Against ~~Holmesian* Deductions That Are Not Acknowledged As Just Being Magic
Yeah, Pratchett said it better and more succinctly but I'm actually still mad about it, so hey.
Let's say you somehow notice that two people used the same soap, ignoring the likelihood of being able to figure out what kind of soap someone uses just through a casual encounter. One person is a man and one is a woman. They know each other. They do not live in the same house.
Do you assume:
1) They are having sex with each other
2) One of them recommended the soap to the other
3) This is the best soap for them or their needs for Reasons
4) It was on sale at the store
5) They belong to a soap of the month club and this is the soap of that month
6) Something else I didn't come up with in literally 3 seconds of thought
So many options! But no, you go with the prurient answer, feel very proud of yourself, congratulate yourself on your Amazing Deductive Skills, and decide the two of them are having sex. Do you treat them like they are having sex and never bother to ask them about it? Does your answer change if you decide they are both men or are both women?
Goddamn how self-congratulatory some of this shit is when all it is is relying on stereotypes and thinking the absolute worst thing about everyone and then being smug about it. I will allow a great deal of noticing random shit, within reason. If you're gonna say that shit means something specific, you are gonna damn well have to show your work and then also accept that you're gonna be wrong most of the time because you do not know that person. There is no amount of Clever that will make up for a lack of knowledge.
*my favorite Actual Sherlock Holmes Deduction, somewhat paraphrased:
"I see you came on a train."
"How did you know that?"
"You're still holding the ticket."
This entry was originally posted at https://lannamichaels.dreamwidth.org/1038285.html.