rm | Sherlock, queerness and more fannish inability to be welcoming to queer perspectives

Entry tags:

sherlock

Sherlock, queerness and more fannish inability to be welcoming to queer perspectives

One of the reasons I'm so intrigued by Sherlock, despite the complete disaster of the second episode (extra super major racism and script logic fail), is not, actually, because of the chemistry between John and Sherlock, despite the fact that it's fun to watch and a huge contributor to the show's mostly exceptional pacing.

That's right, despite enjoying it, I am not hovering on the edges of Sherlock fandom participation, because it's got the potential for some interesting slash writing.

There are two things that fundamentally appeal to me about the show:

1. Sherlock's brain. Fannish interpretation of Sherlock's brain. I'm not that smart, and I don't want to be that smart (the brain I have is challenging enough, thanks), but if intellectual orientations could be said to exist in the manner that sexual orientations do, the manner of the consequences of Sherlock's intellect are relevant to my interests and experience.

2. The queering of Sherlock. By which I do not mean that I see Sherlock as gay, bisexual, omnisexual or ace. I don't know. In fact, if the show presented me with a heterosexual Sherlock, and did so credibly, I could get on board with that too, without a problem, because it wouldn't make Sherlock any less queer in the literary sense. It's like the queering the villain trope (which the show also seems likely be signing up for in spades with Moriarty; and Mycroft's ambiguities are not insignificant in this regard either). Sherlock is to me a character who is queer in the way I am queer, regardless of his level of interest in sex or who he is attracted to in a physical or romantic way. There is an inherent "other" about him in regards to his instinctive presentation of whatever his sexuality may be, and it is recognized by people who see him, both in the audience and in the narrative. Even a theoretically heterosexual Sherlock is, in this presentation, still queered.

In attempting to read Sherlock fic on my own without recommendations, I have encountered a significant number of fics (clearly a majority, and far greater than in, say, Torchwood fandom, although it still happens there too, although to a lesser degree and is generally more frowned upon) not just warning for slash, but also warning for things like "M/M sex" and "boy kissing" right alongside things like incest and non-con.

To once again participate in full-disclosure: I have in the past warned for slash, because I was being ignorant, at times I was trying to be funny and failing, and at times because I was bowing to a fannish convention that was in frequent and accepted use when I first entered fandom in the late-90s.

HOWEVER, warning for slash is rude. It is hurtful to queer people in fandom. It is potentially harmful to young people who use fandom as a way to first examine their sexuality. And it's disrespectful to a source canon that is inherently queer, even if no characters in it are overtly (or perhaps even subtextually) LGBT.

I AM NOT ADVOCATING YOU NOT LABEL YOUR STORIES. Warnings have their place and are an accepted part of fandom etiquette for common PTSD triggers and content like incest, non-con, underage, and drug use.

I'm just advocating that Contents is an unoffensive and useful tool for the types of items some people search headers for looking for one type of story or interpretation over another. Warning in the case of slash and other queernesses indicates, DESPITE WHAT PEOPLE SEEM TO KEEP SAYING, a devaluing of queer identities and a desire to feel clever and scandalous.

And that warning for kissing crap, that boy kissing crap is particularly devaluing; look at how cute and twee and for our entertainment. Unless you're writing a high school AU, when I see boy kissing as a warning or label or anything? I DON'T READ YOUR STORY.

The whole situation is obnoxious.

And for the people who have been going "please write in this fandom" this is why I am currently not that motivated (see also: my lack of participation in the Covert Affairs fandom). The main Sherlock community does not seem like a place that's actually welcoming to actual queer perspectives and identities because of its moderation policies.

Any questions?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

If you're ever looking for Sherlock recs, I have a few in my LJ and there's a good collection on delicious under various tags.

P.S. Thanks for what you said there about warning for queerness. I never understood why people give a pairing in a fic header (e.g., Sherlock/John) and then warn for M/M sexual behavior. If I'm reading a slash fic, I certainly hope there is M/M!

I have been slowly working my way through your recs! And they are very, very good. It was in fact only after I read a few of those and tried to find stories on my own that this bullshit became clear to me.

I never understood why people give a pairing in a fic header (e.g., Sherlock/John) and then warn for M/M sexual behavior. If I'm reading a slash fic, I certainly hope there is M/M!

