Who should become the next Doctor after Whittaker?

[Professor Zoom]

Are you arguing it is not progressive to have less/no discrimination against gay people?

I'm not arguing the progressiveness of hiring gay people. I was pointing out to you there's a difference between gay people and women. As in, just because you are hiring gay people doesn't magically excuse you from a lack of women hires. Just like hiring gay people wouldn't absolve you of not hiring people of color.

Do you not understand the part of the sentence that says ‘if not always behind scenes’ ? Let me clarify it, it means that I was saying it was not particularly progressive behind the scenes. But it was fairly progressive by the standards of its time.

Then, THAT is a language barrier between you and I. In the US, it means, in the context of the sentence, It IS progressive behind the scenes.

Regardless, I would argue, it may be progressive by the standards of the time it was created, but it isn't progressive by modern standards. Certainly in regards to female hires.

Yes, the BBC does have a fair amount of sway over who writes for the show...you may notice they are all writers with previous Who experience, or previous TV/film experience, often with a fair chunk of BBC experience in there too. Even the Star name writers. The BBC boys club is entirely a thing.

A BBC boys club... hm... And what would it take to puncture a BBC Boys club? Perhaps making an effort? Perhaps SPECIFICALLY hiring a woman?

One could even extend the argument... the casting has been a BBC boys club... Hmmm... I wonder how one could change that? Could it be... by specifically hiring a woman to play a Shape Changing Alien?

Joss Whedon and Buffy were considered very progressive. Let’s see how that’s shaken out recently... hypocrisy is a thing. I don’t condone it, but then, at no point am I arguing for less women on the production staff. I can probably name several who I think should be on there, without thinking too hard about it.

Hypocrisy IS a thing. That's what I'm trying to get you to see. The hypocrisy in your posts.

Woke...isn’t it some piece of slang people borrow from an oppressed subculture to show how hip they are to social issues?

*Insert Krysten Ritter Mega Eye Roll here....*

My OWN ideas? Are you suggesting I am somehow mistaken by believing all people should be equal on some very intrinsic level? Again, you come at this with a wrong, and frankly offensive assumption.

No.... I don't think you are mistaken in your beliefs, where did I say that? I AM saying that I think you talk about equal treatment and yet keep coming back to the old canard, "but what about the BOYS?! Who will be a role model for the boys!?"

So, again, I don't think you are mistaken in your belief that all people should be treated equal. I'm saying you don't post that. I'm saying you are blind to the fact that not all things ARE equal. I'm saying you are being hypocritical in your stated beliefs.

Read the words, don’t twist them to suit the assumption.

I AM reading your words. I've even quoted them back to you.

 

[jaime]

I'm not arguing the progressiveness of hiring gay people. I was pointing out to you there's a difference between gay people and women. As in, just because you are hiring gay people doesn't magically excuse you from a lack of women hires. Just like hiring gay people wouldn't absolve you of not hiring people of color.



Then, THAT is a language barrier between you and I. In the US, it means, in the context of the sentence, It IS progressive behind the scenes.

Regardless, I would argue, it may be progressive by the standards of the time it was created, but it isn't progressive by modern standards. Certainly in regards to female hires.



A BBC boys club... hm... And what would it take to puncture a BBC Boys club? Perhaps making an effort? Perhaps SPECIFICALLY hiring a woman?

One could even extend the argument... the casting has been a BBC boys club... Hmmm... I wonder how one could change that? Could it be... by specifically hiring a woman to play a Shape Changing Alien?



Hypocrisy IS a thing. That's what I'm trying to get you to see. The hypocrisy in your posts.



*Insert Krysten Ritter Mega Eye Roll here....*



No.... I don't think you are mistaken in your beliefs, where did I say that? I AM saying that I think you talk about equal treatment and yet keep coming back to the old canard, "but what about the BOYS?! Who will be a role model for the boys!?"

So, again, I don't think you are mistaken in your belief that all people should be treated equal. I'm saying you don't post that. I'm saying you are blind to the fact that not all things ARE equal. I'm saying you are being hypocritical in your stated beliefs.



I AM reading your words. I've even quoted them back to you.

