BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » The Feminist Aspect

nakahara · January 3, 2016 7:08 pm

dartmoordoggers wrote:
Liberty wrote:
I also love LeStrade's obliviousness!

"I'm part of a campaign, you know. Votes for women",
"And are you for or against?"
Not an uncommon response at that particular time in history. A fair percentage of women were completely against the idea; and those who supported the vote had split into various factions. Those who wanted full voting rights for all, those who did not want the vote to go to the working class; whether male or female, those who believed only women of property or financially independant should be able to vote and those who believe it should not be extended beyond married women.
A women in Marys position may have wanted the vote for herself; but not for her servants for instance.

Very good point, dartmoor.

Liberty · January 3, 2016 7:30 pm

Swanpride wrote:
I have a question: Which one of the woman later pretended to be the bride? It is hard to recognize anyone with all the make-up.

It's difficult to see, but it looks to me as if it's Janine (in the maze) when Sherlock says "the women I .. we have lied to and betrayed" and Molly (in the window) with "ignored and disparaged". It also cuts to Janine and then Molly in the church straight after the clips. It makes sense in the context of what Sherlock is saying, and Janine's story is a parallel (wooed and rejected).

Last edited by Liberty (January 3, 2016 7:32 pm)

nakahara · January 6, 2016 12:54 am

Beautifully acted by Martin, funny scene... but very overdone from the feminist aspect.

a) not historically correct - Mary would never prepare the food for Sherlock and John anyway. The servant (and this could very well mean the male cook just as good as the female one) would do it for her. Also, Sherlock doesn´t dwell in John´s household, so their cook would actually just prepare food for John.

b) insincere - "Am I just to sit here?", "Yes... Those gentlemen." These sentences make us believe that Mary is a poor flower wilting in a corner while men have exciting adventures. But the moment later we are informed that Mary is actually a Mycroft´s agent, that she has plenty of adventures on her own and that she, unlike her husband, never bothered to inform John where she really spends time. So what exactly she was complaining about?

c) contemptuous - TAB does exactly what it criticises. It presents cooking as something inferior because cooking is traditionally connected with women. But the truth is that cooking, as well as other kinds of domestic work, is as normal and respectable work as any other. So why was Mary so insulted when being associated with it?

It is not true feminism to demand from a woman that she changes into a ninja or something similar....
True feminism is a realisation that a woman has worth as a human being even if she "just" cooks and changes nappies...

Last edited by nakahara (January 6, 2016 1:09 am)

besleybean · January 6, 2016 8:34 am

Though if a woman wants to investigate, she should be allowed to.

nakahara · January 6, 2016 9:05 am

besleybean wrote:
Though if a woman wants to investigate, she should be allowed to.

But that´s exactly what I am pointing out above - Mary is not only "allowed" to be an investigator here, she actually excells in it and is contacted by British Government to solve its problems. The complaint that "Mary is not allowed" is moot here.

Also, later, in a church scene, we see John to be actually relieved to find out that Mary is away from him all the time because she is a spy. He is not at all bothered to find out that she is an active woman with a successful career. We also don´t hear anything about John trying to hinder Mary´s cooperation with suffragetes.

Previously, John believed that his wife agrees with her work of a domestic worker and acted accordingly. It´s not his fault that Mary was not sincere with him.

Last edited by nakahara (January 6, 2016 9:06 am)

Schmiezi · January 6, 2016 9:10 am

nakahara wrote:
Previously, John believed that his wife agrees with her work of a domestic worker and acted accordingly. It´s not his fault that Mary was not sincere with him.

You are right, I didn't see it that way before.

besleybean · January 6, 2016 9:23 am

Er, I'm not getting this.
How did Mary ever show that she happy about being cast in he domestic role?
She wanted to both see her husband and join him on his adventures.

nakahara · January 6, 2016 9:39 am

besleybean wrote:
Er, I'm not getting this.
How did Mary ever show that she happy about being cast in he domestic role?
She wanted to both see her husband and join him on his adventures.

I did not say that Mary showed it, I said that "John believed that". He presumed they have a traditional marriage where man is working to support the family and the wife is a domestic worker - the most normal form of marriage in that era.

(John wants everything in his married life to be normal even in modern times, remember?)

If Mary didn´t speak to him about her true career and true wishes, how was he to know she would feel at home investigating crimes? He is not a telepath.

besleybean · January 6, 2016 9:46 am

I get you on the modern version, but in Victorian times: that would have been difficult for any society woman to express and any professional man to accept.

nakahara · January 6, 2016 9:49 am

besleybean wrote:
I get you on the modern version, but in Victorian times: that would have been difficult for any society woman to express and any professional man to accept.

Well, as I mentioned above, John was absolutely OK with it when Mary revealed her true form to him there in the church....

besleybean · January 6, 2016 9:52 am

Just as he's accepted her in the modern version.

