fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #5450 ]

[ SECRET POST #5450 ]

⌈ Secret Post #5450 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 22 secrets from Secret Submission Post #779.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

06. https://i.imgur.com/LrZrtvH.png

I mean, sure, but bbc sherlock doesn't strike me as the most "cishet bro"-y of shows? Unless you just mean how they're framed as a "bromance". Supernatural though, yeah. I'll give you that.

I just wish that the canons would stop joking around with the gay. No, I don't think it's going to become canon, but if you put in enough jokes about people mistaking John as gay, you shouldn't be surprised when people start to wonder if he is.

Show: "John, are ya gay?"
"Nope!"
"I bet you're gay."
"Nope. Only into the ladies."
"You sure you're not gay, mate?"
"Can't hear you - too busy fucking women on top of this John's Not Gay parade float"

Fandom: "I can't believe the showrunners led us on like that and then didn't even make John gay!"

"If anyone still cares, I'm not gay."
"Well I am. Look at us both."

Don't pretend that people weren't led into it. It was intentional. It was one of the few genuine cases of queerbaiting.

90+% of fandom and zero casual viewers ever thought anything was happening there, but sure. Whatever makes you feel better.

I think what the writers were going for was a sense of "With the way they're committed to each other, the fact that they aren't gay for each other is irrelevant."

Unfortunately, the writing wasn't very good, so it ended up coming across a lot more like, "No homo, definitely no homo. Unless... Lol, jk... Or are we?"

I definitely never thought Johnlock was going to be canon, but I do feel like the writing was grating and didn't really track the way they wanted it to. Also, "They're so close that the fact they're not together Like That is irrelevant" is not the brave and meaningful storytelling a lot of writers think it is, IMO.

Because it's not like always being assumed gay and denying it is ever done as plot to foreshadow that a character is gay and in the closet/denial....

I only saw a couple episodes of Sherlock and don't care one way or another about Johnlock, but in principle this is a bad way to a make your case against it.

Yeah... it's not exactly rare for a character who's supposed to be in denial, or wink-wink-nudge-nudge not straight, to basically have a running dialogue that goes like "I'm not gay, I just have an extremely close and important bond with another man, but totes not gay, but this other character kinda implies we're in love, but I'm super not gay!!!!!" Usually it's played for laughs though.

Is that really a thing in mainstream media? No, really, name some examples of prominently gay characters who start out as running gay jokes and then come out. Queer characters in mainstream media either show up queer, or the writers develop a "coming out" arc for some existing character whose straightness hasn't been too well-established previously.

That trope IS a thing in fanfic.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2021-12-08 14:06 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2021-12-11 00:55 (UTC) - Expand

Those are just homophobic jokes that general audiences will read as homophobic jokes, they aren't 'telling you' anything secret about the character, it's just making fun of the notion of two guys together because that's hilarious to people who think that's gross.

No sympathy and it makes me Raven-Symoné cackle.

Given that of these examples is a pair of actual brothers...

YES lmfao I love that op put the incest ship of spn here.

IKR? That cracked me up a little bit imagining someone going "OH NO. Why haven't these brothers declared their incestuous love and gotten together??? :("

Oh, there were Sam/Dean shippers crying about queerbaiting, too. Granted, they tend to be the type who also think that JA and JP married actual human women as a ruse to camouflage their love.

...is this picture meant to be of sam and dean, brothers? because....sam and dean shippers probably got the last scene they wanted and expected (maybe not all of the sam stuff in between dean's death...but definitely the last scene). Cas and Dean tho...yeah that one might have run away with them a bit.

I don't think sherlock is very bro-y (it's mid bro-y with mild deviations in how to dude that is immediately balanced with a type of masculinity that didn't need to be there except to go no homo), but I do think Moffat is trolly, so i do think there were missed signs of who exactly was writing this show.

Edited 2021-12-08 04:53 (UTC)

Let’s be honest. The only shippers who really got what they wanted out of the finale were the Dean/Impala shippers. Everyone else had to make do.

Dean just driving around in the impala his whole death was definitely satisfying for dean/impala shippers, you're right about that!

I think of Sherlock as bro-y for the "I'm so clever" British set, if that makes sense.

This. It’s a bro-y show for a different set of bro-y people.

I think of the books that way yes, and both versions of Watson that way, but Sherlock himself doesn't feel like the same as in the books. Is that the difference in time periods you think?

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2021-12-10 14:55 (UTC) - Expand

It's definitively bro-y for a certain demographic of British men, our bro culture isn't quite the same as the US and things like Sherlock and James Bond are 100% idealized male power fantasies. Not that we don't have a more 'macho' masculinity demo over here, but even that doesn't present itself the same as it does in the US.

so...I was actually comparing it to the books. In that I think show!Watson and book!Watson are equally bro-y. But that book!Sherlock does that ideal superior british dude thing in a way show!Sherlock doesn't? like show!Sherlock seems odder in-universe? But is that like the difference in era?

I feel like, to the extent that BBC!Sherlock and James Bond represent male power fantasies, they represent incredibly different ones. And I think it's really stretching the meaning of the term "bro" to describe BBC!Sherlock that way.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2021-12-10 15:00 (UTC) - Expand

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only