The BBC boys club is much more than gender. It’s about class and politics. You can spend the next fifty years with a Doc in a Frock (a line from a poem in a very old fanzine talking about this very thing...I think it was an issue of Skaro.)

As to the role model thing....go and find me a male character in popular entertainment, today or whenever really, but especially today, who stands for the things the Doctor does, in the way the Doctor does. Find me a specifically non-violent figure, who says it’s good to learn things and that might does not equal right. Just one. I’ll be nice, and won’t even limit you to UK TV, though that would be appropriate. Let me know when you find one.
Then you can tell me, when we worry about ‘Toxic Masculinity’, when kids are stabbing or beating ten shades out of each other, when violence is seen as so inherently Male, why a figure like the one that is no doubt on the tip of your tongue, a figure who doesn’t judge by skin, in form or colour, might be very useful in helping show young impressionable kids that there is another way.
Oh, and by the way, religious figures don’t count....I very much doubt you want us all in churches somehow.

It’s not an old canard, how can it be? There’s been a female Doctor for all of three minutes or however long she was on screen.

It’s simply that you conflate the thinking that ‘maybe it’s not a good idea’ with sexists, because some of the voices against it are. You assume I am sexist because I don’t think it’s a good idea, so you try to prove I am sexist. Which is doomed to failure, because I am not, because it’s possible to hold this opinion, in this subject, and not hold it for the reason you assume. You forever widen your perceived bigotry in myself and others wider, which is also totally doomed, because this silly discussion isn’t about race, or sexuality, it’s not even really about gender equality in the wider world...it’s about one specific character. Being the Doctor isn’t like being a chief exec, or ruling a country, holding religious office or having hard power. There’s no ‘turns’ there’s no great triumph, this whole battle amongst fandom is total ‘first world problems’ but we live in a neatly polarised world now, with no nuance.
The only power inherent in the Doctor is as an icon, a symbol, a role model. And if the logic is that the character has to be female for women to identify with it, then the logic means the character must be male for men, or mor importantly boys, to identify with it. Now, for adults, I don’t agree in the slightest, but for children? Yes, generally speaking they gravitate along those lines. So now I ask, which group in the UK needs that figure more? Which has the deficit? Who is being told ‘you can be anything, you don’t need to be physically strong, you don’t need to respond with violence to achieve your goals’ and who isn’t? Who has positive role models available, and who doesn’t?

Is any of that the end of the world?
No.
It’s Doctor Who, not the pope, and we already have a queen, a prime minister, religious leaders etc so I think most of us are quite comfortable with women in authority. Many of us grew up with just a mum, or mostly just a mum, so why would we even question the idea? Who honestly believes a woman can’t be an authority anymore? Surely there’s somewhere else we can look and see ‘that’s how to be a good man when I grow up’...ah. Well. Maybe that soft power is important, and maybe it should be in a few more places, rather than vanishing.
But...I like Jodie about as much as I did Tennant or Smith in their first flush, and I liked Capaldi less. So maybe, really, I don’t mind, and will see what a good job she does before I worry about who’s going to fill her trousers and how in a flash of light four years from now.
But it’s not an amazing world changing idea, and from one perspective, it’s possibly a bad idea. And a bit more empathy, and less rage, would make that obvious. At the very least, a wider grasp of the ultimately insignificant character we are talking about wouldn’t go amiss either.
*shrug*
But what would I know. I’ve only watched the program since I was about two, just a little bit before my parents divorce.

 

[Professor Zoom]

The BBC boys club is much more than gender. It’s about class and politics. You can spend the next fifty years with a Doc in a Frock (a line from a poem in a very old fanzine talking about this very thing...I think it was an issue of Skaro.)

Are you suggesting one shouldn't try?

As to the role model thing....go and find me a male character in popular entertainment, today or whenever really, but especially today, who stands for the things the Doctor does, in the way the Doctor does. Find me a specifically non-violent figure, who says it’s good to learn things and that might does not equal right. Just one. I’ll be nice, and won’t even limit you to UK TV, though that would be appropriate. Let me know when you find one.

Why do I have to look for male character? Are you saying boys can't look up to women? If so, what does that say about the boys that you know?

