Wow! I take no offense at your thinky-thoughts and certainly not at your lovely review and rec. I'm shocked that something I wrote could produce philosophical discourse at all!
I have no background or training in philosophy. My education was in sociology, so your point about the commoditification of women's labor/motherhood/child birth is interesting to me from a social inequality perspective.
Here are a couple background and writing process points that I think play into your comments really well.
1. Paid surrogacy (and possibly other forms of surrogacy as well) is actually illegal in Britain. I deliberately glossed over the mechanics of how donating sperm, getting a surrogate, and the details of pregnancy would work because the system there is totally incompatible to what I know of the American system.
2. And what I know about the American system is not a lot. Next to nothing really, which also matches my knowledge of pregnancy and parenting. So I deliberately sought out a beta who is very familiar with how surrogacy and sperm donation work to read that part of my story with a technical eye, as well as to make sure it was sensitive to issues parents who have gone this route and surrogates may have faced.
3. Initially, when I decided I was going to write parentlock, I knew I didn't want to have John and Sherlock raising John and Mary's child without her. That would require removing her from the story in a way I wasn't comfortable with, either killing her off or divorce or something. But in my attempt to not do harm to a canon female character, I totally erased the identity of an OFC. I didn't even think about that in this light until now.
4. I really wanted to concentrate on Sherlock's emotional turmoil in this (so I'm really glad that growth came across and was a good read for you)and Holmestice was a real time crunch for me this time around, so I knew I needed to get that growth and them give him the pay off of a baby. I'm sure there's a whole second 10k story that one could write about the pregnancy process.
5. I find your reading of the pull of genetics behind Sherlock's desires very interesting. Genetics mean next to nothing to me but I knew that the more hard science approach might mean a lot to Sherlock. Personally, I think he conflates the genetic tie to John with the desire to love a little person that someone you love has created. They aren't necessarily the same thing but for Sherlock who loves so few people, and who is genuinely loved by few people as well, adopting a child that he has no evidence that he can love or that will love him back is too big a risk.
I hope none of these points reads as defensive because that was not my intent at all. I love your comments and even where they point out areas that could have been done differently or better, I think they're really valuable.
no subject
I have no background or training in philosophy. My education was in sociology, so your point about the commoditification of women's labor/motherhood/child birth is interesting to me from a social inequality perspective.
Here are a couple background and writing process points that I think play into your comments really well.
1. Paid surrogacy (and possibly other forms of surrogacy as well) is actually illegal in Britain. I deliberately glossed over the mechanics of how donating sperm, getting a surrogate, and the details of pregnancy would work because the system there is totally incompatible to what I know of the American system.
2. And what I know about the American system is not a lot. Next to nothing really, which also matches my knowledge of pregnancy and parenting. So I deliberately sought out a beta who is very familiar with how surrogacy and sperm donation work to read that part of my story with a technical eye, as well as to make sure it was sensitive to issues parents who have gone this route and surrogates may have faced.
3. Initially, when I decided I was going to write parentlock, I knew I didn't want to have John and Sherlock raising John and Mary's child without her. That would require removing her from the story in a way I wasn't comfortable with, either killing her off or divorce or something. But in my attempt to not do harm to a canon female character, I totally erased the identity of an OFC. I didn't even think about that in this light until now.
4. I really wanted to concentrate on Sherlock's emotional turmoil in this (so I'm really glad that growth came across and was a good read for you)and Holmestice was a real time crunch for me this time around, so I knew I needed to get that growth and them give him the pay off of a baby. I'm sure there's a whole second 10k story that one could write about the pregnancy process.
5. I find your reading of the pull of genetics behind Sherlock's desires very interesting. Genetics mean next to nothing to me but I knew that the more hard science approach might mean a lot to Sherlock. Personally, I think he conflates the genetic tie to John with the desire to love a little person that someone you love has created. They aren't necessarily the same thing but for Sherlock who loves so few people, and who is genuinely loved by few people as well, adopting a child that he has no evidence that he can love or that will love him back is too big a risk.
I hope none of these points reads as defensive because that was not my intent at all. I love your comments and even where they point out areas that could have been done differently or better, I think they're really valuable.
Thank you!