FOR SIX YEARS a continuous ongoing firestorm of a debate raged over something called "Johnlock."

For those unfamiliar, "Johnlock" was (and for some is still) the idea that John Watson and Sherlock Holmes (on the BBC show "Sherlock") loved each other romantically, could barely restrain themselves from plunging into one another's various orifices and were destined at some point in the show to declare their passion for one another.

Some people politely and quietly subscribed to this theory. But it never seems to be the courteous many who are most heard from. It it the screaming, bigoted, ugly-ass minority. The ones who declared anyone who disagreed as seeing the world through a "hetero-normative lens" and being, essentially, gay haters.

It was never that the majority simply didn't interpret the looks as being sexual or the love the men shared as being romantic. There opinions were apparently deep character flaws. (I am one of the flawed, BTW, for any die-hard Johnlockers who GAS.)

In 2017 what very well might be the last episode of Sherlock that will ever be made aired. The writers knew it and wrote it as a series ending season.

There was no kissing or declaration or anything at all for the extremist Johnlockers to hang their theory on. They did not apologize. Instead, they attacked one of the writers as some sort of gay Uncle Tom. Which is so horrible, even an old internet head like myself has a hard time fathoming it.

The On His Knees "controversy." 

There's a kind of writer's meme that says a story is created at least twice: once when it's told and once when it's heard. People see very different things in art - whether visual or written. Or sung/played, I suppose. And that's not only normal, it's a good thing.

An edit appeared on a review of On His Knees on Amazon, bringing up the idea of controversy.
When a reader goes to the trouble of posting a review and then comes back to express her opinion, I feel like I owe that concern some attention.  So-

-does Cam sexually assault Hunter? 

Hunter doesn't seem to think so. I never thought so. Cam doesn't think so, either. In fact, he was insulted at the implication.

But this might be a personal issue for some. It might be the kind of thing that serves as a trigger for someone. In which case, they could be hard-pressed to experience the story any other way.

If so, I hope they avoid BDSM types of stories in future, because a sub saying "nonono" is a fairly standard occurrence and being ignored or even taunted by a Dom is part of what they like and want.

Dale Cameron Lowry addressed this in his review
Camden Snow is a dominant whose rules would get him kicked out of safe-sane-consensual BDSM circles. He doesn’t let his subs choose or use safewords, he doesn’t negotiate contracts, and his specialty is doing exactly the things that subs have previously established as hard limits.

Now, you could argue that this makes what Cam does consensual, because the subs that come to him are specifically looking for him to cross those forbidden boundaries. One of Hunter’s hard limits is bottoming. So when he kneels in front of Cam, Hunter knows it’s pretty much a guarantee that Cam will fuck him up the ass sometime during their scene. And if that’s what he’s looking for, then technically anal sex is no longer a hard limit for Hunter.

But saying he wants Camden to fuck him would make the actual fucking less humiliating, and Hunter has a psychological need to be thoroughly humiliated. So they toss aside safe-sane-consensual rules for the sake of the scene. It also serves the story’s plot well. But whether that’s a good idea for people to do in real life is a whole separate issue.

Note, Mr. Lowry doesn't say "You shouldn't do this." He says, "It's a separate issue."

I'm not going to speak directly to why Hunter needed and wanted what Cam gave him. I think that's something each reader can ponder for themselves, if they find it interesting.

The fact is, some Doms don't allow safewords. Some subs don't want them. Many people don't use condoms. BDSM clubs vary. Some have strict rules. Some have suggestions. Some are "whatever - pay your dues."

Hunter Dane and Camden Snow are a gift to me. My goal is to be true to them. That's my job. As readers, you complete the story. YOU write it. So there are many stories, each unique to you. And one unique to me.

What we see in Knees is a vignette of sorts. A scene in the Scene, in a world both fictional and realistic. In Matchstick Men, Cam takes Hunt home for dinner. They end up in Cam's bed.
Cam laid down on his side and pried one of Hunt's arms loose. He took Hunt's hand in his own and massaged it gently.  

"This isn't a scene. There're no restraints. We aren't in a club. Yeah, I'm still a Dom; I'm always that. But you can use safewords."

He smiled at Hunt's surprised expression. "Of course, you can. I want you to do what I say because you trust me to make you to feel good ..."
What is part of a scene is not necessarily what happens between lovers outside of a scene. Some make their whole relationship a kind of extended scene. Some have very definite boundaries between one and the other. It's a continuum. And no way is the "real" way. Or the "right" way.

Back to work, then. Thanks for reading.


Comments are on. Ad hom will be removed. You opinions are welcome.

No comments:

Post a Comment