I think there's an argument for labeling (not warning for) m/m, even if you've listed the pairing, because not everyone knows the fandom or the gender of the characters you're writing about. And if you're tagging on the AO3 it's especially helpful because it then means that people can search globally for m/m fics.

Just one question, in fact:

:: I do not mean that I see Sherlock as gay, bisexual, omnisexual or ace.

What does "ace" mean? I don't think I've ever seen that before.

And okay, okay, it's probably time that I sat myself down and watched this Sherlock thing...

Asexual.

Aaaaand I should've figured that one out on my own. Thanks! :)

I don't read a lot of fanfiction, and when I do read it... huh. I don't think I even look at the "Warnings" at all. Warning for slash seems bizarre to me. Generally, the header info will tell you the characters that are being "paired" and so why the need to go beyond that? I mean, if the pairing says "Arthur/Eames" then hey, doesn't that pretty much say it all? Why on earth would there be a need to add some sort of "OMG this is about two guys having sex!" Or "Spike/Buffy/Angel" pretty much indicates you can expect threesome action, without having to add a "warning: threesome ahead!"

Your prior LJ post about "not getting it" (which, as you noticed, you're not alone in) - this is another of those things I don't get.

It's such a strange knife's-edge we walk. On the one hand, it's good to point out "Hey, there's all kinds of sexuality, and gender isn't as black and white as we thought" and then on the other hand, as we continue to do that, I can't help but feel that we continue to perpetuate the "otherness" of those things, instead of simply accepting them as part of our natural world. I wish we could get to that point where the reason we draw attention to it isn't because we need to warn about it or draw attention to it because of societal issues, but just because we want to differentiate between this and that. I'm not saying this at all well.

Maybe... let's say we have ice cream. And it's really yummy, and lots of people like it, and it's vanilla-flavored (oh, the irony of vanilla now being used to describe "typical" but that's a digression I won't get into). And then there's this other ice cream, and it's strawberry flavored, and some people like that better, but right now, we're either "OMG SHOCK AND HORROR STRAWBERRY!!1eleventy-one!!!" or we're "DAMN RIGHT STRAWBERRY AND DON'T YOU FORGET IT!!eleventy-one!!1!1"

I keep waiting and hoping for the day when it's "Hey, there's strawberry, and vanilla, and mint chocolate chip, and blueberry. Hmmm...I like strawberry better, I'mma have some of that" or "Hmmm, I've never tried mint chocolate chip, let's give it a shot."

I don't know if that analogy in any way helped articulate what's in my head. I hope so.

The issue isn't about pointing out queer content. Some people exclusively read queer content in fandom, some peoelp exclusively want canon-compliant content (which queer content may or may not be), some people exclusively want gen content. Advertising what is in your story is not a problem. Warning for what it is in a story implies that the things being warned for are bad or scary. Warning for excessive violence or non-con, therefore, makes sense. Warning for queerness says something insulting.

The issue is the misuse of the word "warning".

Agreed - I guess I wasn't expressing myself well. I don't understand the need to warn for queer content at all.

The issue is the misuse of the word "warning".

I totally agree with this. I like the idea of labels, because sometimes I may be looking for something in particular.

Warnings are for things that are potential psychological triggers.

Not only is it insulting to warn for queerness, but, it devalues what warnings are supposed to be. We've certainly seen enough of people talking about how trigger warnings are "PC" and for people who are "oversensitive."

What I don't understand is why people are resistant to conventions that get them more readers. Not having triggers, warnings are not something I innately get. However, that's irrelevant because a) I don't want to be an asshole and b) I want as many people as possible to read my story. Warnings help that. Not rocket science.

I agree, in this case it would be preferable to use "Contains" or something similar for information on the nature of the content and save "Warning" for the psychological triggers.

I prefer using "Contains" for everything because that way I'm not having to specifically judge what is a psychological trigger and what isn't. Or what is "bad" content and what isn't.

...I love the way the AO3 does it. I'm not looking back.

There is an inherent "other" about him in regards to his instinctive presentation of whatever his sexuality may be, and it is recognized by people who see him, both in the audience and in the narrative. Even a theoretically heterosexual Sherlock is, in this presentation, still queered.

Bingo! One of the things I love about Cumberbatch!Holmes is that he's possibly the most "other" heroic character I've encountered who isn't an E.T., angel, or some form of A.I.

