Steven Moffat, Meet That Sexist Pig: A Cautionary Tale

[labingi]

Yet Another Post on Sexism in Moffat's ShowsI have reluctantly come to the conclusion that Steven Moffat is the Ben Steed of his generation. For those not up on their BBC TV writers of thirty-plus years ago, Ben Steed was a writer for Blake’s 7 (among other things), now widely remembered in Blake’s 7 fandom as that sexist pig. This is a shame for

Comments

[lillibet]

This is one of the several reasons I've been encouraging people--most of whom seem to have dismissed it out of hand because they couldn't wrap their heads around Lucy Liu as Watson--to check out Elementary. It's by no means a perfect show, but it is doing really interesting things with the man/woman buddy relationship, the ongoing conversation about addiction, colorful casting (with random bonus Asian women cast in roles that were probably not written specifically for them) including a range of black men, and an incredible flipping of the Woman in Refrigerator trope. I really enjoy Cumberbatch and Freeman, but Sherlock isn't actually doing anything new for television, while Elementary is right out there finding conventions to overturn and interrogate.

[labingi]

Sorry for a late reply. I completely agree about Elementary being far beyond Sherlock in its handling of gender and people of color. I find Elementary less fun as a show because (at least up to midway through the first season), it lacks the wit and the chemistry between its leads. But I also find it a much less annoying show. I'm enjoying it and looking forward to seeing how it evolves.

[slantiness]

Does Moffat still have a chance? I feel like everywhere I look someone's posting another essay on what he did wrong or some crazy sexist thing he did. Last week I saw something about him saying that he wouldn't make a character asexual because it's "boring" and there's "no tension there,"
and way back in 2007 or so my friends were already complaining about the episode that they called "the bitch in the barbeque" because they refused to call it by name--I assume you know which one that is.

[slantiness]

I just realized you can't tell from what i just wrote which "side" I am on, so I should establish that I am pretty squarely anti-moffat. I haven't watched any Doctor Who in a really, really long time (like....since 2008...?) and I'm trying to catch up with Sherlock now, but the knowledge that this is all Moffat is sort of kicking at me while I'm watching it. (I'm on the episode with The Woman)

[labingi]

Good points! Speaking for myself as a viewer and sometime fan of both shows, I think he has a long way to go to win back viewer trust. These days, my default in watching his shows is to rigorously gender pick them; my sensitivity to even small bits of genderfail is hyperactive, and judging by the internet response you note, I'm far from the only one.

That said, he can and will score points back by writing women well. Case in point, a lot of fans have expressed a basically positive response to Mary because she is witty and skilled and doesn't (try to) break up Sherlock and John. Those are all good characteristics and, yes, people notice. Viewers went into DW and Sherlock liking the stories and wanting to be fans, and while the fail may not be soon forgotten, he can start to turn it around anytime he wants.

[slantiness]

That's true, but I think he's failing a lot *outside* the writing, just in his interviews and such. Another anecdote (sorry I have all these weird, floating internet anecdotes): I saw the other day he had said something about how obviously Mary HAD to be a killer/psychopath, what have you, because she was just too interesting or too fun or was too cool to be "just a nurse" or something like that, and so he said the viewer should have been surprised, but also somehow expecting.

My female nurse friend was particularly offended by that one. "Of course, if I'm an interesting female nurse, people should be able to guess I'm a killer, too, gee thanks Moffat"