Why is it all about sex for the JL "militants"?

Well to be fair, sex is often presented as the end-all-be-all on lots of TV shows, so it's understandable if people grow to place too much emphasis on it.

Arthur, put the kettle on and dig out those lemon hand wipes.

It's predictable yes but I'm not sure it's understandable.

They claim that it's all about queer representation, and to them, the ultimate queer representation would be to see two men (johnlock) at the very least, kissing, if not actually in bed naked, doing the deed. A common trope for them is Sherlock and John, high on adrenaline after a case, clawing each other's clothes off in the front hall and having vigorous sex on the stairs in 221B. Sometimes they make it upstairs out of respect for Mrs. Hudson's sensitivities.

Many of them believed that the show that was shown on bbc1 in the Sherlock slot on sunday night (the apple something....) was actually going to be the "secret" episode four of S4 and went *beep* when there was an apparently graphic heterosexual sex scene in the first few minutes. They screamed that it was UNFAIR that the beeb showed graphic het sex, but not gay sex, specifically Sherlock and John.

But then, one must remember that these are the idiots who for years have called Moftiss "Our dads" and refer to Sherlock as "soft" and "smol" and John and Sherlock as "our sons". Some of them take it so far as to believe in "Freebatch", ie: Martin and Ben are boyfriends in real life, or should be.

I do have to say that it is a common trope in entertainment to have a couple who fight all the time, only to one day suddenly stop fighting and start kissing, and fall into bed. The show Moonlighting is a perfect example (Cybel Shephard and Bruce Willis) or Remington Steele (Pierce Brosnan and Stephanie Zimbalist). The kiss/sex is the "payoff". Heck, Shakespeare used this trope in The Taming of The Shrew, so it's been around for a while. So it's not an unexpected thing, but the 'lockers interpreted events, looks, touches in a sexual manner when they were not written or performed as such and took it from there.

They claim that it's all about queer representation, and to them, the ultimate queer representation would be to see two men (johnlock) at the very least, kissing, if not actually in bed naked, doing the deed
Even if Mofftiss do decide to give us that storyline, a kissing scene (or more) would never be part of it anyway. The show just doesn't do those kinds of scenes, no matter which characters are involved. Remember when Mary came along? There was so much speculation that John didn't really love her because we hadn't even seen them kissing. People said that he had only settled for Mary because his true love, Sherlock, was dead.

This is a show that doesn't do love scenes of any kind, so they're not going to start with their two stars.

You want to bet that the majority of these people are women under 25? I'm going to step out on my little rationalization ledge and say that is the most hormone laden time of a woman's life and yet many women of that age have not yet come to terms with their bodies or their sexuality. So they sublimate their feelings by investing as a group in the sexuality of fictional people who don't much have any sex at all. And they're welcome to all of that as long as I don't have to buy in.

A good percentage are middle-aged women, who can be just as unbalanced as young women tend to be. I say that without malice, being a middle-aged woman myself.

I say that without malice, being a middle-aged woman myself.
Ha!

It's all about slash fiction and yes, a few years/decades ago there were articles by actual psychologists saying they were indeed inexperienced female teens who sublimated their sexuality writing gay stories but I remember how some "writers" were really angry at BC and a gay journalist when they talked about this in an interview in Out. They say they weren't young girls but some of them adults and that most of them were "minorities" so anyone who dared to make a joke about them, questioning them or calling them "young girls" were actually damaging "minorities" or something like that. And as "minorities" they have the absolute right to write or draw porn about a "white middle age man" and he must say nil about it because if he has an opinion about people sharing porn that describes him or use his image then he is discriminating him. Seriously there was an article about it...by a white girl who looked very young and I saw how a few of very young white girls shared it on Twitter! LOL

It's a very crazy world and I have read a few stories about fandoms attacking creative people for not doing the gay paring that they wanted. I remember something about people attacking a lesbian author. I guess it's similar to what it's happening with Gattis except that the author was young, female and involve in Internet politics so I guess the abuse was much worse.

Also remember all the angry kids at Marvel because they didn't give a boyfriend to Capitan America!

PD: If they are actually middle aged women or gay or trans or gender fluid, etc. sharing and talking about explicit sex with young kids why is not considered at least creepy? I'm sure everyone would be scandalized if it were straight middle aged men! And with reason!