flynnsarcade: buttkickingest: A lovely... - Captain Sexypants of the USS Awesome

flynnsarcade:

buttkickingest:

A lovely interview about Sherlock wherein Steven Moffat says that asexuality is ‘boring’, that Sherlock is definitively not gay, and that Sherlock wouldn’t be living with a man if men were interesting.

flynnsarcade:

Look, I get that I have a lot of followers who are defenders of his, and I’m not saying that he’s consciously an asshole, but he’s shown a complete disregard for the opinions of others and refuses to step up when he’s called on issues he may be perpetuating. It’s like the man has no brain-to-mouth filter. I tweeted him and said that if he researched asexuality he would find it anything but boring, told him that he had likely hurt the feelings of many fans, and linked him to a glossary of the different facets of asexuality.

As for the ‘if men were interesting’ bit and completely disregarding the other bits about Sherlock’s sexuality because I honestly don’t know what to say - why would he be living with John if he wasn’t interesting? Does the man actually grasp the character he’s writing? I thought that his being interesting to Sherlock was why John was his roommate in the first place. Sherlock would never entertain the idea of having someone who was boring or ordinary in his home.

Moffat is incredible. I’m sitting here slackjawed at his ability to outdo himself in the competition for “worst possible person”.

I’ve discussed my issues with his manhandling of Sherlock’s asexuality and now I see why he’s so terrible at it. Because the more he insists that Sherlock is NOT GAY, NO STOP THINKING THAT, and NO HE LIKES LADIES HE JUST DOESN’T KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH IT, the more pointedly I will interpret Sherlock as a homoromantic/biromantic asexual who’s only interest in Irene Adler was intellectual, and as a challenge— not a narrative that treats his attraction to her like he’s a 12 year old boy who’s seen his first pretty girl and can’t cope with it.

And I’m laughing at him thinking there’s nothing in Doyle’s canon to suggest that Sherlock is gay— there’s a difference between ‘there’s nothing there’ and ‘I didn’t bother considering that literary treatment of queers was much more subtle and linguistically coded than I could imagine and there are no men kissing so he’s obviously not gay’.

And at his defense of the Irene storyline by comparing it to ACD’s—

”In the original, Irene Adler’s victory over Sherlock Holmes was to move house and run away with her husband. That’s not a feminist victory.”

So acting in defiance of the male protagonist for the sake of personal agency?Actually marrying a man who she wanted to marry, one who we see through the context of her experiences and not his? Outwitting and out-disguising Sherlock Holmes and making no apologies for it? No oops sorry she got married that’s reducing women to the role of wives!! That’s sexist!! But….

“I was called a misogynist because I was reducing women to mothers. ‘Reducing women to mothers’ – now there is possibly the most anti-women statement I’ve heard.”

Yeah, you go, Moffat. You know, impregnating a female character, putting her through a pregnancy she barely remembers, diminishing her bodily autonomy by using her uterus as a vehicle for the plot and as an incubator for another female character who is then defined by her relationship with the male protagonist, subsequently erasing her agency and independence within the storyline.

You’re the real feminist here.

It physically pains me to think that this show is stuck with such a close-minded, self-aggrandized writer who has no intention on doing what, by all means, he should be doing with this text, because this is 2012 and yes, you may have taken away Sherlock’s Victorian dressings but you’re doing nothing new by portraying him as a confused, repressed heterosexual whose cerebralistic tendencies make him hopeless with the ladies. So stop patting yourself on the back and admit that (despite the fact that you’ve been given an audience who would, in part, enthusiastically welcome a queer relationship, asexual or no) you’re too caught up in your 1st Grade interpretations of Sherlock’s character and your badly justified heterosexism to remove Sherlock from the metaphorical closet he’s existed in in basically every interpretation of these books.

So yes Moffat you’re hilarious now please give this show to someone more capable than you? Perhaps someone who won’t balk at the idea of an asexual protagonist who is in a non-normative relationship with another man and then disguise his obvious heterosexism behind intellectual excuse making. Someone who won’t get his undies in a twist when people rightfully call him out on his disgusting sexist, homophobic writing tendencies.

Because this is becoming personal.

EVERYONE READ THIS, THIS PERSON IS MUCH MORE ARTICULATE THAN I AM.