Unrequited Love
The conflict at the heart of "No Thank You, John" is one of unrequited love: John has feelings for the speaker, which she does not return. One interesting aspect of Rossetti's portrayal of this dynamic is her focus on feelings as involuntary. The speaker does not, primarily, express dislike of John. Indeed, she at times seems to suggest that she would like to return his feelings, if only to end their current conflict. However, she clearly asserts that she cannot make herself love John, any more than he can make himself stop loving her. The best option, she ultimately concludes, is a compromise of friendship—through friendship, she can offer something of herself without having to conjure love out of thin air, while John can maintain some feelings of affection for her. This suggests that romantic love exists on a plane separate from platonic love, and that it is uniquely uncontrollable.
Gender Roles
In this poem, Christina Rossetti critiques gendered expectations of love and romance, defending the rights of women to refuse male attention and affection. John's actions both reflect and take advantage of sexism. He believes himself entitled to the speaker's love, and disregards her feelings and opinions. The gender norms of Victorian (mid-to-late 19th century) England, in particular, tended to portray women as caretakers, and as morally superior to men. John makes use of those ideals to portray the speaker's refusal as unfeminine. He insists that her lack of feelings for him represents an unfeeling or immoral tendency generally, even while hoping that emotional appeals will alter her stance. Rossetti's speaker generally seems uninterested in fitting a feminine ideal or maintaining a good moral reputation, and remains firm in her refusal.
Concealment and Transparency
The speaker has a certain obvious degree of control over her situation, as evidenced simply by the fact that she is the person speaking to John. She also asks John questions, offering him control and urging him towards transparency. Meanwhile, the fact that John doesn't speak in this poem—even when asked to—has the effect of somewhat veiling his thoughts and motives. He simultaneously loses power and personhood by remaining silent, and gains it by maintaining a degree of privacy and mystery. The speaker, meanwhile, clearly values honesty and transparency: she repeatedly reminds John that, while she may have hurt his feelings, she has never lied to or misguided him. In the latter half of the poem, the speaker tries to end John's concealments and create an expectation of transparency. She tells him that he should not try to cling to hidden hopes or ulterior motives, and argues that both characters will be happy only if they are both open with one another.
