Is Sherlock Holmes Gay?

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Last weekend, I finally got around to seeing the much-anticipated Sherlock Holmes flick. Directed by Guy Ritchie, it features Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law as Holmes and Watson—sleuthing superheroes trying to thwart a sinister black magic plot.

Oh, and they might be gay.

In his review of the film, Roger Ebert remarked, “Both of them now seem more than a little gay; it’s no longer a case of ‘oh, the British all talk like that.’ Jude Law even seemed to be wearing lipstick when he promoted the movie on Letterman.” (Wait…that means he played a gay character?) And Robert Downey Jr. himself said on Letterman that Holmes may be a “very butch homosexual.”

Naturally, this suggestion isn’t sitting well with some folks. Hollywood honchos are apparently worried a homosexual subtext could drive away their audience.  And the executors of the Sir Arthur Conan Doyle estate have threatened to revoke Ritchie’s rights to the film if he tries any funny business in the sequel. Said Andrea Plunket, who controls the remaining US copyright: “I am not hostile to homosexuals, but I am to anyone who is not true to the spirit of the books.”

Which raises two points:

#1: Why does everyone think they’re homosexual? From what I saw, they’re two guys who are very close, protective, and fond of one another. So were the female leads in Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants, and no one called them lesbians. Might it have something to do with the peculiar way our society perceives masculinity and male bonding? Furthermore, why isn’t anyone assuming they might be bisexual—especially considering they both have female love interests in the film? (If only Kinsey were still around to help Americans with their rigid perceptions of sexuality).

#2: So what if they are gay? Putting a homosexual spin on existing popular entertainment is nothing new (see: Bert and Ernie, Fan Fiction). More importantly, the purist argument doesn’t really hold water. This is a film in which Sherlock Holmes is an ass-kicking action hero and the plot is straight out of The Da Vinci Code. If Sir Doyle is rolling in his grave, it’s not because his heroes may—or may not—be gay.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate