“I’m watching Elementary!” (◕‿◕✿)
“It’s really good omg!!” (◕▽◕✿)*:･ﾟ✧
“But OF COURSE it’s not as good as BBC Sherlock—” (°‿°✿)
(T_T ) ✿
_T ) ✿
“Why should we care about women’s representation in video games?”
“Nobody is going to want a female protagonist!”
“Their target audience isn’t big enough to warrant any games!”
“Women aren’t as capable as men, they don’t belong in video games!”
“If more women starting playing video games, maybe then they’d have a say in the matter!”
I once saw something along the lines of “They made Watson a girl wow Elementary is the least progressive of all adaptations!” and I might have thrown up in my mouth a little because that is one backwards definition of progress you have there.
Let me tell you why you need to rethink a few things if your first assumption is that Elementary is homophobic.
One. There was never any homosexual relationship to avoid in the first place. Sherlock Holmes and John Watson were never romantically or sexually involved in the canon, period. I don’t know how to make that any clearer. The Elementary producers and writers could never make Watson a woman with the intent of avoiding a gay relationship if the gay relationship never existed.
One and a half. Gay subtext is not real representation. Yeah, there was homoerotic subtext in many adaptations and maybe even the source text. But unless it is established as a fact that a character is LGBTQ, it does little to accurately represent the lives and opinions of those individuals who are. Two men (in this instance, Holmes and Watson) who are friends who care for one another will obviously, well, care for one another, and expressions of that relationship will often appear to be homoerotic subtext. That does not mean that it is a helpful representation of people who are LGBTQ.
Two. Sherlock and Joan will not engage in romantic or sexual relationship. They never have, do not, and never will. Ever. Period. Straight from the mouth of creator, producer, writer, and all around awesome human being Rob Doherty. There is no furthering of “heteronormative assumptions” if there is no heteroromantic or heterosexual relationship. They are two people of the opposite sex and they have a relationship. There will never be any genitals involved.
Three. On the very very off chance that in the very far future the Elementary writers ever do decide to make their relationship romantic or sexual, then it will be because that is where they believe it is appropriate to take their relationship. Not because they ever planned to avoid a homosexual relationship.
Four. Elementary is the opposite of homophobic. The best example that I can think of is the very brief mention of Crabtree’s partner and their daughter in 1x17 “Possibility Two.” Which is exactly what it should have been: brief. Not drawing attention to it, not using it as a plot twist, not making a joke of it. A homosexual character was introduced and portrayed accurately without any fanfare because you know what? Homosexual people are people, and people love people. There should be nothing to draw attention to.
Four and a half. Warranted mention in this discussion because her representation falls under the “awesome representation of LGBTQ people” umbrella and because she’s awesome and I feel the need to still freak out about how awesome she is is the portrayal of Ms. Hudson. You want to know why Elementary not only the opposite of homophobic, but is the opposite of transphobic too? Because Ms. Hudson was also introduced and developed as a great character who happens to be a transwoman. They mentioned it once, referred to her respectfully and without drawing attention, never screwed up pronouns, and treated her as they would any other character because you know what? Trans people are people.
Five. If your assumption is that two men can’t be in a relationship without your precious subtext, then I’m fairly sure the finger of “unhelpful assumptions about homosexuality” points back to you, this time under the name of “fetishization.” There’s lot of good meta on this like everywhere. I’m not worried about two men engaging in a friendship. There are two things I’m worried about when it comes to the gender of Holmes and Watson, and those are accurate representation of actually LGBTQ people in relationships and the accurate representation an awesome man and an awesome woman in an awesome relationship without people wondering when they’re going to bang. Two heterosexual guys interacting is not one of those things.
On a side note, I see a lot of people complaining that if they were going to “genderbend” one of the pair, both Holmes and Watson should have been made women. Which, I agree, would have been really awesome. But the fact that Elementary didn’t do something cool isn’t a reason why it’s bad or detrimental to the social issues it and its audience holds important. Elementary also has not (yet) introduced manatees as primary characters, but that does not make them anti-manatee or furthering anti-manatee values. Likewise, the fact that they chose not to make both Holmes and Watson women does not make them anti-women or anti-lesbian, nor does it further or glorify heteroromantic relationships at the expense of others.
The decision and execution of making Holmes a man and Watson a woman, in addition to their handling of other social topics, has so far been much better than many shows on air now. While that by no means means we ought stop critiquing and thinking of ways it can improve, it is also not a reason why other awesome things it hasn’t yet done but could do in the future are reasons why Elementary is bad. Elementary is great because of what it does and the bar it sets for itself and other shows further on.
So yeah basically if you think Elementary is homophobic you’re wrong and Elementary is right (most of the time) and will continue to be right. Hooray!
I find it hilarious that the same people who view the homosexual subtext between Sherlock and Watson in other adaptations (and in the original) as a fetish, as something to FAP to, are the ones who are screaming this nonsense.
You tell ‘em.
I think it speaks to the fact that Snape was fucking mean that Neville’s worst fear was not Bellatrix Lestrange, the person who tortured his parents until they could no longer remember who they were or even Voldemort, whose name the act was committed in, but his school teacher who bullied him nine months at a time for years on end.
ugh I’ll keep away from some places for now. The amount of hate Eren is getting after this second episode makes zero sense to me, zero.
- You go and watch your mom get eaten in front of you.
- Then get told that you couldn’t have helped her because you’re weak, humans are weak. So all you can do is run and wait, because Titans are bigger.
- Then watch as an adult, a so called soldiers,say about you and your people: “oh the titan should have eaten them all so that we could have more food for ourselves.”
- Then lash out at your friend for telling you that you’re too weak to try anything against the titans.
Of course there is absolutely no reason for Eren to be angry. Hey 10-yr old Eren isn’t having a breakdown and expressing it through rage. There is absolutely nothing justifying all of his anger, zero. And hey 10 yr-old boys can’t be unreasonable at time either. Annoying little shit Eren is, right? Such a bad main character, Eren is.
Eren is actually one of the FEW boy protagonists that reverses the shounen-type protagonist archetype. Whereas he would be the driving force to solve the problem, here, his attitude is something that doesn’t work, so a different approach must be taken.
Then again, people are idiots. Liking SnK for being so brutal and different, but GOD forbid the lead’s character isn’t the typical heroic one.