Specifically, this. I’m a big fan of prettyarbitrary and I’ve already done my “rage-as-rhetorical-device” thing on her once this week, so instead of reblogging, I’ve tagged her instead to ignore/block at her leisure. So, once and for all, this is my manifesto on representation in Sherlock.
firstdrafted says smart things!
“No one is saying that* a canon queerplatonic or asexual relationship for John and Sherlock is unwanted.”
To clarify, I have indeed seen people who were saying specifically this—three times in the past week, even. I don’t think they were trying to be malicious about it, but I don’t think they were thinking about what it really meant when they took that position either. Which is why I felt that conversation was worth setting off.
What YOU are saying, firstdrafted, is totally smart and hell yes, and hearing it from you has helped me sort my own head out a bit. So I’m a little, guiltily glad I set you off, though I’m sorry if I increased your stress quotient.
THE CURRENT DISCUSSION OF REPRESENTATION AMBIGUITY ON MY DASH IS FUCKING PISSING ME OFF.