I find that the moderation in the comm you linked is inconsistent across the board, and while I believe that they intend no malice toward anyone, this inconsistency and their unwillingness to open the comm to broader discussion makes it a sandbox that people are increasingly uncomfortable playing in. Also, there's sometimes an attitude of "well, it's my sandbox, and if you're bothered, then it's your problem and you should leave," which is unwelcoming at best and actively damaging at worst.

While the mods themselves have said they don't like it when people warn for slash in an unofficial capacity, they seem to think it's just a pet peeve that doesn't hurt anyone, and that newbies should be excused. Which is wrong. They also insist that all kinks be put in the warnings field, which is opening up a minefield all its own.

I write Sherlock fic, and I read it sometimes, but I dunno... I don't really feel like I'm part of the fandom at large, and I'm okay with this.

Yeah, if I write fic Iw on't post it there. The moderation is too problematic. I'm not saying they should not approve fics that warn for slash, but if they just included a "we strongly prefer you do not do this because it is offensive" reminder once a month with the other community rules, we'd be cool.

The problem is that while some people are avoiding that comm and people have created others to take its place, none have really gained a foothold.

And I freely admit that I am posting this in hopes that public shaming with solve the fucking problem.

Edited 2010-12-16 16:41 (UTC)

I confess, I'm not familiar with any other Sherlock comms, really. Not that I've looked very hard. If you have a particular suggestion, I'll certainly give it my support.

Public shaming will help solve the wider problem, certainly. I don't think that specific comm will be changed at all. They've decided how they want it, and that's it. All the more reason to find a replacement.

Agreed completely on the mod problem.

(ObDisclaimer: I nearly got my ass banned from the comm, because I posted a teaser for a Stephen Moffatt interview that supposedly contained "spoilers", and had the temerity to tell the mods that I think anyone in Holmes fandom is probably aware what the words "Hound", "Adler", and "Reichenbach" refer to. Oh, and to PM them so as not to have a ridiculous discussion in public comments. SHAME on me.)

The community rules post regarding 'warnings' I found to be overtly ridiculous in its excessivity of requirements for warning, which seemed to imply every possible kink, trigger, angst-point, or, yes, "OMG HOMOS INSIDE". And it seemed, from following comments, to be incredibly confusing to community participants. ~~(and of course, now seems to have been deleted, as I can't find it using their tags system. grr.)~~ (found it, my mistake.) To the point where, on our most recent story, I found myself writing the warning "If you have strong feelings about B.F. Skinner or operant conditioning..."

ETA: I found the relevant mod-comment that finally set me off:

"...All kinks have the potential to squick, even if they don't upset (although our primary concern is protecting those for whom the subjects are triggers), so all kinks should be warned for. Which makes it an even playing field.

Essentially, if it's not plain and simple snuggling and middle-aged missionary, someone would probably benefit from the heads up."

If there were another more reasonably modded community that had the same number of eyes on it, LSA and I would transfer our fic there in a heartbeat (and we do crosspost to other comms.) But if we want to max her readership, right now we have to post there as well. It's frustrating, and I find myself going over and over our headers before I post to make sure everything's correct, and I don't get us back onto (ridiculously arbitrary) mod-approved-only posting status.

I'd personally love it if public shaming gets them to chill the eff out and act like adults...

Edited 2010-12-16 20:41 (UTC)

I definitely agree about using more neutral header words than "warning" for slash, I've in the past used "Contains" for elements that I felt should be made known but were not socially negative.

I do remember the days when we warned for slash, either sarcastically or defensively when it was much more common to have other fans stumble upon our fics and make an unholy fuss about them, to try to create a situation where we could say "Look, we put the words 'WARNING - SLASH' in ten-foot, red font, if you read it anyway and got upset about the slash, it's your own fault!"

But the time for that has long since passed (thankfully) and it's ridiculous to "warn" for "boys kissing", etc. Also warning for slash when posting to slash-centric communities is redundant and silly.

(Hello, you don't know me, I read your journal on the Dreamwidth feed because I find your posts interesting.)

Your link to eumelia's post about SherlockBBC seems to indicate that you approve of the moderation of the comm. Are you missing a negative in there or am I confused?

Shit! I am missing a negative. Thank you! (and fixed now).

