John Watson

[Pseudonym]

I think things are changing though, in a good way. What's important is not adding in token characters for the sake of it, which I think is where a lot of shows used to go wrong. Producers thinking that adding in a 'token gay guy,' who's only defining characteristic was his sexuality, would make people happy. Same with the 'strong woman' cliche, could Mary not have been a worthy character without being an assassin? I just finished reading a story with an Indian Mary, who's an education administrator, and was infinitely more believable than super spy Mary. 

 

I get what you mean about minorities forgetting things are made by majorities for majorities though, and that not everything is intended as a slight. 

 

I've noticed ads becoming a lot more diverse recently - I wonder if it's the same in other countries? It's not unusual to have a same sex couple or mixed race couple on ads, and that seems like a fairly new trend. I know it's for profit-driven reasons, but that makes me think some focus group must have said they wanted more diversity, and anything that normalises things that used to be marginalised is good in my book. 

 

It's also part of the reason I like this iteration of Sherlock, the actual character, because it's never specified what he is. Which is the best way of doing it, and why I get a bit miffed at people insisting he's one thing or another. 

 

[Artemis]

I've noticed ads becoming a lot more diverse recently - I wonder if it's the same in other countries?

 

I've noticed it here too.

 

 

[Boton]

Because the queer representation here is higher than those 278 minus (straight AND unknown), because statistically a certain % of the unknown has to be queer. :D Also you have to compare clearly straight with clearly non-straight plus the 1-10% of unknown.

 

 

 

This is a good point, because we will know that we are treating gay/queer people equitably in media when it isn't something you can count - sexuality will only come up when it is relevant to the story, and we will all assume that if nothing is mentioned, then we simply don't have that data about the character.

 

Of course, you are also right with the idea that the world is made for and by majorities. Statistically, if you have to guess at something about a character, you will always guess majority answer. So, given no information about a character's sexuality, you are statistically safe to guess some form of heterosexual, even if that is not accurate or is in some way marginalizing.

[T.o.b.y]

To somehow lead this discussion back to John Watson, there seem to be plenty of fans out there who would strongly disagree that John is "clearly straight"... :-p

 

I think I have read more opinion pieces (to say nothing of fanfiction) making the case for John's supposed bisexuality than I can count.

 

The only on-screen hint in that direction that I can see however is what Irene says in response to his "I am not gay": "Well, I am - and look at us both."

 

I understand how this fueled all kinds of theories.

 

It's actually one of my favorite scenes because I personally see little reason to believe that human sexuality is as black and white as it's often made out to be, especially in most fiction. To me, what Irene is saying that she can be (and is) attracted to Sherlock even though she is generally interested in women, so John's general orientation alone is not as good an argument against them being a couple as he thinks.

 

Sherlock and John do come across as a couple in many ways during the pre-Mary era, but I don't see anything sexual, not even subtextually. Romantic, sure. Erotic, no.

[Artemis]

I just don't see it, not even romantically. I see two best friends living together. Perhaps one could argue there is a fine line there, but I've not seen a single thing that indicates to me that they've crossed it, or want to cross it.

[Hikari]

To somehow lead this discussion back to John Watson, there seem to be plenty of fans out there who would strongly disagree that John is "clearly straight"... :-p

 

I think I have read more opinion pieces (to say nothing of fanfiction) making the case for John's supposed bisexuality than I can count.

 

The only on-screen hint in that direction that I can see however is what Irene says in response to his "I am not gay": "Well, I am - and look at us both."

 

I understand how this fueled all kinds of theories.

 

It's actually one of my favorite scenes because I personally see little reason to believe that human sexuality is as black and white as it's often made out to be, especially in most fiction. To me, what Irene is saying that she can be (and is) attracted to Sherlock even though she is generally interested in women, so John's general orientation alone is not as good an argument against them being a couple as he thinks.

 

Sherlock and John do come across as a couple in many ways during the pre-Mary era, but I don't see anything sexual, not even subtextually. Romantic, sure. Erotic, no.

 

I once read their (are they/aren't they?) relationship described thusly:

 

Sherlock is John-curious & John is Holmes-sexual.

