John Watson

[Arcadia]

Same here, Toby.
 

BC and MF do share a lot of eyesex for allegedly straight guys--in character, I hasten to add.  Well, John's straight and Sherlock is, if not John-curious, a dedicated asexual.  Who could fail to read something into all that intense and meaningful close-range staring into each others' eyes they are always doing?  :)

I do. Fail, I mean. I just think Sherlock's very earnest in those scenes, and that's one of the ways people convey they are earnest; by looking into your eyes. I can't get any more out of it than that, I'm afraid.

Is "eyesex" really a thing? Sounds impossible, to me ....

[Pseudonym]

I don't know, I get it. I don't tend to stare that long into any of my friends eyes. But with Sherlock you can excuse it as him being awkward, and John only really does it when Sherlock is the instigator. 

[Boton]

 

 

 

I once had a notion to write a fan-fic where Sherlock discovered that Mycroft was bugging his (Sherl's) underpants in order to keep track of his little brother.  I posited that this bugging occurred when the lads sent out their laundry.  Do you see a washing machine in 221b?  Because I do not, and I don't think Mrs. Hudson would be amenable to washing Sherlock Holmes's soiled underpants, designer or no.  Mycroft was apprehending the laundry courier (we do not for one moment think that SH condescends to go to the launderette, do we?) and replacing the items with others that had had a tiny GPS chip sewn into the waistbands.  The reasoning being that SH sheds clothing/disguises with regularity, but he'd be very unlikely to change his underpants for a disguise.  Only, Mycroft underestimated his little brother, because SH sussed that his shorts were bugged in the second week.  So now Sherl hides a stash of new unsurveilled underwear in a niche behind the periodic table in his bedroom and the bugged underpants coming back from the laundry he gives to Billy to pass out to the male homeless network.  Sherlock's underpants sure do get around, all over London, keeping Mycroft's minions busy.  Being thorough, M. also bugged John's skivvies.  Watson's underpants adhere to a more set routine:  the clinic, the pub, the Tube, home in Baker Street . .and once in a while, another address which is where his current girlfriend (this was all pre-Mary) is living.  Three Continents is pretty predictable.

 

 

 

Write this.  Write this right now, and I will sit down immediately to read "The Case of Sherlock's Underpants."

 

But she really likes this idea of herself being a cool, progressive, open-minded landlady who rents her property out to a gay couple and she also probably thinks her two handsome tenants would be cute together.

 

...

 

 Makes me wonder what kind of a mother John has and on what terms he is / was with her.

 

I agree with this. I think Mrs. Hudson wants to be cool with everything, and she might have been a little cooler than she needed to be.

 

You know, half the fan fics have John as an orphan and/or abused by his father. I'd love to see him with just a nice, normal family who love him and are proud of his military background and are regretful that Harry and Clara split up.

 

 

I do. Fail, I mean. I just think Sherlock's very earnest in those scenes, and that's one of the ways people convey they are earnest; by looking into your eyes. I can't get any more out of it than that, I'm afraid.

 

 

I don't see the eye sex either, TBH. Of course, part of the problem is that I didn't see it when I first watched it, I was appalled when I found out there was a community of people who interpreted the interactions that way, and I have steadfastly *refused* to see it that way.

 

What I do see is body language that indicates that the two are more comfortable in one another's space than men typically are, but I don't read "attraction" off that. I have always seen "comrades in arms" with that language, and I'm sticking with it.

 

ACD Holmes and Watson though? When the mood hits, I can easily believe they are as gay as larks.  :-)

[T.o.b.y]

I think Sherlock looks at everything he is interested in the way he looks at John, animate and inanimate. It's just his characteristic piercing gaze. He is an intense person in many ways and doesn't much care if his behavior is unusual.

 

Sorry John, we're talking about Sherlock again... Story of your life, I know.