Schmiezi · January 6, 2016 10:52 am

Well, Sherlock imagines Victorian John to be fine with what Victorian Mary does.That does not necessarily mean that real John also feels that way.

tea&ash · January 6, 2016 11:13 am

Yes, I agree.

Real John doesn't seem the type to make his wife cook his meals and clean the house.
And in reality, he is aware that she is an ex-assassin perfectly capable of defending herself. And then, in his first mystery with Sherlock, he was almost killed by a woman. So I think he knows not to underestimate us.

besleybean · January 6, 2016 11:15 am

I'm sorry, I'm being incredibly thick today...
When was John almost killed by a woman?

Mothonthemantel · January 6, 2016 4:05 pm

I think it was implied that the case was a real case and that a group of real feminists actually did those crimes. Sherlock turned it all into a big dramatic play with costumes and gongs and things and cast people he knew as the characters.
Quite positively he imagined Molly and Mary not letting the restrictions of the time hold them back and that they would find a way to do whatever they wished.
I think there had to be some misogyny as it is victorian and there was in the original ACD . People don't complain about racism in the Hateful Eight or slavery in Gladiator. They didn't do badly for the genre they were working with .

nakahara · January 6, 2016 4:33 pm

Swanpride wrote:
Mary (and remember, we are talking about mind Mary here, not real Mary) did tell John what she wants, he was just not listening.

Our fabulous Ariane de Vere already has a part of the transcript of the episode ready:

http://arianedevere.livejournal.com/81144.html

According to this transcript, John and Mary have this conversation on the matter:

MRS WATSON: I don’t mind you going, my darling. I mind you leaving me behind!
WATSON: But what could you do?!
MRS WATSON: Oh, what do you do except wander round, taking notes, looking surprised ...

Mary complains that John is leaving her behind. This is very vague - it´s obvious she would like to spend more time with John, probably even during cases, but that does not automatically equals "I absolutely hate my status as a domestic worker / organiser."

And John listens to her, but he is acting on the incomplete information here. He thinks that his wife is just a normal woman of an ordinary disposition. Why the heck would he take her with him on a mission that could eventually lead him to a gruesome crime scenes, opium-dens, into the brawls of ruffians, into a shady pubs... etc. It´s understandable why he thinks it would be dangerous for her. It is not sexism to be concerned about your loved ones that way, as well as it´s not sexist that both Sherlock and John are worried about Mary´s safety when they go meet her at the church...

The situation is similar as if a child asked you to take him/her into a war. Now, that child could be a cynical child-soldier from some African of Middle-East country, jaded and exposed to many battles and atrocities in the past... but as long as you wouldn´t know that, you would automatically presume that child´s request is ludicrous and it´s just an unreasonable notion of someone inexperienced and too out of it to comprehend the severity of the situation...

Plus, Mary taking part on John´s and Sherlock´s adventures would make many of them impossible to be realised. For example the canonical case of Charles Augustus Milverton. After the blackmailer was shot, John and Sherlock barely escaped from the servants and managed to save themselves only because they were athletic and dressed in the comfortable men´s clothing... if a woman dressed in a long robes tag-a-logged after them, they would all three be caught. She would be unable to run quickly and to climb fences in that dress and they would not abandon her and leave her behind in such situation....

Mary´s insult at the end... I´m speechless. That was so uncalled for. So she thinks her husband is a useless tag-a-log (which is obviously not true!), but she demands at the same time that Sherlock should take her on a mission also, so that he has two useless companions dragging after him instead of just one? (She cannot reveal to John yet that she is a God´s gift to mankind, so her request would have this connotation...)

Her contempt for her husband is awful. John is the one who singlehandedly creates Sherlock´s legend and who protects him during danger (and also from himself), but she sees him as a nuisance, because he is not her? That woman is a true narcissist....

(And my personal side-note: It was promised to us by Mofftiss that Mary would not come between Sherlock and John, that the show will continue to be about two friends we know from ACD´s stories... but Mary demands to be a part of the "detective trio" now? A very not good, that...)

Last edited by nakahara (January 6, 2016 4:39 pm)

besleybean · January 6, 2016 4:36 pm

Unless she continues to go a bit free lance!

Liberty · January 6, 2016 7:25 pm

Personally, I think it's important that this is all happening in Sherlock's mind, and tied to the case. Those details he notices about women's place - Mrs Hudson not speaking and making the tea, Mary being left behind and forgotten, and probably not only references to canon, but clues about the case.

nakahara · January 9, 2016 10:43 pm

Some quite interesting theory about why feminism in the Spesh is presented the way it is. I like it.

http://deducingbbcsherlock.tumblr.com/post/136912266354/feminism-and-sherlocks-killer-suffragists

stoertebeker · January 10, 2016 12:04 am

Swanpride wrote:
Well, I already posted the link, but that is easier than to rehash the entire argument:
https://swanpride.wordpress.com/2016/01/09/is-it-sexist-the-abominable-bride/

Kudos, well written. I like your perspective and agree wholeheartly