Subject: Or, possibly...
Author:
Posted on: 2013-04-17 18:53:00 UTC

... because that's not what they want to do with the story?

Seriously, saying that two male leads who share a house "just have to!" get together is exactly as wrong as saying it about a male and female character.

Now, the key difference is that it's incredibly common for the latter to happen (as evinced by the fact that I... can't actually think of an example where it doesn't?), while the former is pretty rare and usually a blatant political statement rather than just something that happens in the way of telling a good story. Given the way Sherlock has been so far about homosexuality (Kaitlyn keeps saying 'normalising', which I can only assume is a good thing), it doesn't need to make the blunt-instrument-political-statement move. Which means it can be reserved for 'if it serves the interests of the story' - which it... kind of doesn't. It would reduce the potential of Molly's character, for one trivial example, and wouldn't add anything to the mystery-drama part.

Oh, And One More Thing (TM)...

...the contentious "Moffat is queerbaiting everyone we need text, not subtext".

Gosh, Lily, Moffat? Teasing people rather than saying things outright? I think my heart just stopped. ;P

hS

Reply Return to messages