Edited 2010-12-16 17:11 (UTC)

Not a fic writer (let's just ignore that one time...), so who knows what role I have in this discussion, but every time this comes up and everyone decides "Let's use 'contains' instead." I can't help but wonder if that's really doing anything, in the sense that unless one's 'contains' field includes heterosexuality, if applicable, one is still warning for slash/non-heterosexuality, even if the word 'warning' isn't attached to it. (Of course, if you never write anything depicting heterosexual relationships or sexual activity, you're obviously not going to be putting it in your 'contains' blank.) But perhaps everyone but me understands that we ought to put heterosexuality down as well.

I guess I'm saying I like the idea of 'contains' (at least as shorthand for 'things you may want to know in deciding whether to read this'), but wonder if perhaps sexual orientations just don't belong there to begin with.

People tend to label their work as het, gen, or slash. And people tend to search for fic based on the "genre" (it's not a genre! but whatever) they prefer. So that content information is desired and if the fucking "warning" word were removed, would probably be used in a fairly balanced way.

Yeah, I was commenting thinking it would be obvious from the pairings or lack thereof, but you're right that the word(s) slash/het/gen are good to have as applicable.

I guess that by directly substituting 'content' for 'warnings' I'm seeing them as equivalent in everything but name, so I want to take 'slash' out of that category. I see "Oh, this contains explicit sex, I'll not read it now." and "Oh, this is slash, I'll not read it now." as different types of thoughts, as I can't separate "I don't want to read slash." from "I don't want to read about gay people." (Except there are circumstances where they really are different: I assume there are fandoms awash in totally shit slash (like there's a lot of bad Doctor Who het), so you might as well skip it all.)

So, yeah, I'm probably reading this issue in a way totally different to everyone else, but maybe it's clear what I meant and maybe it's useful to throw it out there. On the other hand, perhaps step one is to get people to stop warning for slash and step to is to argue about what to do instead.

It's clear what you meant, but it's not super relevant to fandom culture.

The issue isn't labelling what's on the tin (which is done for things like genre (hurt/comfort, angst, romance, drama, etc. and types of relationships if they are the focus of the story). and does not in any way single out or create a euphemistic disapproval of gay content). The issue is the word "WARNING" which implies something dangerous or upsetting. Reasonable for content involving things like common PTSD-triggers; not reasonable for things about consensual relationships and sexuality, which can be labeled for if the author chooses as a form of advertising, but should not be warned for.

I'm sorry I keep explaining this over and over again, but I do want to be clear about fan culture here.

I can't separate "I don't want to read slash." from "I don't want to read about gay people."

I had an immediate defensive reaction to this, but thinking about it it illustrates the different implications of "warnings", "enticements", and "contains" (the latter being a combination of the first two)

I prefer reading stories with female protagonists, and since "has a female protagonist" isn't something people usually label for I settle for avoiding m/m when I'm in a "reading about women" mood(*). But I am quite happy with f/m or f/f or female centered gen that contains m/m relationships, in fact I really like it (especially in het, which can get a bit heteronormative) I just tend to avoid stories which are primarily m/m. In the other direction, someone who is after m/m would probably find a het story with a secondary m/m pairing unsatisfying. Neither of us is well served by an m/m warning, as if it's some allergen we need to avoid completely.

That said the issue of how minor a pairing has to be before you include it or it's type in your header is ambiguous even if you use "contains" etc. But at least the subtext isn't as homophobic.

(*)I also avoid Sherlock fic :)

i think a large problem (at least it was in torchwood) is that ppl weren't using the "warnings" field as strictly intended, but rather as advertisement for what their fic offered, specifically when they "warned" for slash - instead of: 'STOP! this contains homosexuality', what they meant was: "HEY THIS HAS ALL KINDS OF HOT GAY SEX, COME READ!"

and when it was pointed out that, 'hey, that's kind of offensive', ppl (many, not all) took a step back and said, 'omg you're right, sorry!' and they changed it to 'contents' or 'enticements' or whatever else

but when ppl write het and want to advertise it to ppl seeking out het, they do (more or less) - you only see 'warning' for het generally in a joking nudgenudgewinkwink and generally from authors who normally write slash, or have a readership that normally looks for slash

so in conclusion of this rambling ramble, i agree with you! separating 'slash' out like that still sort of others it, but i think it's necessary when ppl want to advertise what their fic will have to offer to the readers, you know? same goes for kinks - i don't think kinks should go under 'warnings' either, but maybe have their own separate line, b/c some ppl may wish to avoid them, but others will seek them out

