Once again, Tumblr has denied me the ability to reblog. It’s just me, I’m sure 😉
This conversation about asexual erasure vs queer representation is dear to my heart.
When Sherlock said the rest was transport, I was thrilled beyond belief to see what I considered asexual representation. It launched me into the fandom like nothing I’d ever experienced and I found that I was not alone and there were tons of asexuals out there. I essentially came out because of that line. But that was backed away from when they went from the pilot to the series.
I took that to be an indication that they were not going with an asexual interpretation, but something more repressed. Celibate. Someone who chose to shove those emotions down deep to be a better, more effective detective without the clouded judgment of sentiment. I still wasn’t sure though.
Season Three changed my mind. The journey to the subconscious that was Drunklock was far more homosexual than homoromantic in tone. This made me both happy and sad. I liked the idea of a homoromantic asexual character, but after awhile ( and after reading the infamous ‘asexuality is boring’ interview) that struck me as simply too difficult to portray for a modern audience. I see it in Granada ( where many see a pure homosexual relationship).
I decided I would be happy with any Sherlock portrayal that was not heterosexual (that was my no go).
So, yes. It is a bit of erasure the further down the path we go ( I do believe in TJLC). Initially, I saw a love that could have been romantic or sexual. Now it appears sexual. I’m good with that. Really. Because for me the enemy has always been heteronormativity.
I do think one needs to prioritize in terms of representation. It’s sad, but I believe it to be a fact of life. It is noble to think so, but in viewing things in a historical context in terms of minority representation, I think we can’t all fit through the doorway if we go at the same time. I think gay representation is more important to social change than asexual representation. I think if Sherlock and John have a sexual relationship, then we can portray Sherlock as gay *and* can portray John *bisexual*…. and by God a bisexual that is not portrayed as an anything-that-moves type would be powerful.
I used to identify as a bisexual before I understood what asexuality was about, and I have had tons of people tell me monogamous bisexuals don’t exist. (I think I am an expert on erasure in many, many ways. This is just one of many I’ve lived through) I would be thrilled to see John portrayed as one. This is why I really hope nothing happens between them while Mary is in the picture. It establishes the possibility as a bisexual as having an attraction to both sexes without having to act on both simultaneously. So… a non-stereotypical bisexual.
Which leads me back to Sherlock, who, even in a sexual relationship with John, has the potential to be defined as on the asexual spectrum. I would love to see him portrayed as a Grey A, or a Demi, (or even take the opportunity to truly educate the public that an asexual is defined by their experience of sexual attraction, not their choice to have sex or not, but, that is an exceedingly complicated concept and I hold zero hopes of exploring it.) It works in terms of headcanon, and possibly personal feelings of representation, depending on what Sherlock discloses to us or to John.
Asexuality is so much an internal determination based on what you feel and how you react personally to stimuli, rather than one of how you appear to the outside world (or even to your partner). If it’s a long range game, there’s still time to explore if what Sherlock really wants is a romantic connection with John, not a sexual one, but is now willing to explore a sexual path for the first time.
Of course, not all asexuals buy that theory. Some find it inherently abusive. Some find it to be throwing aromantic asexuals under the bus to say ‘look, we can have sex, we are just like you!’, but I don’t personally see it this way. Everyone’s opinions vary on this one, and even in writing this I feel as if I will likely be misconstrued. What I am saying is, Sherlock is at the very beginning of his sexual journey if he is the virgin it is implied he is. He likely doesn’t know what path he will take either, so unless the series goes on long enough for him to thoroughly explore his sexual variations, I think it’s very hard to claim asexual erasure, just a broadening of the scope of asexuality.
You describe something very close to the path I traveled when it comes to this. ^_^
The asexual erasure I meant wasn’t in the story. ANY kind of queer resolution there would be a win. The erasure I meant is in the argument some fans have fielded that if there isn’t some kind of physical, sexual expression of their relationship, then it’s not explicit or real. But not all kinds of queer relationships even have that kind of expression. (Nobody in any of these threads have said any such thing, but it’s a claim I’ve seen go around Tumblr a few times.)
I’ve always been incredibly skeptical of Sherlock and the virgin thing. Notice that every time it’s applied to him, it’s a pejorative? All it is is an attack on his choice not to make sex a central feature of his life (whether that is because he’s asexual or celibate). When it’s used as an insult like that, you can’t trust that the people using it are doing it because it’s true; all they care about is trying to hurt. (Including Mycroft, who’s being a bit of a dick there, and who I suspect doesn’t have a hell of a lot of room to talk.)
I do give Moffat—Moffat, Gatiss, Thompson, whoever the hell came up with that bit—props for acknowledging that sex isn’t a top priority for everybody and that whatever their reasons, there’s nothing wrong with that. (Although then they went and talked about how he probably banged Irene after the credits, which. *sigh* I’ll take it as a win.)
Actual bisexual John, though. God, it would be spectacular, wouldn’t it? Bi and married to a woman—THE SHOCK.