(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

mad_teacup
2013-02-22 03:02 am UTC (link)

Another day, and I hate Sherlockfen a little more. Why the fuck are they so misogynist, on top of everything else? I get that reading Sherlock Holes is like experiencing a homosocial romp through 1890's London but seriously? Can we please not be gigantic assholes about it like, you know, Holmes himself is? Because we can read and acknowledge the fact he's really kind of a gigantic dick? Just stop with the misogynistic fail, Sherlock fans. Please.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	ekaterinv 2013-02-22 03:15 am UTC (link)
	Watson often remarks on Holmes being a gigantic dick, too. You're not supposed to emulate Holmes. And Holmes was never this bad -- he was pretty protective of and polite towards women, in fact. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

mad_teacup
2013-02-22 04:33 am UTC (link)

So true about Watson. I have to say I think Holmes is a huge dick about women though. From The Sign of Four, beginning of chapter 9 ("A Break in the Chain"): "'I would not tell them too much,' said Holmes. Women are never to be entirely trusted - not the best of them.'"

Then Watson, like a boss: "I did not pause to argue over this atrocious sentiment."

DEAR SHERLOCKFEN PLEASE LISTEN TO WATSON THANK YOU.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	ekaterinv 2013-02-22 04:38 am UTC (link)
	Holmes was totally a douchecanoe about women. He just wasn't as bad as these people. That's not to excuse him, it's to say that these people are incredibly bad. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

mad_teacup
2013-02-22 04:44 am UTC (link)

And it just boggles me as to why? I'm really a spectator when it comes to fandoms but there is just this crazy rampant misogyny in so many of these "similar" fandoms. I mean, SPN and the RPS tinhats, it's this crazy misogyny fest based on this show with two bromancing men (or however to describe this~) and then all of this internalized misogyny comes blazing on-fire 5600C out of every nook and cranny. It pisses me off about Sherlock fans especially. All you have to do is read to see he's a total ass about this. Let's not do that. Let's be mindful of that as we engage with this material. NO EARTH LOGIC NO STOP

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

the_sun_is_up
2013-02-22 09:43 pm UTC (link)

show with two bromancing men

Yeah, that's the reason why. Whenever you have a fandom that overwhelmingly ships slash, it tends to foster/uncover a lot of misogyny, partly because any female characters (or girlfriends of actors) in the vicinity are obviously just obstacles to the boysex and must be hated on, and partly because of the culture of penis-worship, pretty-boy-worship, and idealizing m/m romances as superior to all other romance.

See also: SPN, Gundam Wing, etc.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	ekaterinv 2013-02-22 10:43 pm UTC (link)
	See also: ancient Athens. (Reply to this)(Parent)

My tl;dr

mad_teacup
2013-02-23 12:06 am UTC (link)

Allow me to teal deer a moment. I just find this fascinating and bizarre. A lot of the time you get the supposed heterosexual male or female characters that the fans sort of project onto, like for example, male fans imagining themselves as a potential relationship partner for a female anime character. There's this whole mindset that if the character on the show isn't in a relationship, they are "accessible" to the fans as personal imagination fodder. There have been these absurd outcries when characters are "discovered" to have been in relationships, or perhaps they hook up in canon. I remember a specific example where a female anime character supposedly had a tryst or something in her past, and male fans erupted into frothing incoherent rage, as she was no longer an accessible virgin in their minds. I'm referencing male fans a lot here, but it's mainly because those stories are ones I'm remembering the most quickly.

Basically, I just think there is this interesting thing going on with slash fans—esp. this kind of slash, where it isn't on the periphery but front and center in the fandom. It's not that the fans go berserk over, for example, SPN actors having girlfriends because they imagine themselves as their girlfriends. It's that the actors are in luv, and the fandom their knights, defending their sacred closeted relationship. I just find that so interesting, it's like this movement from the isolated "I" ("I imagine X character as accessible to me personally, even though everybody else is having their own personal fantasies") to this collective "we" ("HOW DARE YOU INSINUATE X and X MALE CHARACTERS AREN'T TOGETHER YOU DUMB BITCH, THEIR LOVE IS PURE, WE WILL DEFEND THEM!!!!") which totes along crazy amounts of misogyny. If the characters were heterosexually accessible (?) would the hivemind misogyny be as rampant? IT IS JUST SO CRAZY HOW POTENTIALLY CANON SLASH RELATIONSHIPS INVITE RIDICULOUS AMOUNTS OF MISOGYNY INTO THEIR WANKING ARSENAL.

And you have to wonder, even though there's the usual stupid objectification going on whether fictional character/RPS, there's this weird undercurrent with this type of fandom, that the fandom collectively OWNS the relationship. And like they have the idea that the best way to protect their MxM turf/eliminate threats is to target other perceived-female fans by reducing them to categories that should be shunned. ("She's a dumb bitch.") ("What a fucking whore!") She's a "bitch," just ignore her, she's clearly malicious and her questining of the sacred relationship is meaningless! Everyone remain calm, this is what "bitches" do! She's not a person like us people, she's a bitch! THEY'RE ALL JUST JEALOUS OF THEIR LOVE.