(frankly, if there's a pairings line, i don't see why any additional het/slash label is necessary, but i've sort of given up the fight on getting ppl to change their ways)

I haven't submitted any of my fic to the comms, partly because I tend to be wary of them in general, and partly because, well, I think my writing is only so-so at best. My ideas seem to always be done better by someone else. But that is neither here nor there... I agree with you (and so many others) on this issue, as related to ALL fandoms. I've long held that if you insist on "warning" for slash, you also must "warn" for het, which hardly anyone does. That said, either one would still be offensive to me as a "warning". Again, I think if you're in a queered fandom, or with the pairing clearly listed, there's no reason to point out "OMG, M/M IN HERE!". Contents may be a better option if you feel it's necessary to label it. But I really really really wish that we lived in a world where no one felt such a label would be necessary. *sigh*

But, NO, do not lump "M/M SEX!" (or even Het Sex) in with the warnings about non-con, torture, incest, etc. Argh.

"Sherlock's brain. Fannish interpretation of Sherlock's brain. I'm not that smart, and I don't want to be that smart (the brain I have is challenging enough, thanks), but if intellectual orientations could be said to exist in the manner that sexual orientations do, the manner of the consequences of Sherlock's intellect are relevant to my interests and experience."

Dammit. I've always thought along these lines, too, but you've distilled it beautifully here. And as you say in the following point to that, it's one of the ways in which his character is queered, whether or not he's presented as straight, bi, or gay...

User

kskryptonian referenced to your post from In which I try to get the mental gears rotating again. (http://kskryptonian.livejournal.com/35005.html) saying: [...] s started as a comment to on her wonderful post about labels and Sherlock the series [...]

Hm. While I agree that treating one sexuality as needing a special warning, I also try and keep in mind that the idea of moving queer content notification out of teh warning title to somewhere else is less than a year old. Among other things, it's interesting to see how the idea does and doesn't spread through fandoms.

I also think the Sherlock fandom is ... fairly immature in a variety of ways. I'm waiting to see if it grows up.

And also, wtf *was* with that second episode? It was horrible.

ETA: oh, this is a great story 'Just Human' http://wafflestories.livejournal.com/3968.html
and it's a dr who/sherlock xover

Edited 2010-12-16 20:05 (UTC)

I also think the Sherlock fandom is ... fairly immature in a variety of ways.

Agreed, unfortunately. I had a bit of deja vu w/r/t the main sherlockbbc comm; I'm a member-not-follower in the same way as with the doctorwho comm, and generally find fic via peer recs and/or newsletters of the respective fandoms rather than going out of my way to trawl through the comms themselves.

I think the problem with episode 2, besides the Yellow Peril factor, was that it was a lash-up - partly because the Beeb cut the number of episodes from six hourlongs to three 90-minuters, and a plot that might've snuck in as the dodgy one of six rather stands out as poor when it's one of three and Procrustinated into a 90-minute slot rather than dropped in favour of something better.

RE: the second ep. It makes me wonder how bad the other episodes (if they had been completed) they dropped in favor of that one. because I have a hard time imagining that no one in the production side knew it was bad.

I also try and keep in mind that the idea of moving queer content notification out of teh warning title to somewhere else is less than a year old.

Actually, no. There have been people refusing to warn for queer content for just about as long as there has been a web. Seriously. I honestly can't remember the last fandom I was in where that was even a common practice.

Thank you!

Yeah, the whole "boy kissing" and warning for slash business is ridiculous.

You can always leave aside the whole posting-in-a-community thing, and just post in your own LJ and alert the newsletter. They just ask for title, pairing, rating, and series.

Ah, I didn't know there was a Sherlock newsletter yet. Good to know!

holmesian_news is all versions of the Holmesverse, not just Sherlock. On the other hand, Sherlock is the new, enthusiastic kid on the block, so it is much of what's carried on the nl. Look for the "BBC" tag. (ACD or canon = original stories; Ritchie = the latest movie; Grenada = Jeremy Brett.)

This post is awesomesauce.

I have so many thoughts about

sherlockbbc, which can mostly be summed up by FYI

asexy_sherlock IS QUEER FRIENDLY <3

But how does it feel about cocksucking?

I just spent like five minutes trying to respond to this in some sort of succinct and witty way AND FAILING.

