Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



tiye ([info]tiye) wrote in [info]unfunny_fandom,
@ 2012-01-24 13:23:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:Gobsmacked

Multiple interpretations of canon? In MY fandom?
Warnings for homophobia with a side of sexism and probably various other -isms that I'm not entirely sure I have a name for! Also, massive amounts of jaw-droppingly over-the-top condescension.

Alexds1 is a fan of original recipe Sherlock Holmes, which is the only version that matters! Alexds1 has a problem with adaptations of literary works. And people who enjoy those adaptations. And people who view those adaptations as legitimate works in their own right. And people whose interpretations of creative works differ from Alexds1's. But Alexds1 especially has a problem with anyone who dares to speculate about Sherlock Holmes's sexuality, which is spelled out totally unambiguously in the original source material!

It doesn't take long for the pwnage to begin.



(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]life_on_mars
2012-01-25 10:41 am UTC (link)
I do think he was written as asexual or too busy to actively pursue a relationship

I'd always believed he was chaste by preference, simply because he felt any emotional involvements would get in the way of his logical and reasoning powers. And, as a friend of mine says, "Chastity is chastity, whether your thing is men, women or goats."

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map