“Men categorize women in one of four ways: Mothers, virgins, sluts and bitches.” -Syrup, 2013
I can’t be the only one who noticed this, right?
The men in the top three images are (from left to right) Steven Moffat, Stephen Thompson, and Mark Gatiss— the three writers of BBC’s Sherlock.
Now look, as a series, Sherlock has a lot of strong points. However, its portrayal of women is definitely not one of them— not by a long shot.
So, to the men listed above, here is my message to you: reducing women to tired archetypes does not make you a good writer. Demonising women as sluts and bitches does not make you a good writer. Raising women onto pillars as virgins and mothers does not make you a good writer. It only makes you sexist.
Edit: Okay, because I’m getting lots of replies about this, I’m gonna add something here— I love these four characters. I really do. I love all four of them quite a bit; hell, I roleplay as Irene and occasionally Molly. This is not, in anyway, meant to be critiquing the characters as they exist in and of themselves. I mean only to criticise the way they’re being written and handled.
I’m 100% aware that they have more traits than this, and that archetypes aren’t in and of themselves bad; but at the end of the day, I do believe (given Moffat’s history of writing) that this is all they’re really intended to be on his terms.
Edit 2: Okay, and now I need to make a second edit. I am fully aware that they’re replicating a series written in the 1800’s and that two of the characters come from that. That is, in my eyes, not a valid excuse. They already changed so much, not just plot-wise but character-wise— compare the two versions of Sherlock, and you’ll see what I mean.
Also, if I’m not mistaken, Molly and Sally are the invention of Moffat & Co., and thus there is no excuse on their front.