insertnamehere wrote:Dom wrote:
Just one example of his misogynistic attitude would be this line from The Sign Of Three, "John, control your wife."
And no one says anything. Mary looks annoyed, but John doesn't. It was just something that could be said. And the same type of thing happens in Doctor Who in pretty much every episode. Companions are, once again, the accessory to the Doctor rather than characters. Moffat writes women as accessories and not characters.
Let me just play Devil's Advocate here, Sherlock says stupid shit like that all the time that he doesn't mean. John has become desensitized to the Sherlock-isms.
On Doctor Who, there was really only one companion who really stood out as being able to hold her own against the Doctor, Donna. But even before Moffat was at the helm, Rose and Martha always felt like accessories. This is one of the biggest problems with the show that I had. It's just kind of a misogynist show.
While this isn't a Doctor Who thread I think the discussion on Moffat isnpertienent.
I absolutely disagree with your assessment of Martha and Rose. Women who fall in love can be well written women. Rose starts off as a shop girl who thinks nothing of herself. Her relationship with the Doctor teaches her she has inherent value. This continues after she leaves the Doctor and Rose even tells Donna that she is important. Martha is an medical student with a path in life who is swept up by a grieving Doctor. Martha doesn't learn that she important but rather to love herself. Martha leaves the Doctor when she does. She starts her own life and knows her love is as valuable as someone else's.
Moffat wrote Amy. A girl who waits for the Doctor because??? She is continuously referred to as a "girl" and Moffat's Doctor is not one that is humanist. He writes a Doctor who swaggers in and every woman swoons over him with no reason. He has a relationship with what seems to be three women at once and no one bats an eye. Amy doesn't do anything. Things happen to her. The Doctor usually a saves her. This was the opposite in the Russell T Davies Era. Add this to many lines that should be looked at with a glaring eye, Moffat is misogynistic.
In Sherlock this is less pronounced because the structures of the shoes are different but you'll notice that of the four main characters (Sherlock, John, Lestrade, and Mycroft) are men. The two female characters (Molly and Mrs. Hudson) serve traditional female roles. Mrs. Hudson is an essential housewife and Molly (through the first two seasons) is basically an assistant who fawns over Sherlock. There is the problem of the line I mentioned.
Now I haven't seen His Last Vow yet, but I'd love to address that episode later.
Moffat is a shitty writer that does great with short bursts like Sherlock. He does not give his characters consequences. No one dies, and when they do there is either no grief or there is a way out.
I'm waiting for the person who usually gives me a link to give me a link 