 

They each are the Exception to the rule of their respective sexualities.  Normally, Sherlock Holmes is a dedicated asexual who never gives romance/sex (yukky timewasters that they are.  The proximity!  The bodily fluids!  Getting close to people!  Pillow talk!!) a thought, except as a tedious preoccupation which Ordinary People waste incredible amounts of time being fixated upon.   None are his area whatsoever and he wants to keep it that way . . though he is cognizant that female persons of the single persuasion at work or other seem to find his person attractive--a fact he shamelessly exploits for his own manipulative purposes at every opportunity that presents itself.

 

Then he met John Watson.  Best friend . . first and only friend . . who seems devoted to Sherlock even though everyone else who does not have a crush on him regards him as a Freak. 

 

John Hamish 'Three Continents' Watson, homme du monde, professional ladies' man, always has his radar out for the chicks.  Has had many romances of varying duration.  All are very short after he moves in with Sherlock Holmes.  Suddenly, all his energies which he used to devote to practicing medicine and scoping the girls (because the ladies love a doctor even more than a soldier . .) are diverted to the unique and authoritarian demands of his singular flatmate.  Good thing for John that he responds so well to strong authority figures!  In addition to being personally compelling, Sherlock is a brilliant enigma.  Watson was born to be an admiring audience of one, and when this admiring audience collided via Fate with someone who is wired up to be Admired . . Kaboom!  Combustion.

 

Sherlock Holmes is not interested in sex . . except possibly with John Watson, aided and abetted by copious amounts of alcohol to cover over his feelings of inadequacy in this one area he has not mastered in life.

 

John Watson is not interested in sex with men as a general rule . . Sherlock Holmes is the force of nature that smashes all general rules.  Really, if Watson were bisexual, the only recipient of the non-hetero variety would be Holmes.  Worth breaking the rules for, I'd say.

 

Love Adler or hate her--the Woman had this dynamic exactly right.  Sherlock Holmes (as portrayed by Benedict) has the power to make everyone around him question his/her sexuality.  The lesbians want him.  The straight-arrow dudes want him.  Maybe even Lestrade wants him . . maybe the key is to be completely disinterested?  The women who aspire to being Sherlock's girlfriend won't get anywhere by fawning over him.  He only tolerates fawning from John.  If one is a female . . a flogger seems to have aphrodisiacal qualities for SH.  The only Woman who tickles his synapses beat him, insulted him, foiled his deductive prowess, drugged him, stole his clothes and broke into his home in the middle of the night.  Now, THAT is a Woman worthy of SH's interest.

 

Maybe SH is a closet masochist?  'Submissive' doesn't really seem like the word.  Molly doesn't have a prayer, even if she did help him with the Reichenbach matter.  She's way too wholesome and SH has a thing for bad girls.  More specifically, Sherl has a thing for exactly one Bad Girl and one very special Good Boy.  So I guess that makes him and Watson alike--both are, under very stringent conditions, bi-curious.

[Boton]

 

To me, what Irene is saying that she can be (and is) attracted to Sherlock even though she is generally interested in women, so John's general orientation alone is not as good an argument against them being a couple as he thinks.

 

Sherlock and John do come across as a couple in many ways during the pre-Mary era, but I don't see anything sexual, not even subtextually. Romantic, sure. Erotic, no.

 

I agree with this.

 

Irene is right that John is conflating the idea of being sexually attracted and being a couple, and it probably isn't true for the two of them. That was the aspect of Mary that I don't think got enough focus: John had to find a woman who would be OK with the fact that he had an existing and ongoing "couple" relationship with Sherlock.  

 

It makes us debate the idea of "romance" and "eroticism" and where they overlap. In some ways, it makes me think most strongly not of Sherlock and John, but that episode of House that I always refer to, The Big C.  It was one of the most romantic stories I've ever seen, and there was no doubt that the two were not in the least sexually attracted to one another.  HoB is a milder form of romantic for Sherlock and John, because they are out of their normal element and John seems to have taken his talk with Irene to heart, because he no longer cares all that much to correct people about his relationship.

 

Do you ever wonder what was going on in John's head? We always seem to give Sherlock a pass that he either doesn't notice what people think, doesn't care, or is some form of asexual.  But what was John thinking all along? At some point, did he just settle in and think that he probably wasn't going to get married anyway, so there was no sense saving the coupledom for a woman, and he might as well acknowledge that he was in this pairing with Sherlock? And then, when Sherlock jumped from the roof, John was in some way widowed even though it wasn't a sexual relationship?