Then you can tell me, when we worry about ‘Toxic Masculinity’, when kids are stabbing or beating ten shades out of each other, when violence is seen as so inherently Male, why a figure like the one that is no doubt on the tip of your tongue, a figure who doesn’t judge by skin, in form or colour, might be very useful in helping show young impressionable kids that there is another way.

Maybe the problem isn't a lack of MALE role models for boys, but rather this idea that boys can ONLY have role models that also have penises. Maybe if we dispense with the idea of boys can only look up to male role models, we might not have toxic masculinity.

It’s not an old canard, how can it be? There’s been a female Doctor for all of three minutes or however long she was on screen.

Sigh. The only canard "Won't someone think of the boys." You think this casting is the first time it's been used?

It’s simply that you conflate the thinking that ‘maybe it’s not a good idea’ with sexists, because some of the voices against it are. You assume I am sexist because I don’t think it’s a good idea, so you try to prove I am sexist. Which is doomed to failure, because I am not, because it’s possible to hold this opinion, in this subject, and not hold it for the reason you assume. You forever widen your perceived bigotry in myself and others wider, which is also totally doomed, because this silly discussion isn’t about race, or sexuality, it’s not even really about gender equality in the wider world...it’s about one specific character. Being the Doctor isn’t like being a chief exec, or ruling a country, holding religious office or having hard power. There’s no ‘turns’ there’s no great triumph, this whole battle amongst fandom is total ‘first world problems’ but we live in a neatly polarised world now, with no nuance.

This whole battle amongst fandom... Yes, I would agree it's a first world problem when a casting of a TV throws fanboys into fits of rage and "I won't watch it." Because, simply, there's no reason for it. A woman is playing a fiction shape changing alien.

We are polarized, I don't disagree with that. But, it's fascinating to me that when things shift a little bit, white men think the world is over. Times are changing, people aren't going to shut up when they see or hear bullshit. (Of course, you think what I'm saying is a bullshit, but that's ok.)

You are being asked to give up 1 character. Maybe for just three years, maybe more. But, 1 character, and you are treating it like it's the end of the world on this forum.

The only power inherent in the Doctor is as an icon, a symbol, a role model. And if the logic is that the character has to be female for women to identify with it, then the logic means the character must be male for men, or mor importantly boys, to identify with it.

Who says women HAVEN'T identified with the Doctor?

Now, for adults, I don’t agree in the slightest, but for children? Yes, generally speaking they gravitate along those lines.

Speaking from experience raising a kid, children model their behavior on the adults around them. They learn how to behave and what's considered right and wrong from the adults raising them.

Many of us grew up with just a mum, or mostly just a mum, so why would we even question the idea? Who honestly believes a woman can’t be an authority anymore?

I would like to think none.

Surely there’s somewhere else we can look and see ‘that’s how to be a good man when I grow up’...ah. Well. Maybe that soft power is important, and maybe it should be in a few more places, rather than vanishing.

Why can't it be "that's how to be a good person when I grow up"? Why do you suggest we only model our behavior along gender lines?

But...I like Jodie about as much as I did Tennant or Smith in their first flush, and I liked Capaldi less. So maybe, really, I don’t mind, and will see what a good job she does before I worry about who’s going to fill her trousers and how in a flash of light four years from now.

I hope you give her an honest chance. She seems incredibly talented. And I think, once her series starts, all of this "a woman can't be the Doctor" will be placed in the dustbin.

But it’s not an amazing world changing idea, and from one perspective, it’s possibly a bad idea.

Casting a woman? Maybe not for you its not world changing... but for others...?
Here in American, Black Panther was a huge deal. Not because there was a black man in a super suit, we've done that dance a couple of times. But here was a King. A well educated man of the world. Who was trying to do the right thing. And for a lot of African Americans, that was incredibly powerful.

And, boy, I feel bad for Wesley Snipes, Blade was all but forgotten in that discussion.

And a bit more empathy, and less rage, would make that obvious.

My apologies if you think that I've been raging, that's not my intent. But, it has been about empathy. I can see how important the character of the Doctor is to you as a role model, and you don't want to lose that connection. But, I would ask you to look at it from the other side, from a female perspective, how after 50 years, after all the BBC Boys Club stuff, a woman finally gets a chance at the role. That's a powerful moment for some.

