Liberty wrote:

But in real life, people are assaulted and carry on wanting consensual SM if that's what they wanted beforehand.  It's a bit like saying that people who have been sexually assaulted wouldn't ever have consensual sex.  (And of course some might be so traumatised that they might not, but it's not a given).  If anything, I'd see him continuing to have that interest (if he'd had it before) as normal and healthy, rather than emotionally different. There's just such a world of difference between non-consensual and consensual.

But I haven't got to that part of the series yet (still trying desparately to savour each episode for an extended period) so what do I know?   I'm just generalising. 

That's a good point about the consent...I saw a piece of another crime show ("Law and Order" or some such) where someone who dealt in those kind of practices had been murdered, and they investigated her "establishment." And I remember there was something about how the "clients" who were "subs" had the "true power" because they were allowed to end the proceedings at any time just by saying so...not sure that was true with Irene.

It is possible to infer that Sherlock doesn't mind being on the receiving end of all of that, even in his work...but the thing I keep coming back to is, Sherlock absolutely HATED CAM "for preying on people who are different." Shouldn't he then have felt a little more negatively towards Irene for exploiting people's kinks and then embarassing them? Sherlock may not come off as moralistic most of the time, but in HLV he was shown as having a big moral objection to blackmail.

(Which is consistent with the Doyle Milverton story, by the way. But there it's not inconsistent for him to admire Irene, because she is definitely NOT engaged in the same kinds of doings as Milverton.)

I know people have speculated about whether Irene and Sherlock "had dinner" after he saved her. I saw a comm

"One Week" by Jane Turenne: Holmes and Watson make a wager as to who has stronger powers of resistance, and then spend a week trying various gambits to seduce each other: serenading (for Holmes); telling their explicit dreams; dressing up in outfits the other likes (Holmes nearly passes out when he sees Watson in military garb), BUT - it's a perfectly-established relationship and they're totally comfortable with each other. I think Jane must have been trying to get the UST and seduction without the angst that often comes with not-yet-established:
http://archiveofourown.org/works/14154/chapters/18048?view_adult=true

In "The Sum of Us," John and Sherlock have been, um, doing it, for a while, and John is just starting to be more open about it. Here's the quote where he lashes out after getting a negative reaction from some older friends (rugby team):

You worried I’m secretly lusting after you? That it? Well allow me to burst that bubble for you, I wouldn’t touch your lardy arse with a ten foot pole. Yeah, I fell in love with a bloke. A beautiful, tall bloke who outsmarts all of us put together and who is infinitely better than you in any way you can imagine. So don’t you worry your ignorant little head about how I might turn into some kind of gay predator out to shag every single one of you cause trust me, I got something so much better to go home to.”

http://archiveofourown.org/works/394956

Sherlock has, er, a "sexual consultant" in this one, too. See who it is.

Any time, in a fanfic, John raves (or sighs) about Sherlock's beauty, I figure the writer must be pretty, well, Ben-addicted. That's usually how it is with fan fic writers - "into" one or the other of the actors. 

maryagrawatson wrote:

I also see a big parallel between TRBF and HLV, but the latter resonates much more emotionally with me.

I have always had a problem with TRBF that is even greater now that we've had season 3. I just don't know what's real in it. How much was Mycroft and Sherlock working against Moriarty and how much was Moriarty being smarter than Sherlock? I also don't know which of Sherlock's emotional moments were real. It's just a big jumble that feels even more muddled after TEH. I watched the episode after TEH before moving on to the rest of season 3 and knew that would be the last time. TRBF leaves me feeling frustrated.

HLV has a lot of the same points as the TRBF, but it's just done better, in my opinion. In this episode, I know for sure that the master criminal is way smarter and ahead of Sherlock. I know that Sherlock's emotions are real and therefore his decisions and actions make my heart thump. This time, his sacrifice isn't just a few years of his life, but the rest of it. It's basically as if the writers realised what a mess TRBF was and made a tighter version of it with HLV.

Mary

Actually, now that we know that the whole time we thought Moriarty was destroying Sherlock, it was Sherlock  (or "the Holmes brothers") playing with Moriarty...I am holding out hope that they had some additional aces up their sleeves with regard to Magnussen. The parallel between the two seasons is what gives me that hope.

Because, somehow, even if the British government can't truly punish Sherlock (jail or exile him) due to needing him, the fact that he had to resort to murder feels to me like a victory, if not for CAM, then, ironically, for Moriarty, because Sherlock in a sense became what his enemies were saying he was.

The premise of SCAN, in canon: the King of Bohemia says Irene will "ruin" him by exposing their past affair. That is, the King's current fiance, a princess, is SO puritanical that she will not marry him if she knows he ever had anything to do with an "adventuress."

Now, I know this is Victorian England,and it was presumed that women were shocked by sexual matters. And no doubt the standards of conduct for men were different than they are today. But I guess I would have expected the usual double standard, with men being allowed to have those kind of "adventures" before marriage (and perhaps during), and the highly-born wives being conditioned to either accept it, and perhaps be grateful not to be "imposed on" for sex, or else regard it as all the slutty adventuress's fault for being available. In which case Irene would damage herself more than she would the King, by saying anything.

There IS a double standard in the sense of "She was so exciting but she's not good enough to marry," (I think the King is still hot for Irene, actually), but the point is, the affair seems to threaten the man's reputation, at least his political position, as well.

SusiGo wrote:

I can only agree. For me it is a love story between Sherlock and John taking place during a wedding at which a crime is solved. But - and this is the sad thing - it is mainly unrequited love on Sherlock's side, at least most of the time (if we exclude the stag night). 
All the things you expect to see - the proposal, the declaration of love, doing all you can think of to make the other person happy - is between Sherlock and John. 
 

Sherlock really did  make it his wedding, didn't he? Don't forget the scene when he tried to step into the wedding pictures...and the fact that we see him pledging him love, and John hugging him, not as much affection between John and Mary. Or if there is, it isn't central.

It really did make me think Mary could go along with one of those three-person "arrangements."

There's a lot of fanfic about the knee grab leading to a "first time" but I could see that applying to their practice dancing also.

Although there were times (the planning scene) when it was Sherlock and Mary doing the work, and John the least involved.


 

It's my understanding that a woman who marries a man in Britian who receives a knighthood has the title "Lady." Agatha Christie's archeologist husband was knighted; she was "Lady Mallowan," and then later she was given the female version in her own right (Dame Agatha.)

So, if Sherlock received a knighthood (Doyle-canon, he actually refuses one, but it does get talked about in BBC), and married, say, Molly or Janine, one of the would be "Lady Holmes."

But I also hear the Britain is going to legalize same-sex marriage, if they haven't already.

So what if Sherlock married John? Or the reverse, what if John got the knighthood, for service to the country or something, and then they got married? 

Which actually raises the question about the husbands of women with the Dame title. 

I thought the "shoulder to cry on" thing might have taken place before John, when some other relationship ended...but now we know Mary didn't have time for a lot of relationships as Mary. On the other hand she hasn't known right from the start of when she changed her name. 

But it's a good point that Sherlock wouldn't have acted the way he did with David if he hadn't viewed him as a possible threat to John. The speculation has been raised about Mary's baby not being John's. That would certainly be a convenient way to get Mary and the baby out of the picture...but I wonder if, if Sherlock knew that, would he have been so protective of Mary and the baby?

I think Sherlock would be angrier with a woman for betraying John than for hiding her past as an assassin! Or, more selfishly, he might take advantage of the fact to get her out of John's life. Conversely, if the baby is John's, Sherlock might have strong feelings about it which explain why he protects Mary in spite of everything else...this baby is part someone he loves, and he doesn't seem to mind kids in general either, judging by his relationship with Archie.

Another fanfic writer I communicate with (I think she's here some of the time) said that, on forums that are focused on Brett (of course this includes his Holmes but looking at various things he's been in, so not Sherlock Holmes forums entirely) the subject of his relationships with  men is taboo and gets people flamed for bringing it up.

Well, don't you think maybe Moffit and Gattis are waiting for the fans to generate theories so they can use them? I'm only half-joking, given what happened with Series 3.