[T.o.b.y]

 

 

 

To me, what Irene is saying that she can be (and is) attracted to Sherlock even though she is generally interested in women, so John's general orientation alone is not as good an argument against them being a couple as he thinks.

 

Sherlock and John do come across as a couple in many ways during the pre-Mary era, but I don't see anything sexual, not even subtextually. Romantic, sure. Erotic, no.

I agree with this.

 

Irene is right that John is conflating the idea of being sexually attracted and being a couple, and it probably isn't true for the two of them. That was the aspect of Mary that I don't think got enough focus: John had to find a woman who would be OK with the fact that he had an existing and ongoing "couple" relationship with Sherlock.

 

It makes us debate the idea of "romance" and "eroticism" and where they overlap. In some ways, it makes me think most strongly not of Sherlock and John, but that episode of House that I always refer to, The Big C. It was one of the most romantic stories I've ever seen, and there was no doubt that the two were not in the least sexually attracted to one another. HoB is a milder form of romantic for Sherlock and John, because they are out of their normal element and John seems to have taken his talk with Irene to heart, because he no longer cares all that much to correct people about his relationship.

 

Do you ever wonder what was going on in John's head? We always seem to give Sherlock a pass that he either doesn't notice what people think, doesn't care, or is some form of asexual. But what was John thinking all along? At some point, did he just settle in and think that he probably wasn't going to get married anyway, so there was no sense saving the coupledom for a woman, and he might as well acknowledge that he was in this pairing with Sherlock? And then, when Sherlock jumped from the roof, John was in some way widowed even though it wasn't a sexual relationship?

My personal opinion is that John never thought any of this through and that if his therapist so much as hinted in this direction, he shut her down or even stopped seeing her.

 

When he is talking to Ella in Reichenbach, John repeatedly and very firmly refers to Sherlock as his best friend. That's the label he has chosen for them and imo the only one he is comfortable with.

 

He also doesn't seem to appreciate Mary's teasing in The Empty Hearse when she reads his admiring blog entries of the past and jokes about the mustache. Mary talks to and about Sherlock much as if he were John's ex and John really doesn't seem to appreciate that - but at the same time, I think he knows he is lucky to have found a woman who is a okay with Sherlock and "gets" him without much explanation.

 

John, the way I see him, would never, ever acknowledge anything beyond a best friends / brothers in arms relationship. Not even the potential of anything. The only scene where he seems to brush off the idea without seeming the slightest bit unsettled takes place in Sherlock's Mind Palace: the waterfall confrontation with Moriarty in TAB.

 

However, when he is really drunk in The Sign of Three, John's behavior can be seen as almost flirtatious ("am I a pretty lady?").

 

Not that I think the stag night would have gone anywhere even if no client had shown up.

 

Sherlock and John's relationship is best described as "it is what it is", imo. I think John knows that but he doesn't want to think or talk about it and neither of them wants it to change into something more definite.

 

Sherlock, in my interpretation, is still very much a child when it comes to relationships anyway. His development in that area was disrupted when Eurus killed Victor and never moved much further than a very late brush with puberty when he met Irene.

 

Sherlock just wants John to run around with him having adventures and playing pirates and to not die. He is very innocent about it in a way and therefore pretty unconcerned about how they come across.

 

That's how I see it anyway.

[Boton]

When he is talking to Ella in Reichenbach, John repeatedly and very firmly refers to Sherlock as his best friend. That's the label he has chosen for them and imo the only one he is comfortable with.

 

He also doesn't seem to appreciate Mary's teasing in The Empty Hearse when she reads his admiring blog entries of the past and jokes about the mustache. Mary talks to and about Sherlock much as if he were John's ex and John really doesn't seem to appreciate that - but at the same time, I think he knows he is lucky to have found a woman who is a okay with Sherlock and "gets" him without much explanation.

 

John, the way I see him, would never, ever acknowledge anything beyond a best friends / brothers in arms relationship. 

 

...

 

Sherlock and John's relationship is best described as "it is what it is", imo. I think John knows that but he doesn't want to think or talk about it and neither of them wants it to change into something more definite.