And then it sort of breeds into everything, so it's not just the relationship it's like, the series itself, because on the tumblr tag, it's not like SHERLOCKxJAWN DON'T QUESTION, it's like YOU WOULD DARE TROLL SHERLOCKFEN YOU DUMB BITCH?

It's like, wow, okay...THIS IS SO CRAZY.

I think I could just keep rambling I...I have no idea how to cure this.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: My tl;dr -

singe, 2013-02-23 01:37 am UTC

Re: My tl;dr -

full_metal_ox, 2013-02-23 10:10 pm UTC

Re: My tl;dr -

singe, 2013-02-25 04:39 pm UTC

Re: My tl;dr -

cmdr_zoom, 2013-02-23 03:15 am UTC

Re: My tl;dr -

iczer6, 2013-02-23 03:21 am UTC

Re: My tl;dr -

pyratejenni, 2013-02-24 04:31 pm UTC

Re: My tl;dr -

iczer6, 2013-02-24 08:38 pm UTC

Re: My tl;dr -

uldihaa, 2013-02-23 04:14 am UTC

Re: My tl;dr -

eevee, 2013-02-23 11:15 am UTC

My tl;dr continues -

mad_teacup, 2013-02-23 05:36 pm UTC

Re: My tl;dr continues -

sparkysrevenge, 2013-02-24 07:10 pm UTC

Re: My tl;dr continues -

adevyish, 2013-02-25 10:48 am UTC

Re: My tl;dr -

full_metal_ox, 2013-02-23 10:17 pm UTC

Re: My tl;dr -

the_sun_is_up, 2013-02-25 07:26 pm UTC

(no subject) -

sorchar, 2013-02-23 08:25 pm UTC

	puipui 2013-02-22 07:55 am UTC (link)
	Then Watson, like a boss: "I did not pause to argue over this atrocious sentiment." This is why it always annoys me when adaptations make Watson the stupid one. Watson is supposed to be the the sane one, people! Pay attention! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

beccastareyes
2013-02-22 02:44 pm UTC (link)

They can't write Sherlock Holmes with amazing observation and deductive skills, so they compensate by making everyone near him suddenly get a case of the stupids?

Watson is worse at being a detective than Holmes, but that is not saying much, given it's Sherlock Holmes. It's like saying 'I am not as good a physicist as Stephen Hawking': true, but tells you almost nothing about my actual abilities, since that covers a range from 'innumerate' to 'a solid, skilled physicist'.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	lady_ganesh 2013-02-22 05:07 pm UTC (link)
	They can't write Sherlock Holmes with amazing observation and deductive skills, so they compensate by making everyone near him suddenly get a case of the stupids? By Jove, I think you've got it. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	sorchar 2013-02-23 08:26 pm UTC (link)
	Icon love! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) -

beccastareyes, 2013-02-23 09:06 pm UTC

	sorchar 2013-02-23 08:27 pm UTC (link)
	Oh, and also, yes to everything in this comment. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	abharding 2013-02-26 01:05 am UTC (link)
	People either forget or are unaware that Watson was the audience/reader surrogate. He asked the questions that the reader wanted and or needed to in order to understand what was going on. He is even the troupe-namer on the TV Troupes website. (I don't know how to link - so I am not going to to.) (Reply to this)(Parent)

	mcity 2013-02-23 09:18 pm UTC (link)
	The Ritchie films pretty much did that. Watson was clearly no intellectual slouch himself, as demonstrated in the second film. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	community_care 2013-02-25 12:16 am UTC (link)
	And way before them (and many times better) the Granada series. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	honorh 2013-02-22 07:34 am UTC (link)
	Heh. "Sherlock Holes". Freudian slip, or the perfect title for the porn parody? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	uldihaa 2013-02-22 10:18 am UTC (link)
	You mean there isn't already one? And no, I am not going to google it. Mainly because I'm 99.99% certain that there is either porn, or a porn actor, by this name. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	ladyvyola 2013-02-22 06:02 pm UTC (link)
	If nothing else, fandom_wank has taught me when not to google, click the link, or read the comments. Not that I always heed the lesson.... (Reply to this)(Parent)

	mad_teacup 2013-02-22 07:19 pm UTC (link)
	I saw that after I posted and was like, welp, that explains everything! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	eevee 2013-02-23 11:19 am UTC (link)
	I googled it, then realized I had SafeSearch on, and decided not to push my luck. A ton of people seem to misspell it like that, though. "Sherlock Holes" is a favorite book of at least 26 people in Facebook, apparently. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	mistal 2013-02-22 11:54 pm UTC (link)
	Ah, but do these people see Holmes as a dick or the epitome of greatness and "do-no-bad"? My guess is epitome of greatness and "do-no-bad". (Reply to this)(Parent)

	life_on_mars 2013-02-23 01:01 pm UTC (link)
	'Sherlock' has nothing to do with Sherlock Holmes and nobody will ever convince me that it does. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	community_care 2013-02-26 11:47 pm UTC (link)
	Me neither. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	sepiamagpie 2013-02-25 05:42 pm UTC (link)
	Okay, new rule. We do not complain about misogyny with one breath, then mock 'crazy fangirls' with our next. I cannot enforce this. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -