And there's the fact that John's sister is a lesbian. Neither he nor Sherlock displays thoughts of disgust over this - Sherlock was just shocked that he got it wrong, and John not getting along with Harry is probably due to her drinking rather than sexual orientation. He tells Sherlock about how she and Clara were married; at the time of filming same-sex marriage wasn't as fully legal as it is becoming now; it would have been a civil partnership but he says they were married, which shows he was at least accepting of the relationship even if he doesn't like his sister for other reasons.

The "gay" references in the show are both a nod to canon and how people used to think that ACD's Holmes and Watson were gay, and also playing to the assumption that two guys who live together must be gay. Look at the media in the show; everybody thinks they're more than friends.

Just because John doesn't want everyone thinking he and Sherlock are a couple doesn't mean he's a homophobe.  He even sees "John Watson, Confirmed Bachelor" in the newspapers.  He's probably thinking "Great, no woman will ever go out with me now"...because they think he's gay and in a relationship with another man.  It's not homophobic, it's John wanting to date women.  Anyone who was friends with someone and kept getting mistaken for that person's partner would probably feel the same way.  People need to stop reading insults into everything and see it from the other person's point of view.

Ah yes, never read the Sun myself as I'm in France, but I used to be a very huge Liverpool FC fan (I said "used to be" because after 10 years with a husband who despised football, I could hardly watch games and I lost track of every football news and now I don't have time for this anymore...) and I know what the Sun wrote in 1989 regarding the LFC fans and the Hillsborough tragedy. All lies. Which is why you'll never see a LFC fan reading that paper. They still boycott it.

Anyway, we could also mention Irene admitting being gay, and also other characters like Mrs Hudson and Angelo (even Jeanette to a certain extent lol) not having trouble at all when they assume John & Sherlock are a couple.

So really, I don't see anything homophobic in the show.

As stated before, John keeps saying he's not gay either because he wants to date women and so wants to make it clear that he is hetero and "avalaible" , either --if you're a Johnlocker, like me, hehe!-- because he realises he's got feelings for Sherlock but doesn't know how to deal with them, refuses to admit them and believes that it'll help if he keeps telling the whole world he is NOT with sherlock, but doesn't even manage to convince himself...  (well, that's a version I like at least )

Can I gently suggest that the experiences of those who are actually non-straight, who have experienced homophobia, might be slightly different? Homophobia is quite a nuanced thing, and often experiencing it isn't logical, its about hints and suggestion, about having sterotypes thrown at us again and again. I think people have specific objections to the representation of minorities in Sherlock, with most issues occuring where Moffat is the writer.

I love Sherlock, I really do, and I would not say that generally its a homophobic show. But tbh I don't think anyone is suggesting that, really, not from what I've read. Its been accused specifically of queerbaiting, which isn't exactly homophobia-its trying to pull in gay viewers by giving them just enough to make them think they are being represented, without confirming enough to put off straight viewers. I think, yes, Sherlock does do that a bit actually, and the episodes which are probably the worst for that are the ones not written by Gatiss. I'm on the fence anyway about queerbaiting. I think is not great but its a sign of the society we live in more than anything, and for LGBT teens, or older people working through their sexuality, I do think that the representation on shows like Sherlock is better than nothing. 

But I think what people are really objecting to is some of Moffats personal views, expressed both through the show and in interview. Irene Adler was a big issue for lesbians/bi women for a number of reasons, but mainly that she played into the whole lesbian-til-man-comes-along thing and didn't seem to have a strong, believable lesbian identity at all, her sexuality seemed a titilating afterthought. Gatiss may be gay but he is a gay man and there is not a single female writer on Sherlock-or Doctor Who. The experiences of lesbians and bi women are fundamentally very, very different to those of gay men and I would not say that there's much evidence that gay male writers tend to lead to greater lesbian visability or inclusion. The gay female experience is not represented well at all, I'm afraid, with the only onscreen gay women being dominatrixes, Regarding Moffat, there's a lot of criticisms of his representation of every single minority really. He does stereotype minorities, and he underrepresents them, and that's going to get people's back up. Its not going to bug everyone, and I don't especially expect straight men or women to get why lesbians are so annoyed over the way Irene was portrayed, but I think its reasonable to listen to why this feels upsetting.

