Sherlock is actually a girl’s name.

 (Sherlock meta by notagarroter)

Can we talk about this moment a bit? I mean, really? I just finished watching my way through the entire series for the umpteenth time (really fifth, I think), and every time this scene makes me a little angrier.

I know the usual fandom reading. Everyone focuses on the previous line, “John, there’s something … I should say; I-I’ve meant to say always and then never have. Since it’s unlikely we’ll ever meet again, I might as well say it now.”

And they get their hopes up in whatever way suits them. I love you, I yearn for you, you complete me, you had me at “here, use mine.” Whatever they are picturing, it is not “Sherlock is actually a girl’s name." And so that statement is read as a joke and as a disappointment. And all the focus is on what Sherlock really meant to say.

Here’s the thing: I don’t think it’s a joke. And that makes this scene so much more heartbreaking for me.

In some sense, of course it’s a bit of a joke. But it’s not one Sherlock’s been planning for ages. It’s a response to what John said only moments earlier.

SHERLOCK: William Sherlock Scott Holmes.
JOHN: Sorry?
SHERLOCK: That’s the whole of it – if you’re looking for baby names.
(John chuckles.)
JOHN: No, we’ve had a scan. We’re pretty sure it’s a girl. (x)

Sherlock asked John to name his baby after him. And John said no, on an extremely flimsy excuse. So Sherlock asked again. And John laughed.

I don’t want to know what Sherlock "really” meant to say. I want to know, what was so damn funny about Sherlock’s request?

Of course we, the audience, know that Sherlock’s exile will only last five minutes, and he and John will be reunited shortly. But Sherlock doesn’t know that. Sherlock believes he is being sent to his certain death. And even if John doesn’t know that, Sherlock explicitly tells him “it’s unlikely we’ll ever meet again." Doesn’t that mean anything to John?

Sherlock has no children, and (there’s reason to believe) he never will. John is supposed to be the closest person in the world to him, and he has a baby on the way. Would it kill him to name this child after the most important man in his life? The man who sacrificed everything – up to and including his very life – to protect John, his wife, and his child?

Surely everyone knows that the gender argument is bullshit. My sister Karen was named for my mother’s uncle Charlie, who died in WWII. This happens ALL THE TIME. Especially after a war, many girl babies are named for recently deceased male loved ones, to honor their memory. Usually they are given feminine versions of the name – Georgina, Patricia, Josephine – but it’s not unheard of for parents to just flat out give a girl a traditionally male name, for rememberance.

And that’s not even to mention how many traditional boys’ names have been used for girls just out of fashion or whim. Paris, Dylan, Ashley. Nor to mention that "Sherlock”, being extravagantly rare as a name for any human, can’t seriously be said to have a strongly gendered association.

And then there’s Sheryl, Sherla, Sherleen, etc. if you insist on being REALLY gendered about it. Or take William and do the traditional Wilhelmina. There were LOTS of options.

Why won’t John give Sherlock this one thing? Forget the passionate kisses and grandiose declarations of undying love. This is what Sherlock asked for, and there’s every reason to believe it would mean a great deal to him. To be remembered, in a significant way, by the person he cares about the most. To have a small piece of him passed down to the next generation.

Goddammit, John. What’s the matter with you? Why won’t you name your daughter Sherlock?

I can’t even wrap my head around how wounded Sherlock must be that John laughs off his suggestion.