At the very least, a wider grasp of the ultimately insignificant character we are talking about wouldn’t go amiss either.
*shrug*

Exactly, a wider grasp...

But what would I know. I’ve only watched the program since I was about two, just a little bit before my parents divorce.

That must've been very difficult for you. I'm sorry that happened.[/quote]

 

[Manticore]

Then, THAT is a language barrier between you and I. In the US, it means, in the context of the sentence, It IS progressive behind the scenes.

It does?

 

[starsuperion]

You previously said that the last two series felt like pandering and identity politics, but Jodie Whittaker was casted by Chris Chibnall (if I'm not mistaken, the internet wasn't that clear wether Moffat or Chibnall casted her) who wasn't involved with those previous two series at all and from what little I have seen from his previous work (I believe only early Torchwood) he didn't exactly seem like a feminist to me. Couldn't it be that he, like you, acknowledged the lack of shows staring women and wanted to cast one in the leading role for that reason? And if you acknowledge that problem and try to actively solve it, of course you have to, as you put it, "denigrate one class of people in favour of another". In order to reach that representation you have to favor the group currently unfavored, so to speak, until equality is achieved.

Moffat was working as he has said in interviews to make it possible for the new showrunner to place a woman in the role of they wanted to. The intro of Missy was the green light along with the off hand comments written about the corsair.
But his lack of experience in diversity made the last two seasons of Capaldi come off as an SJW virtue signal fest, while also throwing in some pretty nasty hits on conservative people, as if they were monsters. Chibnall to his credit writes both men and females pretty good in broadchurch and equal time is allocated for the most part. While whittaker is good in BC, I don't and never will buy that she is a good enough actress to be in the role of the Doctor. But that's my personal opinion. Chibnall should have been up front about his intentions. To lie first then admit later, coupled with the sad things Moffat did, makes the whole casting feel like it's going to be a feminist movement play story wise, and sets up a division amongst fans already, before the show even gets going. Whittaker herself has made a few blunders as well..

"Don't be afraid of my gender" the most assanine, arrogant, offensive, and condescending statement I have ever heard her utter. Referring to herself as a feminist, the next doctor who refers himself if male, to a maninist better no get any flack, because that would be the height of hypocrisy. As far as parody, is it really more important then talent? Because I doubt MLK, JR a personal fav hero of mine here in my adopted country, would beg to differ. Content of character over identity, race, creed, sexual orientation. Etc...that's not what modern SJW ism is about. They've flipped it, and that's a very dangerous situation. Hitler worked to do so against the Jews..there is a slippery slope there in that ideology. I'm worried that it gets this volatile and with all the name calling, it seems it is not ending soon. I would think some would sit back and really look at what this ideology is saying, and just not parrot someone else's ideological reasons.

 

[Professor Zoom]

It does?

*shrugs* That's how I read the sentence.

 

[EnderAKH]

Hitler worked to do so against the Jews..there is a slippery slope there in that ideology.

And the thread has gone full Godwin! Well done, everyone.

 

[starsuperion]

And the thread has gone full Godwin! Well done, everyone.

LOL, honestly this is tame by far compared to what goes on in the STD trek threads, and god forbid there be a different Enterprise.. sheesh! I think the only thing I am interested in seeing is the new TARDIS interior. pictures online will be a great satisfaction when they finally are taken.

 

[Neroon]

While good, energetic, invigorating debate is always welcomed... some of these posts are getting quite personal. We don't need to throw any water or gasoline on the discussion, at least not for now. But please make every effort to mind what terminology you use to describe your opponents. Whether by name or group

 

[Jayson1]

What seems fair to me is a lesson we all should of learned in grade school and that is you should simply share the role of Doctor between genders and races. This time it will be female and the next time male and then back to female and so forth. Star Trek has developed a good tradition of sharing since Picard. Went white male,black male, white female., white male, black female. Would be nice if the next captain was alien and then asian or latino maybe come back to white or black male and then whoever doesn't get it, gets the next role and then back to female and so forth. One benefit of these roles that will never end since these franchises will never end is you got plenty of time to keep mixing it up and offering variety.