[Hikari]

 

 

 

 

I once had a notion to write a fan-fic where Sherlock discovered that Mycroft was bugging his (Sherl's) underpants in order to keep track of his little brother.  I posited that this bugging occurred when the lads sent out their laundry.  Do you see a washing machine in 221b?  Because I do not, and I don't think Mrs. Hudson would be amenable to washing Sherlock Holmes's soiled underpants, designer or no.  Mycroft was apprehending the laundry courier (we do not for one moment think that SH condescends to go to the launderette, do we?) and replacing the items with others that had had a tiny GPS chip sewn into the waistbands.  The reasoning being that SH sheds clothing/disguises with regularity, but he'd be very unlikely to change his underpants for a disguise.  Only, Mycroft underestimated his little brother, because SH sussed that his shorts were bugged in the second week.  So now Sherl hides a stash of new unsurveilled underwear in a niche behind the periodic table in his bedroom and the bugged underpants coming back from the laundry he gives to Billy to pass out to the male homeless network.  Sherlock's underpants sure do get around, all over London, keeping Mycroft's minions busy.  Being thorough, M. also bugged John's skivvies.  Watson's underpants adhere to a more set routine:  the clinic, the pub, the Tube, home in Baker Street . .and once in a while, another address which is where his current girlfriend (this was all pre-Mary) is living.  Three Continents is pretty predictable.

 

 

 

Write this.  Write this right now, and I will sit down immediately to read "The Case of Sherlock's Underpants."

 

But she really likes this idea of herself being a cool, progressive, open-minded landlady who rents her property out to a gay couple and she also probably thinks her two handsome tenants would be cute together.

 

...

 

 Makes me wonder what kind of a mother John has and on what terms he is / was with her.

 

I agree with this. I think Mrs. Hudson wants to be cool with everything, and she might have been a little cooler than she needed to be.

 

You know, half the fan fics have John as an orphan and/or abused by his father. I'd love to see him with just a nice, normal family who love him and are proud of his military background and are regretful that Harry and Clara split up.

 

 

I do. Fail, I mean. I just think Sherlock's very earnest in those scenes, and that's one of the ways people convey they are earnest; by looking into your eyes. I can't get any more out of it than that, I'm afraid.

 

 

I don't see the eye sex either, TBH. Of course, part of the problem is that I didn't see it when I first watched it, I was appalled when I found out there was a community of people who interpreted the interactions that way, and I have steadfastly *refused* to see it that way.

 

What I do see is body language that indicates that the two are more comfortable in one another's space than men typically are, but I don't read "attraction" off that. I have always seen "comrades in arms" with that language, and I'm sticking with it.

 

ACD Holmes and Watson though? When the mood hits, I can easily believe they are as gay as larks.  :-)

 

 

I've obviously been spending way too much time over on YouTube . . . but I didn't have you guys until 6 weeks ago.

 

Eyesex is a thing.  I believe that the writers as well as the actors themselves have acknowledged it.  Not that they are intentionally having eyesex but that it comes off that way onscreen to a lot of people.  I appear to be the minority here, but not over on YouTube.  You ladies are obviously trodding the high road.  :)

 

The first memorable appearance of eyesex was in 'PINK'.  DI Lestrade's minions are ransacking the flat and Sherlock has just been told that it stops being a fake drugs bust if anything is found.  Watson susses by this comment that his new flatmate (still unofficial at this point) has a drugs history with Scotland Yard.  Incredulously he asks, "You . .?"  At this point, there's no other word for it--Sherlock looms into John's personal space and locks eyes with him for an extremely long moment.  One is reminded of a Rottweiler having a stare-down with a smaller, fluffier terrier-type dog just prior to eating it.  Sherl is using his larger physical presence and scary-intense stare to intimidate Watson into silence.  Our Three Continents, a hardened military veteran with the wounds to prove it, doesn't back down easily, but in the face of such single-minded dominance of his person from this guy that he only just met a few hours ago . . he's not getting the upper hand in this exchange.  It wasn't meant as eyesex, I'm sure . . but still, it's  . . . hawt.

 

JohnLock was born in that moment, I'm pretty sure.  Some shippers put it earlier, when John first volunteers his phone to Sherlock in the lab, and first garners SH's notice.  But there wasn't any eyesex until the scene in the flat.

 

Plenty of folks shipped JohnLock in its original incarnation, when it was known as Holmeson.  It's true that Holmes exclaims "My dear Watson!" a great deal more than his normally chilly reserve would indicate he do.   As for Watson, we know he is to be found ejaculating something or other in nearly every story.  But they most definitely have separate bedrooms.  The rigid code of Victorian manliness which dictated one call his most bosom mate by his surname only, even when they were alone . . one wonders if it extended to the boudoir.  How incredibly buttoned-up those people were.