 

...

 

Sherlock, in my interpretation, is still very much a child when it comes to relationships anyway. His development in that area was disrupted when Eurus killed Victor and never moved much further than a very late brush with puberty when he met Irene.

 

Sherlock just wants John to run around with him having adventures and playing pirates and to not die. He is very innocent about it in a way and therefore pretty unconcerned about how they come across.

 

That's how I see it anyway.

 

 

Yeah, I mostly agree with this.  I think for John, "brothers in arms" is the term that he would use for coupledom. I have a friend whose husband apparently has a best friend like this.  The wife calls the best friend "[her husband's] work husband."  That's what Sherlock and John are to me, in many ways.  

 

I love that description of Sherlock.  In many ways, Sherlock is arrested at the time of Victor's death, and John has become the substitute Victor.  So what happens now that Sherlock may be allowed to mature? 

[Artemis]

John, the way I see him, would never, ever acknowledge anything beyond a best friends / brothers in arms relationship. Not even the potential of anything. The only scene where he seems to brush off the idea without seeming the slightest bit unsettled takes place in Sherlock's Mind Palace: the waterfall confrontation with Moriarty in TAB.

 

...

 

Sherlock, in my interpretation, is still very much a child when it comes to relationships anyway. His development in that area was disrupted when Eurus killed Victor and never moved much further than a very late brush with puberty when he met Irene.

 

Sherlock just wants John to run around with him having adventures and playing pirates and to not die. He is very innocent about it in a way and therefore pretty unconcerned about how they come across.

 

That's how I see it anyway.

 

Yeah, I mostly agree with this.  I think for John, "brothers in arms" is the term that he would use for coupledom. I have a friend whose husband apparently has a best friend like this.  The wife calls the best friend "[her husband's] work husband."  That's what Sherlock and John are to me, in many ways.  

 

I love that description of Sherlock.  In many ways, Sherlock is arrested at the time of Victor's death, and John has become the substitute Victor.

 

   Good stuff.

 

 

[J.P.]

 

Sherlock, in my interpretation, is still very much a child when it comes to relationships anyway. His development in that area was disrupted when Eurus killed Victor and never moved much further than a very late brush with puberty when he met Irene.

 

Sherlock just wants John to run around with him having adventures and playing pirates and to not die. He is very innocent about it in a way and therefore pretty unconcerned about how they come across.

Amen!

[Boton]

So, since this is John's thread:

 

If Sherlock is/was arrested developmentally at the time of Victor's death, viewing best friendship as a set of adventures and play time, what does this say about John and about the relationship up until about the last 30 minutes of TFP? Sherlock and John are supposed to be "the best friends ever," Moftiss say.  Can they still be if what we have seen is essentially a child-like friendship based on play rather than an adult relationship? Do you think the relationship will continue to be as strong as Sherlock "becomes an adult?"

[Carol the Dabbler]

John's side of the relationship seems adult enough, so I assume it's mostly Sherlock's side that you're asking about -- plus how John would react to any changes in Sherlock's part. Interesting question. My real-world best guess would be that Moftiss intend to use Canon as a template. In-universe, I'd tend to agree.

[T.o.b.y]

So, since this is John's thread:

 

If Sherlock is/was arrested developmentally at the time of Victor's death, viewing best friendship as a set of adventures and play time, what does this say about John and about the relationship up until about the last 30 minutes of TFP? Sherlock and John are supposed to be "the best friends ever," Moftiss say. Can they still be if what we have seen is essentially a child-like friendship based on play rather than an adult relationship? Do you think the relationship will continue to be as strong as Sherlock "becomes an adult?"

I think it will get stronger. In fact, I think we have already seen the beginnings of that at the end of The Lying Detective.

 

And I agree with Carol - John is emotionally mature, he just has a few hang-ups, taboos and blind spots, imo.

[Arcadia]

Yeah, I think it will get stronger too. They've been through hell together and proved their loyalty to each other, I can't see that disintegrating anytime soon. And they've also demonstrated how much crap they will take from each other. It would take a massive betrayal (even more massive than faking your death ;)) to split those two apart now, imo.

