#It's so funny to me that some of these BC people disregard hoopers when it might actually be a bettee sport for their dogs if they just wan

[pawsitivevibe]

I do kinda think "Border Collie people" are ruining dog agility.

They have made agility into a superfastspeed game and want to strip away all the challenges that require control and speed adjustment. The chute obstacle was "too dangerous" for dogs running at speed! The table was "too dangerous" because their dogs had to "slam to a stop." There's pressure to remove the teeter. There's discussion of whether the contacts are actually necessary. There's talk that curved tunnels are unsafe for fast dogs ... How long before they strip everything away to make it a jumps-and-straight-tunnels racing game? Can't have anything that slows down a dog! Can't have anything that would be "dangerous" to do at speed because they CAN'T slow down their dog.

They love to say "not every sport needs to be for every dog" in defense of making courses faster, bigger, etc. But HATE the idea that maybe agility isn't for dogs who can't control their speed enough to perform the more challenging obstacles. Agility should not be only about speed! Part of the challenge IS the different obstacles, adjusting speed, collecting and lengthening stride, etc. Safety is super duper important, but I don't believe removing all the challenge from the sport is necessary to play safe.

[tiliaeuropaea-blog]

sapphic-nd replied to your post

“*banging pots and pans* MOFF-TISS-HATE   MOFF-TISS-HATE...”

why, though? can you think of a legitimate reason to back up that point or are you just bitter bc your ship wasn't canon?

Under the cut, a list of things I’m “bitter” about, regarding all seasons of Sherlock, in no particular order.

They butchered all the female characters. Straight up butchered their character potential and made them tools to be used by male characters. Let me be a bit more specific about a couple of them:

Irene Adler (and yes, I always going to be bitter about it). Now, Irene Adler in A Scandal in Bohemia (published in 1891!) is a more proactive, progressive, appealing and genuinely interesting character that BBC!Irene will ever hope to be. And if you think about the 120 year gap, it’s kind of sad. ACD!Irene is a successful thirty-something woman who has retired from her career after making a fortune and now lives in a fancy area of London all by herself (IN THE FUCKING XIXTH CENTURY), marries for love and outsmarts Sherlock Holmes so hard he is left speechless. She’s funny, talented, smart, has a wonderful sense of humour, and sometimes dresses as a young lad to walk around London without being restricted by gender norms. An icon to this day. Now Steven Moffat read this story and went, “This is absolutely NOT a feminist victory! I, a straight white cis middle-aged man, know EXACTLY what a feminist victory looks like!” So BBC!Irene is a woman whose power literally comes from her vagina and her being fuckable. Her agency is reduced to her reliance on powerful male figures. Sure, she’s smart, but it’s made clear she’s not smart enough. The Alpha Man outsmarts her, humiliates her and then swoops in to mercifully save her. She should be the Woman who beat Sherlock Holmes, but she’s not. And don’t even get me started on her sexual orientation (and the implications that all gay women are promiscuous and just waiting for the Right Man). I highly recommend reading Antonija Primorac’s The Naked Truth for more insight on the matter.

Molly Hooper. They mistreated her character all along, and I think this is pretty clear. She’s depicted as needy, pathetic, weak time and time again. I thought they were getting better at writing her until season 4 came along. They simply used her when they needed her (e.g. for looking after a baby they created just for the sake of a good pun; and of course Rosie’s babysitter had to be Molly or Mrs Hudson, god forbid it’s a man? Greg who?). Zero agency, zero character development. But the last straw had to be the I Love You scene. First of all, how is it possible that Molly is still in love with Sherlock? Honestly? They literally haven’t spoken to each other in months, it’s just not realistic. This is character regression. Secondly, she is just brought back so she can be humiliated. Again. I truly believe Moffat has a kink for getting praised by women and humiliating them in return. Talk about issues. What’s even worse is that she’s shown visiting 221B in the final episode, as if nothing happened. She’s expected to be humiliated by Sherlock again and again and forgive him every time.

Rosamund Mary Watson. I’ll just refer you back to these two metas, x and x, I wrote after T6T. 

