you'd really not thing too long or hard about it. But if I told you I loved you, you would think I was weird. I once told a female friend of mine that I loved her. Just in the same way I'd tell, say, my mother. Since then she's always thought I was a little gay. OMG! I tell all my friends I love them. People just don't know how to handle love when it's not in the prescribed way.

p.s. i can't spell.

Last edited by VaticanCameoBrooch (January 12, 2014 7:04 pm)

**Posted by besleybean** January 12, 2014 7:31 pm

Sigh.

**Posted by VaticanCameoBrooch** January 12, 2014 8:15 pm

besleybean wrote:
Sigh.

**Posted by tonnaree** January 12, 2014 8:18 pm

Yea, that's a bit ridiculous. My friends and I, male and female, do not hesitate to say I love you.

**Posted by VaticanCameoBrooch** January 12, 2014 8:22 pm

tonnaree wrote:
Yea, that's a bit ridiculous. My friends and I, male and female, do not hesitate to say I love you.

Cool. I'm happy that you have such good friends.

It's a shame not all people are that open about how they feel. I wish more people were.

**Posted by zydeholic** January 26, 2014 1:48 am

Probably not the right thread to express this (Assuming Johnlock refers to a homoerotic involvement between the two), but, in rewatching the whole series, I'm picking up on the consistency of the warning from Mycroft regarding "Don't get involved". Then the Redbeard thing, etc.

I'm assuming at some point there is going to be an episode where the emotional ties are going to override Sherlock's cognitive skills and he makes a huge mistake, perhaps losing someone because of it. We might see an inkling of that with episode 3.3, but, that remains to be seen as more is revealed to us about what other things were going on and who was being fooled. Or, perhaps Sherlock will sacrifice himself in some unnecessary way, either through guilt or impaired judgment.

**Posted by besleybean** January 26, 2014 8:26 am

Have you seen 3.3?!

**Posted by zydeholic** January 26, 2014 8:39 am

Yes, I was including that, as to things that haven't been revealed to us yet our who's fooling us or whomever else in the show.

Still don't know if that "foolhardy" thang was actually planned by all involved (govt, etc).

**Posted by besleybean** January 26, 2014 8:59 am

Oh no, it was very much spur of the moment.

**Posted by zydeholic** January 26, 2014 2:41 pm

Or so they would have us think. He asked John to bring his gun. Lord Smallwood committed suicide. Lady Smallwood was deciding Sherlock's fate. Etc, etc.

We don't know for sure, and they've not enlightened us yet on how he survived the fall either.

**Posted by besleybean** January 26, 2014 2:45 pm

I wouldn't hold out on hearing anymore about the fall, I think you maybe have had your lot on that one.

**Posted by zydeholic** January 26, 2014 5:11 pm

Yes, it keeps the forum buzzing if they don't say. But, I dont' think we've heard the last of what was behind he ending of 3.3.

**Posted by besleybean** January 26, 2014 5:12 pm

Oh of course not. We will have that explained next series.

**Posted by zydeholic** January 26, 2014 6:09 pm

So, if it was spur of the moment, what is there to explain?

**Posted by besleybean** January 26, 2014 6:12 pm

Ooh, just in case LAST VOW SPOILERS!

Oh sorry, I thought you meant the Moriarty part, for the explaining!
The spur of the moment thing, I meant Sherlock shooting CAM.

**Posted by nakahara** February 24, 2014 10:38 pm

In my opinion, Jonlock directly stems from canon and people were always able to recognise it between the lines of ACD′s stories.

Otherwise, why would so many film versions of Sherlock Holmes adventures have so much cheeky innuendo between the two main heroes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OinQ1KMEds

There is certainly something in the ACD original that generates this innuendo, that′s certain.

**Posted by Harriet** February 24, 2014 10:40 pm

Thanks for sharing, nakahara!

**Posted by besleybean** February 25, 2014 8:52 am

I think some writers do write innuendo, but I personally don't see it in ACD.
I think the reacton to his works is just part of the oversexualised world we inhabit.
And some of us continually try and stem the tidal wave.