About Irene Adler in yesterday's Sherlock ep
Don't read this if you do not want to be spoiled for yesterday's Sherlock.
So, I've seen a few people being upset about Irene Adler identifying as "gay" (she never used the word "lesbian"--which is a different identity--y'all are the ones calling her that) and yet:
a) becoming emotionally involved with Sherlock;
b) being a professional dominatrix who has many male clients.
I just want to talk a bit about each of these points.
First of all, as many other people on (and off) the internet have observed, there's no authority that takes away your "gay" or "lesbian" card if you have a romantic or sexual attraction, encounter or relationship with someone of the opposite sex. One of the reasons the "everyone is bisexual" meme is annoying is that gay, lesbian and bisexual are identities that can and do mean different things to different people. Some people feel that they are bisexual if they are attracted to and interested in having relationships with people of both or even all genders or sexes. Some people feel that if they have a much stronger attraction to and history with same-sex or opposite-sex partners, they are gay, lesbian or heterosexual even if they have occasionally crossed the Kinsey line. There are valid reasons why people feel that way, even if they have had more than one relationship that crossed the line, because their history may still be one where they're primarily giving their energy to their own gender; for instance a lesbian feminist who has spent most of her life working on behalf of women and lesbians and is actively taking part in a lesbian community does not stop being a lesbian because she's fallen in love--even more than once--with a man--even a straight cis man (which Sherlock is not; whether or not he's an ace, and he probably is, he's got a same-sex domestic partner in all but name).
Irene's feelings about Sherlock--and his for her--are definitely of a singular nature for each of them. This in no way undermines her stated identification as gay or his probable identification as asexual (or gay, or grey-A, or whatevs).
Secondly, there are a lot of people involved in BDSM and kink who do not equate genital sex with bondage or domination. Dominatrixes often do not have genital sex with their clients and usually do not undress for them (Irene did undress in the episode, but it was definitely an attempt on her part to dominate Sherlock and John, who were not her clients). They do beat and humiliate their clients, and some of their clients probably do think of it as a sexual experience, experience genital arousal or even have orgasms, but some professional female dominants experience an entirely different emotional thrill in dominating people than they do during sex. A lot of kinky people who identify as gay, lesbian or heterosexual for purposes of romantic relationships and genital sex do not particularly care what gender the person who dominates or submits to them is. Some do, of course, but some don't.
There are a fair number of people who experience kink as sex and a fair number of people who experience it as something similar but not the same. It's a large enough divide that whether or not there will be kissing/genital touching/orgasms is one of the things people normally discuss in their negotiations.
So even if Irene did identify specifically as lesbian (rather than gay) and is a "gold star lesbian" who's never touched a penis (maybe she makes them do it themselves) she could still be a professional dominatrix who gets off on dominating men without sex (even if they're getting off).
Finally, there is no consensus whatsoever about porn, sex work and BDSM within feminism or even within radical feminism; people have different ideas about these things. However, calling Irene Adler and her companion "whores" when they do not choose to call themselves this thing is definitely outside the pale of general feminist consensus not to mention basic common decency, so please do not do it.
This entry was originally posted at http://tiferet.dreamwidth.org/73839.html on Dreamwidth, and you won't be able to comment anywhere else. In order to comment in my journal on Dreamwidth, you will need to register your OpenID before commenting. Sign into Dreamwidth using your LJ or IJ OpenID; you will be asked if you'd like to register your OpenID. Please do so, and then subscribe and grant/request access to my Dreamwidth journal. Once I've approved you, you'll be able to comment.
So, I've seen a few people being upset about Irene Adler identifying as "gay" (she never used the word "lesbian"--which is a different identity--y'all are the ones calling her that) and yet:
a) becoming emotionally involved with Sherlock;
b) being a professional dominatrix who has many male clients.
I just want to talk a bit about each of these points.
First of all, as many other people on (and off) the internet have observed, there's no authority that takes away your "gay" or "lesbian" card if you have a romantic or sexual attraction, encounter or relationship with someone of the opposite sex. One of the reasons the "everyone is bisexual" meme is annoying is that gay, lesbian and bisexual are identities that can and do mean different things to different people. Some people feel that they are bisexual if they are attracted to and interested in having relationships with people of both or even all genders or sexes. Some people feel that if they have a much stronger attraction to and history with same-sex or opposite-sex partners, they are gay, lesbian or heterosexual even if they have occasionally crossed the Kinsey line. There are valid reasons why people feel that way, even if they have had more than one relationship that crossed the line, because their history may still be one where they're primarily giving their energy to their own gender; for instance a lesbian feminist who has spent most of her life working on behalf of women and lesbians and is actively taking part in a lesbian community does not stop being a lesbian because she's fallen in love--even more than once--with a man--even a straight cis man (which Sherlock is not; whether or not he's an ace, and he probably is, he's got a same-sex domestic partner in all but name).
Irene's feelings about Sherlock--and his for her--are definitely of a singular nature for each of them. This in no way undermines her stated identification as gay or his probable identification as asexual (or gay, or grey-A, or whatevs).
Secondly, there are a lot of people involved in BDSM and kink who do not equate genital sex with bondage or domination. Dominatrixes often do not have genital sex with their clients and usually do not undress for them (Irene did undress in the episode, but it was definitely an attempt on her part to dominate Sherlock and John, who were not her clients). They do beat and humiliate their clients, and some of their clients probably do think of it as a sexual experience, experience genital arousal or even have orgasms, but some professional female dominants experience an entirely different emotional thrill in dominating people than they do during sex. A lot of kinky people who identify as gay, lesbian or heterosexual for purposes of romantic relationships and genital sex do not particularly care what gender the person who dominates or submits to them is. Some do, of course, but some don't.
There are a fair number of people who experience kink as sex and a fair number of people who experience it as something similar but not the same. It's a large enough divide that whether or not there will be kissing/genital touching/orgasms is one of the things people normally discuss in their negotiations.
So even if Irene did identify specifically as lesbian (rather than gay) and is a "gold star lesbian" who's never touched a penis (maybe she makes them do it themselves) she could still be a professional dominatrix who gets off on dominating men without sex (even if they're getting off).
Finally, there is no consensus whatsoever about porn, sex work and BDSM within feminism or even within radical feminism; people have different ideas about these things. However, calling Irene Adler and her companion "whores" when they do not choose to call themselves this thing is definitely outside the pale of general feminist consensus not to mention basic common decency, so please do not do it.
This entry was originally posted at http://tiferet.dreamwidth.org/73839.html on Dreamwidth, and you won't be able to comment anywhere else. In order to comment in my journal on Dreamwidth, you will need to register your OpenID before commenting. Sign into Dreamwidth using your LJ or IJ OpenID; you will be asked if you'd like to register your OpenID. Please do so, and then subscribe and grant/request access to my Dreamwidth journal. Once I've approved you, you'll be able to comment.