Nerd HQ 2016: LGBT Character (Sherlock Conversation Highlight)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- #NerdHQ | July 21-24, 2016 | San Diego New Children's Museum
A Conversation For A Cause with the cast and creators of Sherlock at Nerd HQ benefiting Operation Smile on Sunday, July 24. Featuring Steven Moffatt, Mark Gatiss, Sue Vertue and Amanda Abbigton. Brought to you by PDP Gaming.
Watch the full panel here: • "Sherlock" Cast & Crew...
Follow The Nerd Machine:
thenerdmachine....
thenerdm...
/ thenerdmachine
/ thenerdmachine
Snapchat: @RealNerdMachine
did he just call John a grumpy bisexual and sherlock a camp gay person?
"gay baddie", too. hah.
i still have faith.
I actually really loved their replies. But give us Johnlock now!
stop its not going to happen
lol except that it is, see you in 2017 fam
"You can be a grumpy bisexual person. You can be a very camp gay person." The frequency of which I've seen John and Sherlock described as such (respectively) just makes that comment a hundred times better
GIVE US SOME JOHNLOCK ALREADY ITS BEEN NEARLY 7 YEARS
Y? That would ruin the show. Both are into woman. Can't reverse that. Oh wait person of interest did that
+Bluebird21 +Wawasjohn You're clearly homophobes if you think having a gay couple would ruin a show. Don't even deny it
+Bluebird21 sorry bluebird that wasn't directed towards you! I meant Wawasjohn
+Wawasjohn what show are you watching?????
Whaat? Sherlock isn't interested in women at all, he repeats and demonstrates it all the time :) John, on the other hand, is interested in women indeed. However, that doesn't mean he isn't also interested in guys, he never said it. Being 'not gay' isn't the same - there are many layers in between. He does get jealous of Sherlock's supposed love interests, though, and he grieved Sherlock like a widower, not a simple friend. He even decided to get married to 'move on from Sherlock'. Everything's so obvious, really :)
They answered the questions perfectly. If kids are taught at a young age that homosexuality is somehow "abnormal" then of course they're going to bully gay kids. If parents don't make it an issue, then kids will not look at gay couples and think it's weird. It's that simple.
Exactly. I remember i babysat a young girl (12) and she was talking about how she thought a (straight) couple was adorable and how she shipped them, and it so happened that same day she saw a (gay) couple ship when browsing pictures. And she looked at me and said "what is that?! Umm ew!" I later found out the parents did not (and i qoute) "wanting her to know about that until later".
They explained that perfectly.
I know Steven try’s to be supportive of the lgbtq+ community and what he was saying was mostly true but I wish Mark would’ve talked more on this topic as he is actually gay so idk it made me feel a bit weird that Steven was talking more than Mark. The most representation we get out of Sherlock is the occasional gay couple that appear for less than half an episode, and they’re not even close to being a main focus of the episode (and I don’t mean their sexuality being the main focus, I don’t want that, I just want actual canonically lgbtq+ people having more screen time). And there’s Harriet, but she’s not actually ever shown, just spoken of. If the creators of this show don’t think it would work with the storyline if Johnlock became canon (though personally I think it could work, as not all relationships have to be sexual), then introducing a main character that is actually lgbtq+ but their sexuality/gender not being part of the main plot, would be really really good for the 5th season.
Preach Moffatt PREACH
"but other people are doing lgbt representation so we don't have to", basically.
lots of excuses there.
How is it? It's his show if he wants gay characters it's his choice. The way he explained it made sense, there show isn't one to have agenda and have time to waste time talking about lgbt.
The show already has its core cast of characters. Holmes, Watson, Mrs Hudson, Lestrade, Mary & Molly. None of them are gay. So to introduce a gay character would mean they’d either be a villain or a victim which people would get annoyed about.
I’m gay. But we can’t pretend that being a minority is being a majority. Simply adding characters to give the illusion of diversity is only going to lead to the token gay character or the barely fleshed out character who is reduced to nothing more than a sexuality rather than a character.
DontSigh I agree, I can barely understand that. They took it way too seriously, and the point is to NORMALIZE lgtbq+ people. Of course, they were afraid of including a lgtb+ strong character
It's probable that Sherlock already has an LGBT main character; two of them, actually! And it's so damned appropriate with all the history surrounding Arthur Conan Doyle and 1895 and Gothic Victorian literature subtext. On my first watch-through of this show, I was on the edge of my seat the entire time thinking, "HOLY CRAP! When are they gonna kiss?!" Because the romantic subtext is so obvious. From my perspective, as a fan of ACD Holmes who also happens to be queer, this would just be the perfect story set-up for historically groundbreaking LGBT representation. Finally queer male characters that are relatable and not just stereotypes (or set up for tragedy)! Finally a romance/adventure story I can believe in! Finally these two beloved heroes get to come out of the closet they were forced into for 130 years! Finally someone is doing this story RIGHT!
This is so ridiculous given the representation of irene: An overly sexual "lesbian" that when one man comes along will be swept of her feet and is no longer gay. As a gay woman who has had stuff like "oh you'll find a man eventually" said to me before it's actually appauling. They said every TV show needs to get better at it. Maybe they need to look at their own. Obviously people can change and i would be fine with it if she comes to realise shes not gay (still a bit dodgy because of the suggestion that one man can make gay women realise they aren't gay) but she had sex with sherlock for fucks sake and was in love with him. I'm sorry but that's just absolutely ridiculous to call that good representation.
So true!
Irene is not lesbian! Mycroft said multiple times during the episode that she had relationships with both men and women. Also she was in love with Sherlock but she has never had sex with him. You need to rewatch Belgravia 'cause I think you missed the point.
IAm3.14YearsOld I agree, like she could just be bisexual, but she did say to John that she is gay (I know that can be an umbrella term). So idk I wish they had done her storyline a little better so that it was more implied that she was attracted to both men and women but obviously not make it a big thing.
Well, I think you might me mixing things up here.
Irene has said herself to be gay, right; but she is also known to be working as a dominatrix. We all have to understand that being a dominatrix doesn’t necessarily require having intercourse with your client. Often times it involves asserting domination through different sexual scenarios, and that’s it.
She may be gay, but she has also learnt to separate work from personal relationships, and props to her for that!
But they do mention who people would like to date, several times! There were several romances in Sherlock and dr who. He claims to be an advocate for LGBT representation then gives literally NONE. All the while baiting the fans with 'ohhhhh johnlock could happen' like representation is something you dangle in front of a minority's face like a cat toy. Don't try and pretend like he is being helpful to the situation.
Didn't you watch season 2?
does Steven Moffat REALLY think that people come out or reference their queerness by saying "I like to date my own sex"
That's what representation is. The vast majority of TV and films have straight leads, and pretty much no gay characters. But how do we know they're straight? Because in their first scene, at some point, they'll randomly shout "I like to date the opposite sex". Have you not noticed this?
What a dumb question, everything has lgbt now u can't watch anything with out it being forced on u to accept and agree with
And that is how u do a good job explaining this, good job Moffat. We need some common sense in this. We don't need to know if there gay or not
aww, bitter already??
aww, bitter already??
Not liking to watch lgbt characters on tv = hating lgbt people?
jaykaykaykay WOW? Not liking to watch lgbt characters on tv? the hell's that supposed to mean. sounds like you'll drop the tv show just because there's lgbt poeple in it. Maybe that came out wrong?