[Artemis]

The first memorable appearance of eyesex was in 'PINK'. DI Lestrade's minions are ransacking the flat and Sherlock has just been told that it stops being a fake drugs bust if anything is found. Watson susses by this comment that his new flatmate (still unofficial at this point) has a drugs history with Scotland Yard. Incredulously he asks, "You . .?" At this point, there's no other word for it--Sherlock looms into John's personal space and locks eyes with him for an extremely long moment. One is reminded of a Rottweiler having a stare-down with a smaller, fluffier terrier-type dog just prior to eating it. Sherl is using his larger physical presence and scary-intense stare to intimidate Watson into silence. Our Three Continents, a hardened military veteran with the wounds to prove it, doesn't back down easily, but in the face of such single-minded dominance of his person from this guy that he only just met a few hours ago . . he's not getting the upper hand in this exchange. It wasn't meant as eyesex, I'm sure . . but still, it's . . . hawt.

 

That is so weird to me, I do not see "eyesex" at all. Wouldn't "eye-communication" be more accurate? What I got from that look was mainly "John, it's true; please stop defending me and shut up now." With maybe a dash of underlying "I'm embarrassed by this and I hope you haven't lost respect for me."

[Hikari]

I derived considerably more threat in Sherlock's posture in that particular scene than 'Gee, I'm embarrassed'., but a chacon son gout.

[Boton]

 

The first memorable appearance of eyesex was in 'PINK'. DI Lestrade's minions are ransacking the flat and Sherlock has just been told that it stops being a fake drugs bust if anything is found. Watson susses by this comment that his new flatmate (still unofficial at this point) has a drugs history with Scotland Yard. Incredulously he asks, "You . .?" At this point, there's no other word for it--Sherlock looms into John's personal space and locks eyes with him for an extremely long moment. One is reminded of a Rottweiler having a stare-down with a smaller, fluffier terrier-type dog just prior to eating it. Sherl is using his larger physical presence and scary-intense stare to intimidate Watson into silence. Our Three Continents, a hardened military veteran with the wounds to prove it, doesn't back down easily, but in the face of such single-minded dominance of his person from this guy that he only just met a few hours ago . . he's not getting the upper hand in this exchange. It wasn't meant as eyesex, I'm sure . . but still, it's . . . hawt.

That is so weird to me, I do not see "eyesex" at all. Wouldn't "eye-communication" be more accurate? What I got from that look was mainly "John, it's true; please stop defending me and shut up now." With maybe a dash of underlying "I'm embarrassed by this and I hope you haven't lost respect for me."

 

 

Yeah, I think at one point I called that scene "eye semaphore."  Sherlock is really trying to get John to pick up on all the clues, and poor John is just not getting it. And the last thing Sherlock wants is John to accidentally dare Lestrade into doing more than a cursory look, because you know there's a little something hidden in a dresser drawer or under the floorboards or something.

[Artemis]

I derived considerably more threat in Sherlock's posture in that particular scene than 'Gee, I'm embarrassed'., but a chacon son gout.

I didn't say I thought embarrassment was the primary conveyance of the look though, and "Gee, I'm embarrassed" is a lot less earnest than the tone I was intending to connote. But yeah... I don't see the look as particularly threatening. Just really really wanting him to stop carrying on assuredly about how he couldn't possibly be a junkie when everyone else in the room knows better. I do think he is slightly ashamed.

 

But to the main point, threatening or not, I don't see "sex" anywhere in the interaction. All this "eyesex" and "subtext" stuff I keep hearing about is a bit Freudian for my taste.

 

Don't mind me, I'm grumpy today. *mumblegrumble*

[Van Buren Supernova]

Your grumpy is my normal.

[Boton]

 

I derived considerably more threat in Sherlock's posture in that particular scene than 'Gee, I'm embarrassed'., but a chacon son gout.

I didn't say I thought embarrassment was the primary conveyance of the look though, and "Gee, I'm embarrassed" is a lot less earnest than the tone I was intending to connote. But yeah... I don't see the look as particularly threatening. Just really really wanting him to stop carrying on assuredly about how he couldn't possibly be a junkie when everyone else in the room knows better. I do think he is slightly ashamed.

