Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Happy New Year!

Heads up that I'll be writing a small bit about the new Sherlock episode near the end of this journal, but I'll avoid mentioning any huge spoilers. It's more of a rant about a little niggle I had with it. However, if you have issues with spoilers of any kind I'd avoid reading this!

So firstly, I hope everyone had a great holiday (if you celebrated any particular holiday, that is) and New Year. I had a small and quiet Christmas with the family, as was planned. Can I just say how awesome my brother is for what he got me for Christmas? I was bummed out a few weeks ago that due to my agoraphobia and depression issues I was unable to make a Manics CD and book signing session in Birmingham. My brother - who as I've mentioned is awesome - apparently went along to the signing session and got both a CD and a book signed for me as a surprise Christmas present! Needless to say that my face was like this ---> :D for the rest of the day... hell, it's still like that now! New Year was a quiet one too. I just stayed in and watched the celebrations on TV. But all in all it was a good couple of weeks.

Onto the new Sherlock episode. I really liked it. I liked the plot, I liked the drama and the humour, I liked the array of characters, and I liked Irene Adler (note here that I have never read the books, so my opinion of her comes solely from the programme, and not to how she compares to original book character). It was good to finally have more BAMF-y and intelligent female characters. My one small - and maybe petty - niggle with Irene's character was her sexuality. Not that she was a dominatrix, but that she was (according to her own words) gay, and yet she flirted with Sherlock. Not even just on a intellectual basis, which I could understand if that was the case, but in a sexual way too. So why couldn't she have identified as bi, rather than gay?

I've seen it said that maybe she calls herself gay because she prefers women to men... but that would still make her bi generally. Gay people are exclusively attracted to same-sex people. I don't see why TV shows are always so reluctant to use that label. Why it always has to be a black and white case of straight or gay. It was the same big issue I had with Willow's character in Buffy. In the early years Willow was clearly both romantically and sexually attracted to both Xander and Oz... and yet she suddenly turned gay in the later episodes when she fell in love with Tara. Again, why did she have to change from one end of the scale to the other? Why couldn't she have just been bisexual?

Sorry, I'm ranting too much about this, but it is really something that irks me. I guess a good reason would be if Irene had never actually felt any attraction to a man before Sherlock, and so she thought was she gay before she met him. It was also interesting that Sherlock was pretty much confirmed as asexual though, albeit without explicitly using the word. With the whole "why eat if you're not hungry?" analogy (what is it with Moffat always using metaphors for sex? Dancing in Doctor Who and now eating?), and confirming that he's never had sex. Although it doesn't much help the asexual awareness if the only asexual characters on TV are generally not normal people.

Anyway, I think I've ranted enough about this. Otherwise I'll have to change my user label to "Grumpy old bi-romantic asexual rants about TV characters' sexuality (or lack thereof in some cases)"!

~ Ace.

P.S. Thanks to the epic fuck up of this site that LJ have inflicted on everyone recently I have made a mirror Dreamwidth account of my journal: http://manicsfan.dreamwidth.org/ I just wanted to give a heads up for when/if I move over there permanently. Which if LJ carries on the way it's going that will be fairly soon!


( 6 comments — Leave a comment )
Jan. 2nd, 2012 07:19 pm (UTC)
While I'm naturally included to the WELL DUHHH BISEXUAL about Willow, given the era and the demographic, I reckon that 'lesbian now' was about as challenging as Joss Whedon thought he could get away with. 'Bisexual but monogamous!' would have been a more rewarding line for some of us (and more educating for others) but *sigh* so much stuff gets pulled in America.
Jan. 2nd, 2012 07:21 pm (UTC)
Also: new year celebrations on TV: how frickin AWESOME were the london fireworks?!
Jan. 3rd, 2012 12:08 am (UTC)
You're right about Willow. I always forget that even though Buffy was only made a short time ago things regarding LGBT characters was a lot stricter than these days. I remembering reading that Joss Whedon actually had to threaten to quit the series because the censors weren't going to allow them to show Willow and Tara kissing. So yeah, it's a shame they had to go down the "suddenly gay" route, but understandable that Joss did the best he could.

Yeah, the London fireworks were amazing! Much better than last years, IMO.
Jan. 2nd, 2012 08:45 pm (UTC)
Your brother is awesome! That's so great!

*nods* Yes, when she said she was gay, I was like, "... huh? I thought you're meant to fancy Sherlock and be having epic sexual tension with him?" I mean, I suppose it could've been a hint that she was playing him, but she is meant to not just have been, and it's a pretty clumsy hint (especially as she says it while Sherlock's eavesdropping). And I'm pretty sure it said she had an affair with both participants in a marriage and I took that to mean a man and a woman. It just seemed a clumsy line.
Jan. 3rd, 2012 12:11 am (UTC)
My brother is the best! :D

Yeah, I was actually hoping that it was just meant to be her playing him, but it was clear by the end that it wasn't that. I just don't see why writers still have such an issue with having a character be bisexual. It always seems to be "straight with an exception" or "gay with an exception". It's disappointing.
Jan. 3rd, 2012 07:06 pm (UTC)
Definitely. I don't know, I know sometimes maybe people don't want to be all "I'm undercutting the gay character by not making them totally gay!" but then, as you say, you have gay-with-an-exception. Human sexuality is a lot more fluid than that, and making people feel THERE IS NO LABEL FOR YOU (because I for one have actually quite WANTED a label, in my time) is not helpful.
( 6 comments — Leave a comment )


Gorillaz - 2D On Melancholy Hill
Manics fan

Latest Month

December 2012
Powered by LiveJournal.com