Dear Recent Writers For Irene Adler: Why, Just Why? Sincerely, A Sherlockian

 Okay, so I'm trying to expand my horizons and write more than just Sherlock-related stuff. I really am. In fact, I have a post planned about a recent show and my thoughts on it tomorrow in lieu of an Elementary review. But I felt the need to say this. To get this out there…

What is up with two of the recent Adlers?

There's something I've noticed about two of the recent ones: a sort of double-standard that's employed. Allow me to explain...

I've made it no secret that I dislike BBC Sherlock's Irene Adler. Seriously, Moffat? You've written/created girl characters I like:

 Amy,

  Clara,

River,

Molly,

Madame Vastra and Jenny...

 

 Why'd you have to drop the ball on the classic female character I already like?

Sorry.

I could talk about how I felt she was over sexualized, and about the possible unfortunate implications I've read regarding her sexuality (Eek! Who'd have thought I'd be using those words and "prostitute" so many times? Talking about SHERLOCK HOLMES!? Ye gads). But I wanna talk about something I realized. It has to do with when Irene is escaping her house, the authorities, and our favorite duo...

When Irene tries to get her phone back, she stabs Cumberlock with a giant needle full of drugs, and beats him with a riding crop until he goes down. She then strokes his face with said riding crop, saying she wants him to remember her as the woman who beat him. this is treated as not too terrible a thing.

Totally No Big Deal...

 

So what's the problem? Well, let's just picture this scene with the genders switched. With Sherlock as a "Sherline" and Irene as an "Ian". Had it been that way, I think the scene wouldn't be treated lightly. It'd be treated for drama. There may have been an outrage. But no, since she's a woman, he's a man, it's no big deal. It's pretty much the double standard that men don't get abused, let alone by women. Or that they don't get raped, either.

Speaking of which...

I realize I neglected to mention something I noticed, but kinda sidestepped about the Rachel McAdams Adler. But since I'm going here, I can't ignore this. The scene where she and Downeylock are in the hotel. She drugs him and it's strongly implied, if not outright stated, that she and him... Did it. Yeah. Let's face it, she pretty much raped him. Seriously, think about it.

Again, if they were different genders, it probably would've been a bigger deal. I admit, I found the following scene with Downeylock, his pillow, and the chambermaid funny. But still! If nothing else, he treats it as a minor annoyance. (which probably has it's own issues) Who knows? Maybe for him and her, that's normal... I know Downeylock has feelings for her, but we never see him give consent. Rape is rape...

Don't get me wrong, I still like a lot of things about Movie!Adler, but I really wish they hadn't done that. It's unnecessary and has double-standards...

My lord! No WONDER Millerlock is a man-tramp into that sorta thing! These previous Irenes' actions to his predecessors must've messed up his psyche! (Though I still believe it's because they didn't want Joan Watson to be labeled a tramp if they kept the "three continents" trait from the original male version, so they just gave it to Millerlock instead. Which would be, in itself, a double standard...)

Now, I may not be the best person to talk about this. I may not be qualified. Someone could put this into words better. I'm just some random young woman on the Internet who fangirls and is to much of a shy, introverted nerd in real life that it's a wonder I can function in society. In fact, maybe I'm coming off as some whiny soapbox sadie. But I felt this needed to be said. To be put out there for thought...

So, Elementary writers, please, do not pull this sort of thing with your Irene Adler (who recently got cast. Please for the love of Conan Doyle let her be better than Pulver's). So far, the only bad thin is her being a "woman in the refrigerator" for Millerlock to give him pathos. Please don't make it "worse".

In fact, any future Sherlock Holmes writers, don't pull this crap with Irene. She never did ANYTHING like this in the canon! Who thought that needed to be a thing with her?

That's all I have to say. If anyone out there cares to discuss, please kindly do so.