 

But to the main point, threatening or not, I don't see "sex" anywhere in the interaction. All this "eyesex" and "subtext" stuff I keep hearing about is a bit Freudian for my taste.

 

Don't mind me, I'm grumpy today. *mumblegrumble*

 

 

I agree, Artemis.  I think there is a little bit of embarrassment - maybe not a lot, but Sherlock had already gone to the trouble to show Lestrade his nicotine patch. That indicates to me that not only is he off everything, but the smoking thing is relatively recent, and he's sort of being an over-achiever for Lestrade. 

 

To me, the sex thing is a little preposterous.  (Sorry, Hikari.) Even if I believed Sherlock and John had sexual chemistry they wanted to act on, giving one another meaningful sexual looks during a drugs bust is just *weird.*   ;)

[Arcadia]

I think Sherlock looks at everything he is interested in the way he looks at John, animate and inanimate. It's just his characteristic piercing gaze. He is an intense person in many ways and doesn't much care if his behavior is unusual.

 

Sorry John, we're talking about Sherlock again... Story of your life, I know.

 

John and Molly need to form a club for people who are outshone by their more exotic counterparts. #OrdinaryLivesMatterToo. :P

 

 

 

The first memorable appearance of eyesex was in 'PINK'. DI Lestrade's minions are ransacking the flat and Sherlock has just been told that it stops being a fake drugs bust if anything is found. Watson susses by this comment that his new flatmate (still unofficial at this point) has a drugs history with Scotland Yard. Incredulously he asks, "You . .?" At this point, there's no other word for it--Sherlock looms into John's personal space and locks eyes with him for an extremely long moment. One is reminded of a Rottweiler having a stare-down with a smaller, fluffier terrier-type dog just prior to eating it. Sherl is using his larger physical presence and scary-intense stare to intimidate Watson into silence. Our Three Continents, a hardened military veteran with the wounds to prove it, doesn't back down easily, but in the face of such single-minded dominance of his person from this guy that he only just met a few hours ago . . he's not getting the upper hand in this exchange. It wasn't meant as eyesex, I'm sure . . but still, it's . . . hawt.

That is so weird to me, I do not see "eyesex" at all. Wouldn't "eye-communication" be more accurate? What I got from that look was mainly "John, it's true; please stop defending me and shut up now." With maybe a dash of underlying "I'm embarrassed by this and I hope you haven't lost respect for me."

 

 

Yeah, I think at one point I called that scene "eye semaphore."  Sherlock is really trying to get John to pick up on all the clues, and poor John is just not getting it. And the last thing Sherlock wants is John to accidentally dare Lestrade into doing more than a cursory look, because you know there's a little something hidden in a dresser drawer or under the floorboards or something.

 

"Eye semaphore", that's perfect! I have to try and remember that.

 

Is that what's meant in the fanfics when Sherlock "waggles his brows", do you think? Seems like I've been reading a lot of brow waggling lately, but I don't remember it that much from the show.

 

Your grumpy is my normal.

 

We know, dear, we know. :P

[Boton]

 

 

Is that what's meant in the fanfics when Sherlock "waggles his brows", do you think? Seems like I've been reading a lot of brow waggling lately, but I don't remember it that much from the show.

 

 

In fan fic, Sherlock waggles his brows, John pinches his nose, and Lestrade continually calls Sherlock "son."  None of which, to the best of my memory, ever happened in the show.

[Hikari]

 

 

 

Is that what's meant in the fanfics when Sherlock "waggles his brows", do you think? Seems like I've been reading a lot of brow waggling lately, but I don't remember it that much from the show.

 

 

In fan fic, Sherlock waggles his brows, John pinches his nose, and Lestrade continually calls Sherlock "son."  None of which, to the best of my memory, ever happened in the show.

 

 

Rupert (b. 1963) is too young to be Bendi's (b. 1976) dad.  I'm sure Lestrade would much rather be Sherlock's mate than his father-figure. 

 

Though Lestrade's reaction to Sherl's sudden reappearance was pretty effusive.  I didn't get 'My son!' from it, though.  More like, "C'mere you irritating SOB . . my life has been so boring since you left!"  Sherl's reaction face to that hug is pretty priceless, too. ("Normally I would not allow this sort of thing but because you are in my secret friend circle, I will submit to this hug and kind of like it though I am made uncomfortable at the same time/"

[Boton]

 

 

 

Rupert (b. 1963) is too young to be Bendi's (b. 1976) dad.  I'm sure Lestrade would much rather be Sherlock's mate than his father-figure. 