Eurus Holmes. Her depiction as the Mad Woman in the Attic is in itself problematic, and if you’re interested in reading more about this, please read @aherocanbeanyone‘s post about the depiction of mental illness in TFP. Also may I add something Beatrice pointed out in private: weird how the only Holmes sibling to be “mad” is the female one, uh? Her own character is inconsistent at best: she’s a mentally ill person, who has been locked up since childhood for murdering another human being, but in the end she just needed... a hug? So you’re either telling me Mr and Mrs Holmes are horrible, cruel parents who never showed affection to her daughter and/or intervened when they realised Euros was jealous of Sherlock and Victor’s relationship? Or her psyche is totally inconsistent and far-fetched. Moreover, when Sherlock hugs her and comforts her, she is once again saved by a man and has her agency wiped away - she’s unresponsive, doesn’t talk, etc. As Kaite Welsh said: “Although Euros in villain mode can be truly horrifying, at least she had power. At least she had agency. [...]  Every woman on the show has been systematically defanged and no amount of Mrs. Hudson driving a sports car can erase that.” (x)

That being said, we can safely say Sherlock is a sexist show. Most episodes don’t even pass the Bechdel test, I think.

Now, onto my “bitterness about Johnlock not being canon”. The reason I’m angry that Johnlock was not canon, is that it made the whole series a prime example of queerbaiting. Queerbaiting is cruel and honestly, some of the people on here who believed the most are young queer fans who were really hurt by the way Mofftiss treated us. I don’t approve of the carrot and stick approach they used. They repeatedly insulted and disregarded the Johnlock community in interviews and peppered the show with gay jokes, but kept playing with the subtext and the fans. They exploited their queer fans, their resources and then revealed they actually don’t care at all. If they cared about us they would’ve followed through and made the subtext text. If they didn’t want this from the start, they shouldn’t have played with the feelings of queer youth just because it’s fun. But what’s wrong with an ambiguous ending, you ask? It’s cowardice and cruelty. By leaving the ending ambiguous they revealed that they care more about the money that the larger straight (and homophobic) audience can give them, than about the loyalty and respect of a smaller but dedicated group of fans, whose lives would’ve been changed by this kind of representation. I’m sorry but this is just plain evil. 

And now last but not least: they’re mediocre writers at best. They rely heavily on illogical plot twists just for the shock value. They’re like architects that built a house with stained glass windows and a pool with a 30ft slide, but didn’t really bother with the foundation. The house is going to collapse eventually, no matter how pretty it is. The show may be exciting and shiny, but if you take a closer look you’ll notice so many plot holes and fortuitous coincidences. “You know what they say about coincidences? The universe is rarely so lazy.” But they are. Most plot lines are built on coincidences, chance, and far-fetched deductions that magically turn up to be correct. This has always been their modus operandi since day 1 (the suitcase has to be pink because the woman wears a pink coat? you do realise most women don’t have as much suitcases as they do coats, do you?) but it got worse with the seasons. The reason is that they bit off more than they could chew, wanted to build ever cleverer and more convoluted plot lines without being able to make them realistic and plausible. Season 4 was supposed to reference back to previous seasons, to tie up all loose ends, so be the overarching glue that kept all season together. It was obviously not, most characters were OOC and their character development made a sharp U Turn to FuckedUpVille. Also, they said that the big plot twist was something they hinted at throughout the series but they did not??? They literally introduced a new villain two episodes in with no other hint beforehand? Also, it’s pretty obvious they did NOT plan this ahead because this season is completely detached from the others plotwise. Well of course except for Moriarty, who we are expected to believe knew about Sherlock’s secret sister but did not use it against him? Because he’s what, kind-hearted?

They’re also pretty shitty at handling climaxes: all the climaxes in the show have deeply underwhelming resolutions that resolve absolutely nothing: Morairty has Sherlock and John at gunpoint? Ooops, phone call. Euros shoots John? Nah, tranquillizer. Reichenbach Fall? Who the fuck knows how he did it? Not them. What I mean is, they come up with a shocking scene where all hope seems to be lost, how will our hero survive? Cool, right? But they cannot come up with a decent answer to that question either, so they scramble up a (again, furtuitous) way to dodge the situation. That’s a sign of bad writing. If you can’t figure out how your hero survives, you should not write that scene.

But if they’re just plain incompetent, they do not deserve hate, right? They deserve to be explained their mistakes so that they can grow and become better writers! Wrong. We’re past constructive criticism, Moffat refuses to listen to criticism, he even sounds personally offended whenever someone says anything about his shows (x x). He’s just like a giant entitled toddler who needs a reality check. About Gatiss, I honestly to this day cannot wrap my head around what is up with him. 

This is the end of my presentation on how much I hate Mofftiss. I’m sure I forgot something but I’ll add if it comes to mind. Anyway, Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss are sexist queerbaiting assholes, lame writers and horrible human beings. End of.