Okay, you brought up context, so let's put a little context around this. You talk about "Hollywood's" pattern of "sexualizing women." Couple of problems with that. The first is that her character is inherently sexual. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle made her so in the original story over a hundred years ago. But more to the point, he made her smarter than the smartest fictional character ever and her sexuality becomes the least interesting thing about her in that story. Gatiss and Moffat just updated that in "Scandal in Belgravia" as someone described above.

Second, this isn't Hollywood. Sherlock is a BBC property and they aren't the hypocritical puritans over there that we have here. Yes, Pulver is naked in that scene (which basically and cleverly shows nothing). But there's a lot more nudity by BOTH sexes on British television. As the actress herself pointed out: “Martin was naked in Love Actually. Benedict is always naked – he was naked on stage in Frankenstein – so I was just joining the club."

And more to the point, what precisely was Cumberbatch SUPPOSED to say?

That it's wrong? Is it wrong when he and Martin get naked as well? Or are men the only ones allowed to take off their clothes for performances? Not to mention, publicly stating that your director and writer chose to do something and you think it's wrong? Well you won't be working long. Not to mention, Cumberbatch is renowned for NEVER saying anything negative about anyone or anything. He's like a lot of British actors: they let the work speak for itself and are reasonably surprised that we (specifically Americans) give a damn what they think.

That it's sexy as hell? It was. Because of the intellectual battle they are fighting. The fact that she's naked in that scene is not only in character, but makes the point that her nudity is not vulnerability (as it has been historically). The two of them strip each other intellectually bare and you pretty much forget that she is naked short of the plot point. Not to mention that both she and Cumberbatch are a hell of a lot sexier in that coat of his than either of them is naked.

Finally, it's obvious from the context of the quote that Cumberbatch isn't taking about the nudity itself. He's talking about the newspaper criticism of the nude scene. You yourself removed that context when you failed to include the words in CAPS below:

"Benedict Cumberbatch is shrugging off British newspaper criticism of his female co-star's nude scene in TV's latest season of 'Sherlock'.

IT MAY BE AN EFFORT TO SELL PAPERS, he said, but it also helps the drama about a modern-day Holmes that will air its second season in the United States this May on PBS' "Masterpiece Mystery!"

"It's great publicity, isn't it?"

But even the AP removed context. Here's a much fuller context from which the quote is taken:

"Pulver says, "To be honest, it’s one of two minutes in a 90 minute episode, and it’s pre the 9 o’clock BBC watershed. There is nothing that you see. It’s very suggestive. It’s very clever camerawork, and it’s just a character device. It’s not about nudity being displayed in “Sherlock.” She’s a dominatrix. Nudity is nothing to her, and I’m sure Ben will talk further, but it was no mean feat for me to shoot it being naked for eight hours in just a pair of Louboutin shoes was a challenge and one I’ve never met before, but please, Ben, go ahead..."

(Laughter)

Benedict Cumberbatch was quick to praise Pulver: "You were amazing. It takes a hell of a lot of courage to do what you did, and I think Lara’s absolutely right. There’s nothing that’s supposed to be at all sensational about it. It’s supposed to have an effect on Sherlock. It’s not supposed to be a source of stimulation for the audience. It’s supposed to throw his radar off, which is exactly what it does. It’s used as a device of character to create a situation of control, and it’s very much at the heart of their relationship, the power play between the sexes and Holmes and Miss Adler, but an overall answer to the question, it’s great publicity, isn’t it?"

(Laughter)

"I mean, if anyone wants to create a storm in a teacup over it and sell papers the size of telephone directories with sort of hot air arguments of any description, they’ve really been scraping the barrel this year, so it’s been a lot of fun to watch it come out and sort of laugh them off. I mean, the love for this goes quite far and wide, and it meets sort of all status of society. Yeah. Good luck to them for their views, and that’s fine. I think there’s an awful lot of support for the way that we did it and the taste that we did it with, and if it creates more interest than the program, thank you very much for that."I think there's an awful lot of support for the way that we did it (the scene) and the taste that we did it with. And if it creates more interest in the program, thank you very much for that."

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/smallscreen/features/article_1684317.p...

IOW, it was the newspapers which sensationalized it, and rather than getting upset about the misrepresentation of that scene, he pointed out that they were generating interest in the very thing they were damning (sight unseen, as I recall).

Look, I'm a feminist myself. And I believe it's important that we call out those who are misogynists. But we dilute our message when we start getting up in arms about things which, on closer examination, are actually about something else entirely. Cumberbatch has a track record of treating his female co-stars with great respect, and Pulver herself has called that out time after time.

A few facts:
*The character Lara Pulver is playing is based on Irene Adler, who was immensely sexually daring for her time period and yet was still a good person and got away with outsmarting Holmes. To create the same shock value it had in Victorian England, they use nudity, lesbianism, and BDSM.
*Irene does not go nude just to entice Sherlock, she does it because it keeps him from figuring her out using her clothing/grooming habits/etc. The scene is not just for titillation and ends up playing a part in the plot (the key to the safe that saves Sherlock's best friend's life is her measurements).
*In the same episode, Benedict Cumberbatch goes nude himself! Granted, it's but for a moment and all we get is shirtlessness and a flash of ass, but it's still at least a stab at equal-opportunity.

The episode IS sexist, but not because of its nudity. It's sexist due to the ending and the way Irene is drawn as a character, which takes all the agency and power out of her position and makes her subservient to Sherlock. But complaining "Oh god, a naked lady on TV!" is counterproductive.

I know that it was wrong to show such scenes before the watershed, but Cumberbatch has a point. It's good publicity, and if Lara Pulver didn't want to do the scene she wouldn't have- she's the one making the most money out of it! It's wrong to point the blame at him. He's been naked for roles too, or does that make the women on the set at the time pigs also?

I was watching Fox today and three women pundit from both aisles agreed on the "extreme sexualization of women in America" and this Cumberbatch is right up there in Hollywood with his new role in War Horse.

What a pig. Cool that he gets to make more money when a woman he works with is naked on the set.

Bend his ass over and let's all have a second to insert a dime.