 

 

 

Have you not yet fallen down the rabbit hole that is the "Papa Lestrade" tag on fan fics? It's - odd.  I don't see it myself, but some people are quite convinced they have a father son relationship.

[Hikari]

 

 

 

 

Rupert (b. 1963) is too young to be Bendi's (b. 1976) dad.  I'm sure Lestrade would much rather be Sherlock's mate than his father-figure. 

 

 

 

Have you not yet fallen down the rabbit hole that is the "Papa Lestrade" tag on fan fics? It's - odd.  I don't see it myself, but some people are quite convinced they have a father son relationship.

 

 

Apparently I have not.  I wasn't aware that it was a thing!  I guess given Lestrade's seniority of age, silver hair and air of responsibility, he *could* function as Sherlock's dad . . . but that's what Sherl has Mycroft, his Big Daddy-Brother, for.

 

Lestrade would be more akin to an exasperated boss and SH is the flightly Millennial employee with the erratic work ethic and addiction to social media.

 

[Artemis]

I don't believe it, but I like it. :D

 

IOU: Ten Reasons Why John Watson is Actually Moriarty

[Hikari]

I don't believe it, but I like it. :D

 

IOU: Ten Reasons Why John Watson is Actually Moriarty

 

Those pics opened up so Enormous they were mostly blurs.  Were they supposed to do that?

 

This theory seems to have been constructed by a person or persons who can't decide which they ship harder, JohnLock or Sheriarty.  This provides a way to have both their cakes at the same time!  But JW as an audacious criminal mastermind?  Nope, doesn't hold together.  Not even Sherlock Holmes is a good enough actor to pull off such a Straight Arrow disguise to such perfection.  :)

 

On the whole, Rex Stout's theory that 'Watson was a Woman' (or more precisely, 'The' Woman) is more plausible that John = Moriarty.  Though!  there was that time that Mary slipped up and called her husband . .."James".

 

Hmm ...

[J.P.]

"Skills and Proficiencies:  Poisoning / overdose."

 

I don't think it was meant this way :D

[Carol the Dabbler]

 

My favorite 'gay joke' at John's expense was written by Mr. Gatiss for the Hounds episode.

 

Concierge at the Keys hotel:  Sorry we couldn't do a double bed for you boys.

JW:  We're not . . . it's fine.

 

Chef to JW:  Is yours a snorer?  Mine's a snorer.

JW:  Have you got any crisps?!

 

 

I love that.  Just the whole, "I no longer have the energy to correct people I'll never see again after this weekend."

That's an interesting interpretation. I've always taken John's reactions in the "bed' scene as 1) he starts to correct the guy, just as he usually does; 2) it occurs to him that the two innkeepers may be gay, and therefore the correction might not be very tactful; so 3) he changes course in mid-sentence.

 

Wonder which way MG meant it -- now that I've read your take, I can see it equally well either way.

[Artemis]

Those pics opened up so Enormous they were mostly blurs.  Were they supposed to do that?

 

They didn't appear at all blurry or oversized to me.  :/

 

 

[Arcadia]

 

 

 

 

Rupert (b. 1963) is too young to be Bendi's (b. 1976) dad.  I'm sure Lestrade would much rather be Sherlock's mate than his father-figure. 

 

 

 

Have you not yet fallen down the rabbit hole that is the "Papa Lestrade" tag on fan fics? It's - odd.  I don't see it myself, but some people are quite convinced they have a father son relationship.

 

 

I see it (or saw it) because of the "sunshine" moniker Lestrade used in "Pink". That just seemed very fatherly to me. So did the bear hug in TEH, and Greg's general tolerance of/love for Sherlock. But it's not a big, overt part of their relationship... just one aspect of it.

 

I don't believe it, but I like it. :D

 

IOU: Ten Reasons Why John Watson is Actually Moriarty

 

I love it! It's perfect! I'm sold. :P

[J.P.]