Jason

 

[jaime]

Are you suggesting one shouldn't try?



Why do I have to look for male character? Are you saying boys can't look up to women? If so, what does that say about the boys that you know?



Maybe the problem isn't a lack of MALE role models for boys, but rather this idea that boys can ONLY have role models that also have penises. Maybe if we dispense with the idea of boys can only look up to male role models, we might not have toxic masculinity.



Sigh. The only canard "Won't someone think of the boys." You think this casting is the first time it's been used?



This whole battle amongst fandom... Yes, I would agree it's a first world problem when a casting of a TV throws fanboys into fits of rage and "I won't watch it." Because, simply, there's no reason for it. A woman is playing a fiction shape changing alien.

We are polarized, I don't disagree with that. But, it's fascinating to me that when things shift a little bit, white men think the world is over. Times are changing, people aren't going to shut up when they see or hear bullshit. (Of course, you think what I'm saying is a bullshit, but that's ok.)

You are being asked to give up 1 character. Maybe for just three years, maybe more. But, 1 character, and you are treating it like it's the end of the world on this forum.



Who says women HAVEN'T identified with the Doctor?



Speaking from experience raising a kid, children model their behavior on the adults around them. They learn how to behave and what's considered right and wrong from the adults raising them.




I would like to think none.



Why can't it be "that's how to be a good person when I grow up"? Why do you suggest we only model our behavior along gender lines?



I hope you give her an honest chance. She seems incredibly talented. And I think, once her series starts, all of this "a woman can't be the Doctor" will be placed in the dustbin.



Casting a woman? Maybe not for you its not world changing... but for others...?
Here in American, Black Panther was a huge deal. Not because there was a black man in a super suit, we've done that dance a couple of times. But here was a King. A well educated man of the world. Who was trying to do the right thing. And for a lot of African Americans, that was incredibly powerful.

And, boy, I feel bad for Wesley Snipes, Blade was all but forgotten in that discussion.



My apologies if you think that I've been raging, that's not my intent. But, it has been about empathy. I can see how important the character of the Doctor is to you as a role model, and you don't want to lose that connection. But, I would ask you to look at it from the other side, from a female perspective, how after 50 years, after all the BBC Boys Club stuff, a woman finally gets a chance at the role. That's a powerful moment for some.



Exactly, a wider grasp...



That must've been very difficult for you. I'm sorry that happened.

[/QUOTE]

My point is that I do look at it from the other side, and as to your comments on role models and identification, the very argument in favour of a female Doctor is predicated on the idea that girls can only have role models without penises. As you put it.
Aside from the fact that I don’t think that either side always needs role models of the same gender, I also accept that sometimes, to the young in particular, this is true.
Which is what leads me to the conclusion that since there are already smart, intelligent, peaceful female role models (not least as many of these traits are seen as feminine in the first place) in place, (Hermione, there’s a nice easy mainstream one) I have to conclude that the Doctor is better used as he always has been, particularly now.
After all, what will help equalitarianism more? A few thousand boys growing up to be more like the Doctor, or a few thousand girls doing the same? While I agree female instigated violence seems to be on the rise, or is at least reported more often, it is not for want of role model characters, and it seems to be considered that boys tend to emulate these things more in general. There are also far more boys without fathers (and girls without fathers) than girls (or boys) without mothers. Whilst it’s somewhat ridiculous that TV characters should fill that void, here we are regardless (teachers also skew majority female, particularly at a primary level.)
You seem to still not read what I am saying, instead putting your own spin on it through assumptions.
This position of Doctor seems to have been put up on a pedestal alongside world leaders etc, that it is a great victory for a cause to cast a woman. I am not sure either of these things can be true, or that if they are, the world is in worse shape than I thought. It’s all about stereotypes of fans I suppose. SF and F is this imaginary boys only club, at least in part because for a long time girls didn’t often like it much. And the boys who like this get all rage at their space being changed, and the girls who like to have things to fight see it as a battle. The boys and girls who have always been in it and didn’t particularly see it as a fight or some silly gendered thing carry on quietly as we always have, and wonder why these two sets of strange people are making such a ruckus and disturb our peace. It’s all ridiculous, but much of the modern era is. Binary and adversarial.