This is really quite personal, actually, and I know feelings can ride high sometimes and people do sometimes find criticism of the showrunners quite upsetting. However, this affects me personally to some extent and so I do want to explain where I'm coming from. Watching the show as someone who does not identify as straight, who has had direct experience of homophobia, yes I think some of the accusations against the show are fair. I also think, overall, representation of non-straight people in the show is generally far and away better than it was when I was growing up. My primary concern is always with people working through their sexuality, because I think that that time, before you have a support network, is the most vunerable. Now I don't think Sherlock is problematic from that pov for young boys; for girls it is rather more problematic, because of the portrayal of Irene.

I think its worth remembering that this is people's lives, its their identity, and so its going to be very, very important to them. And I also think its worth remembering that people who are making criticisms are often doing it in hope that somehow, through some channel, it will get back to the writers and improve the show they love. Constructive criticism is not a destructive thing. And most people have no avenue other than blogging or tumblr to feedback on the show.

Last edited by beekeeper (August 7, 2013 9:18 am)

Story-telling without using stereotypes, developing a plot and still being political correct, not offending anyone but surprise everyone; being inventive without upsetting people
How can anyone do that?
The writers have to make a choice here.
In ASiB they decided that they wanted to tell a story about Sherlock and love. How he deals with physical attraction shown towards him or (eventually?) feeling attracted himself.
The portrayal of Irene being gay and somehow interested in Sherlock doesn’t undermine her sexual identity. John is straight and he is obviously magnetizised by Sherlock. I don’t say sexually exactly, but on a certain level attracted by his enigmatic personality.
IMO the writers just wanted to point out that Sherlock is one of a kind. He manages to get you in one way or the other.
Irene is usually a strong woman. We meet her at a point of time when she needs protection for some reason. If the circumstances were different she would have acted differently.
 
When a TV show tells a story there is always the risk that people will draw conclusions about it. And feel offended.
Take the lawyer, the judge and the public prosecutor in TRF. They are portrayed as incompetent and according to The Casebook having an inappropriate intimate relationship with a subordinate (Judge).
Should every person working in the law business be offended now?
Or Kitty Riley? A female journalist. Her role as a professional women working for the press is not quite flattering, isn’t it?
That doesn’t mean that the writers think every female journalist is waiting for a scoop and would do anything to get it. But the critisism of the excesses of the British press is obviously there.
 
What I am trying to say is not that there is no responsibility in writing a story. In fact there is a huge responsibility not to cheat, to respect the audience, to be genuine, to reflect the reality and maybe even to enhance gay/lesbian acceptance in society or criticise problematic developments when possible and the story allows it.
But you can’t scarifize the plot, the puzzle, the deductions, the crimes and villains in order to be politically correct at any given time. The fun is to use stereotypes, change them and surprise the audience by doing it. And the images and stereotypes are always a bit over the top to make fun of themselves, too. 
 

I'm familiar with the German soap Verbotene Liebe, which has featured several gay characters. The two that I have a thing for are Christian and Oliver, who are just an amazing couple and I've watched their story on youtube; it's great stuff

It is interesting, though, that Moffat seems to be able to get people into (heated) debates over his shows. In another forum I'm on (which is not primarily related to Sherlock) we currently once again have the discussion about whether or not Moffat is anti-women or even misogynic. This discussion comes and goes, not only in that forum but everywhere on the net. And I think it's often based on the stuff that Moffat says in interviews and on the net, and not so much on the shows themselves. The debate now came up again because of Doctor Who and what Moffat said abaout a possible female doctor. Sometimes I really think he'd better shut up.

On the other hand, just like Swanpride said: In the end I don't really care that much what Moffat says, I care what he does in Sherlock. To quote Swanpride: "I watch the show, and I refuse to read anything into it because of the creator."
 

Also for gay characters; Gary and Billy who own the Cross Keys Inn

No, it wouldn't. I quite agree with lots of what beekeeper said.