Subject: Chuck me some peanuts.
Author:
Posted on: 2012-09-15 16:19:00 UTC

I'm just going to say that the majority of Sherlock Sues I've seen (and I have seen a shitload of them now) function under the idea that "girls want a bad boy who's willing to be good for them", under the appeal of Boyce Avenue's cover of Katy Perry's "Teenage Dream" (instead of being all about sex, the BA cover is all about cuddling around and having deep romantic connections. yeah. it's very nice).

That is to say, any bad boy like Sherlock or Moriarty (and by bad I mean cynical about society, possible sociopathy, etc) can be turned into a loving, caring ideal mate of the Sue's at the cost of believable characterisation. Because, believe me, there is a way to write lovey-dovey Moriarty and it's "as a psychopathic act". And there is a way to write a caring Sherlock and it's "Three Garridebs, with Watson being hurt".

Key term: Watson. Because to me, any Sue who attempts to be with Sherlock Holmes is upstaging John Watson. Even if John is straight and Sherlock is asexual (popular headcanon, especially given the married-to-his-work spiel), there is still an element of their bromance that goes deeper than such. Neither can exist without the other - their post-FALL characterisations in the last minutes of the show clearly say that. John's entire dating career has been trainwrecked by Sherlock, and Sherlock is entirely uninterested in something as vapid as dating girls.

So if a Sue tries to change that, they change a huge part of Sherlock's character.

(Pardon my heteronormative language, but we /are/ discussing Suvian stereotypes in the BBC Sherlock fandom and heteronormativity tends to happen with Sues around.)

Reply Return to messages