Btw, I just did the math for Sherlock: Imdb says the show has a cast of 278. Gay, lesbian, bi or otherwise not straight are, as far as I can remember: Harry and Clara (off-screen only), Hrs Hudson's neighbor's "married ones" (off-screen only), Jim from IT (only pretending, although Moriarty himself doesn't exactly have "straight dude" written all over his forehead), Irene Adler and her assistant Kate, the innkeepers in "The Hounds of Baskerville" and maybe Eurus. I mean, who the heck knows what Eurus' sexual orientation is and if it can be classified in any ordinary way, but she makes a statement indicating she doesn't much care what genitals her partners have so I counted her too. That's ten people which means approx. 3,6% of characters on Sherlock are not straight.

 

Hard numbers are difficult to come by, but this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation suggests that the prevalence of homosexual and bisexual people in western populations is somewhere between 1 and 10%.

 

So I wouldn't say the show presents a very distorted image of reality on that front.

 

Not a real addition to the discussion here, but I have to correct your math (and yes, it doesn't let me sleep at nights)

 

Among those 278 characters you have to count all those, who are clearly straight. Mrs Hudson and her lover from Speedy's, Lady Smallwood, John, Mary, and his two girlfriends we know, Greg and his wife, Anderson and Donovan, the Cabbie, Dr Stapleton, Parents Holmes and and and… actually you can find many hetero characters if you look closer at them all.

 

All the others we don't know anything about. Chan, Soo Lin, Ajay, the guy making Hound excursions, Henry Knight, Dr Frankland, Seb, the JanusCars guy, Dimmock, the Semtex clad victims of Jim in TGG… there is no reason to assume they are straight (or queer), so you have to leave them out of the equation.

 

Just saying. :D

[T.o.b.y]

 

Btw, I just did the math for Sherlock: Imdb says the show has a cast of 278. Gay, lesbian, bi or otherwise not straight are, as far as I can remember: Harry and Clara (off-screen only), Hrs Hudson's neighbor's "married ones" (off-screen only), Jim from IT (only pretending, although Moriarty himself doesn't exactly have "straight dude" written all over his forehead), Irene Adler and her assistant Kate, the innkeepers in "The Hounds of Baskerville" and maybe Eurus. I mean, who the heck knows what Eurus' sexual orientation is and if it can be classified in any ordinary way, but she makes a statement indicating she doesn't much care what genitals her partners have so I counted her too. That's ten people which means approx. 3,6% of characters on Sherlock are not straight.

 

Hard numbers are difficult to come by, but this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation suggests that the prevalence of homosexual and bisexual people in western populations is somewhere between 1 and 10%.

 

So I wouldn't say the show presents a very distorted image of reality on that front.

Not a real addition to the discussion here, but I have to correct your math (and yes, it doesn't let me sleep at nights)

 

Among those 278 characters you have to count all those, who are clearly straight. Mrs Hudson and her lover from Speedy's, Lady Smallwood, John, Mary, and his two girlfriends we know, Greg and his wife, Anderson and Donovan, the Cabbie, Dr Stapleton, Parents Holmes and and and… actually you can find many hetero characters if you look closer at them all.

 

All the others we don't know anything about. Chan, Soo Lin, Ajay, the guy making Hound excursions, Henry Knight, Dr Frankland, Seb, the JanusCars guy, Dimmock, the Semtex clad victims of Jim in TGG… there is no reason to assume they are straight (or queer), so you have to leave them out of the equation.

 

Just saying. :D

How heteronormative of me! :-P

 

But why leave them out? The question was whether non-straight characters were overrepresented. So it matters how many of the total are explicitly not straight, it doesn't matter how many more might be because they aren't represented as such.

[J.P.]

Because the queer representation here is higher than those 278 minus (straight AND unknown), because statistically a certain % of the unknown has to be queer. :D Also you have to compare clearly straight with clearly non-straight plus the 1-10% of unknown.
 

Caution! Rambling ahead!

 

It somehow has to do with a problem I think I encounter lately. The minorities forget sometimes that our world is made by majorities and therefore for majorities. Which seem to be people with a certain size and weight, right handed, straight, healthy, physically fit enough to move around without help, seeing, hearing, with a certain way their brains work, with a certain level of education. Many will add white, many will add men.

As long as you are somewhere in the middle of the of the standard Gaussian distribution of all the importand traits it's okay. As soon as you are on some end of it, you will face difficulties but it doesn't have to be always an evil plan.

 

The problem IMO lies in the way we treat the not-conformable people of any kind.