[Artemis]

I think for John, "brothers in arms" is the term that he would use for coupledom. I have a friend whose husband apparently has a best friend like this. The wife calls the best friend "[her husband's] work husband." That's what Sherlock and John are to me, in many ways.

Like in "King of Queens": Carrie calls Doug's best friend Deacon his "work wife", lol.

 

 

 

[Boton]

 

the peace between them made sense to me.

The Sherlock-John conversation made sense to me.

To be clear, I also thought it made sense. I just didn’t think it was satisfying.

 

 

 

Bringing this over from the Molly Hooper thread, because poor Molly plays second fiddle to John enough.   ;)

 

I actually found the ending conversation in TLD between Sherlock and John to be pretty satisfying.  One of the things I liked was the symmetry of it.  John is mourning the end of a relationship that he screwed up several times.  He's looking back and thinking how good the little things could have been if he'd really let them be.  And here Sherlock is, taking these tentative steps into flirting with Irene, and John is standing there probably wishing he could go back to flirting with Mary by text and having all that wonderful new relationship stuff to look forward to.

 

I liked the conversation.  That is all.

 

Edited:  TFP and TLD are not the same episode.

[Pseudonym]

Do you mean the conversation at the end of TLD?

[T.o.b.y]

I like it too but for different reasons and I see something else happening! :-D This show... Nothing is ever clear cut that's going on between human beings...

 

What I see happening is John making a totally inappropriate comparison between his relationship with Mary and Sherlock's with Irene. It's ridiculous imo, Mary was John's wife and true love and the mother of his child, Irene is a crazy dangerous femme fatal who sends Sherlock naughty texts once in a while and whom he occasionally likes to imagine naked. Sherlock doesn't need or want a regular relationship with her and John knows or should know that. But instead of getting annoyed and telling him off for pestering him with such a "frivolous" subject and / or explaining again how he is married to his work and doesn't do girlfriends, Sherlock is now able to see behind John's words and his angry demeanor and recognize the massive amounts of pain and personal regret there. And, without prompting from anybody dead or alive, he finds a proper way to respond.

 

This is Sherlock Holmes as I think he should be. Not only a clever and a brave man but a wise one also and even kind when the situation really calls for it.

 

Sherlock, I am so proud of you. :-D

[Boton]

Do you mean the conversation at the end of TLD?

 

Oops, yes.  Correcting that now.

[Pseudonym]

 

 Irene is a crazy dangerous femme fatal who sends Sherlock naughty texts once in a while and whom he occasionally likes to imagine naked. 

 

Not to be argumentative, but I'm genuinely curious what makes you think he sometimes likes to imagine her naked? He doesn't seem particularly interested when she's straddling his thigh. He looks bemused more than anything. I've always thought of Sherlock's fascination with Irene as being with her mind rather than her body. He finds the way she thinks fascinating, plus the fact she almost beat him. In the scenes where we see them together and she flirts with him he either looks uncomfortable or ignores it completely. 

 

Maybe it's another one of those things where it depends what we believe about Sherlock's sexuality as to how we read into his relationship with Irene. 

[Boton]

 

 

 Irene is a crazy dangerous femme fatal who sends Sherlock naughty texts once in a while and whom he occasionally likes to imagine naked. 

 

Not to be argumentative, but I'm genuinely curious what makes you think he sometimes likes to imagine her naked? He doesn't seem particularly interested when she's straddling his thigh. He looks bemused more than anything. I've always thought of Sherlock's fascination with Irene as being with her mind rather than her body. He finds the way she thinks fascinating, plus the fact she almost beat him. In the scenes where we see them together and she flirts with him he either looks uncomfortable or ignores it completely. 

 

Maybe it's another one of those things where it depends what we believe about Sherlock's sexuality as to how we read into his relationship with Irene. 

 

 

Your last part is definitely true, because I always see Sherlock as hetero but intentionally celibate.  And all the instances you mention above I read as interest hiding behind feigned indifference.

[Pseudonym]

Where as I see him as being genuinely indifferent, and uncomfortable that she doesn't seem to take the hint. 

[T.o.b.y]

I think he likes to imagine her naked because she shows up in her birthday suit in his mind palace and he waves her away with "not now, I am working". Which tells me that when he isn't working... ;-)

[T.o.b.y]

Or was it "I am busy"...? Anyway. Same principle.