So... as long as everybody's all safe/sane/negotiated/consensual and nobody is curing anybody of anything and it's engaging with asexuality, just fine! (I personally don't read asexy Sherlock fic with sexual content [ETA #2: This is because I have issue related to enthusiastic consent, not because I think there's anything wrong with it], but it has nothing to do with how many dicks are on the dance floor.)

ETA #1: WE DO HAVE ASEXY GENDERSWAP FEMSLASH

Edited 2010-12-17 05:31 (UTC)

1. OMG could you be my sherlock brain twin? i am so counting on you to find more fic that i'll like, b/c so far the only one that actually worked for me was the one you rec'd by out_there (the whore of babylon...)

as much as i like john watson, especially in this particular incarnation b/c i LOVE the actor, he's not the one that interests me... he's not the one i "identify" with, for lack of a better word

not that i am anywhere NEAR sherlock's intellect, but i think i understand the world better from his POV than john's or any of the other characters, and i've yet to find a fic that explores that in a way that works for me

i am literally craving a fic that will elaborate on his drug use, his childhood/teen years, his life and relationships before john as compared to him after he meets john - but so far the ones i've found portray him just a touch too far removed from humanity, and i don't read him as a sociopath no matter what they've said in canon

so... yeah, WHERE IS THE FIC FOR ME?

also, the warnings - i've been noticing it, too, and god i just don't have the energy to do this fight again after torchwood and merlin :( which is absolutely awful of me, b/c i have the choice to engage or not and others do not get that choice b/c THIS IS THEIR LIVES

can someone set up a torchwoodhouse for sherlock fic?

can someone set up a torchwoodhouse for sherlock fic?

What, a rec comm in the style of calufrax in the Doctor Who fandom? Not a bad idea: the only difficulty would be that there's little centralized archiving outside of the AO3.

can someone set up a torchwoodhouse for sherlock fic?

My fantasy is that someone will set up a version of Teaspoon for Sherlock/Sherlock Holmes fic so people can search on the version, pairing, content they want.

(deleted comment)

A fanfic archive is one of those things that I'm really rather shocked that a fandom as old as Holmes-in-general is doesn't have already.

*looks at grammar, decides people will understand what I mean*

(deleted comment)

(no subject)

neadods.livejournal.com - 2010-12-19 14:55 (UTC) - Expand

There is an inherent "other" about him in regards to his instinctive presentation of whatever his sexuality may be, and it is recognized by people who see him, both in the audience and in the narrative. Even a theoretically heterosexual Sherlock is, in this presentation, still queered.

Thank you for saying this. It means a lot to me for a whole heap of weird-ass personal reasons.

Sherlock Holmes (in general) was the first fandom that I really got into independent of Torchwood. That is, I got into Merlin and White Collar earlier/around the same time, but that was me following Torchfen who had migrated there. As such, the fic I tended to read and the discussions I tended to have about those shows were all generally informed by the queer sensibility that permeates much of Torchwood fandom (which isn't to say that this is true of those fandoms in general -- just the corners that I hang out in). Sherlock Holmes fandom, on the other hand, was very much still dominated by assumptions that the people reading and writing fic were straight women (even though that wasn't actually TRUE), and... I don't know, it was just missing a certain undercurrent of queer perspectives that had always been a staple of my fandom experience.

Again, it's not that those perspectives don't exist in the fandom -- just that they didn't have the currency that I would have expected. Also, this community on Dreamwidth hasn't been particularly active lately, but it's worth checking out: http://queering-holmes.dreamwidth.org/

ETA: Not that I'm saying that Torchwood fandom was perfect or anything (far from it), just that there was a noticable difference in terms of queer sensibility.

Edited 2010-12-16 22:45 (UTC)

I'm currently corresponding with one of the mods over there, explaining in very small words (with an overhead projector) precisely why allowing people to warn for slash is so full of fail. I'll let you know how it goes if you'd like.

...people still warn for slash? omg FAAAAAIIIILLLLL

I do warn for explicit sexual content because I don't rate and I'm not going to until they come up with a rating system that isn't ageist. Not because I think sex is bad, but because I think people should know before they click on a link in a public place, be that work or the bus or the doctor's office or the library, whether or not there is liable to be sex in it.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Sherlock, queerness and more fannish inability to be welcoming to queer perspectives

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

warning: possibly-bitter comment ahead :)

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

In which I try to get the mental gears rotating again.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

(no subject)

no subject

no subject

no subject