I am sure Jodie will do her best, I hope the writing team does as well, and I am certainly not angry about it etc. I have tried to answer your questions, even as you refuse to answer mine and make odd assumption. I suppose it was arrogant of me to try to gently make a point that even Peter Davison couldn’t really, but it’s a good point, and something that should inform the series as it goes on. The Doctor never alienated women (that same issue of Skaro featured a girl remembering how she used to dress up as Pertwee. I think there was a core cadre of lesbian (and gay) fans who very much used identifying with the somewhat asexual Doctor as part of their growing up.) and the idea that the character did seems to be a modern invention. Or perhaps only NuWho does. Who knows.

I wish for equality, think Women absolutely should be given a fair chance at things, much as men should be, from all backgrounds etc. We are all basically the same, and should work together. That I have to keep stating this is a sad reflection on the politicisation on the discussion of a character, that it’s ok to suggest motivations that are unpleasant, and to turn it into the front in a war that shouldn’t be.

After Jodie? I just hope there’s another Doctor.

 

[Jinn]

Moffat was working as he has said in interviews to make it possible for the new showrunner to place a woman in the role of they wanted to. The intro of Missy was the green light along with the off hand comments written about the corsair.

No complaints from me, I loved Missy.

But his lack of experience in diversity made the last two seasons of Capaldi come off as an SJW virtue signal fest, while also throwing in some pretty nasty hits on conservative people, as if they were monsters.

I don't know how exactly you define SJW, but for me an SJW is an actual leftist, and I don't think that Moffat would really fall under that category. I mean, most of the times when he attempts to do something feminist it comes off really forced or insensetive, like the transgender horse or that time the general regenerated back into a female and said something like "How do you deal with these egos", which feels like he wanted to reach out to the feminist audience, but from what I've heard he kinda failed with that. All the leftists I watch on YouTube and the few real life leftist who fans I know found that particular line rather forced. My point is, I don't think that Moffat can be accused of being an SJW. I do think that he can be accused of virtue signaling, going by the wikipedia definitions, virtue signaling being effort to do something moral to enhance one's standing in a social group, but as I said he kinda failed that and made everybody dislike it.

Chibnall to his credit writes both men and females pretty good in broadchurch and equal time is allocated for the most part. While whittaker is good in BC, I don't and never will buy that she is a good enough actress to be in the role of the Doctor. But that's my personal opinion.

I think I really should watch Broadchurch sometime... I have only ever seen Whittaker in one role, in an episode of Black Mirror, but I can't really say from that alone if I think she can play the Doctor. I do however definitely like the promotional images like this one and this one.

Chibnall should have been up front about his intentions. To lie first then admit later, coupled with the sad things Moffat did, makes the whole casting feel like it's going to be a feminist movement play story wise, and sets up a division amongst fans already, before the show even gets going.

I just read up on this on wikipedia. One thing, I kinda missed all the initial drama as I wanted to stay spoiler-free of who was casted as 13 until I actually saw the christmas special, which unfortunately failed... Anyway, I could Chibnall try to keep the casting as good a secret as possible by not giving away the character's gender. I'm also not sure if the two statements I've read are that contradictory. He said he wanted 13 to be a woman after he said tha nothing was ruled out casting wise. I could see that meaning they had a list of actors they considered for the role and the first couple of those were female, not that they exclusively casted for female actors, but I could be wrong there. I don't really know a whole lot about the Doctor Who casting process.

Whittaker herself has made a few blunders as well..

"Don't be afraid of my gender" the most assanine, arrogant, offensive, and condescending statement I have ever heard her utter. Referring to herself as a feminist, the next doctor who refers himself if male, to a maninist better no get any flack, because that would be the height of hypocrisy.

Yeah, that probably wasn't the brightest idea. She probably should have phrased it like "to all those who are skeptical of me because of my gender" and not as a statement to all fans. From what I've read about meninist that's more of a satirical thing, so I don't think it can be really equated to feminism.

As far as parody, is it really more important then talent? Because I doubt MLK, JR a personal fav hero of mine here in my adopted country, would beg to differ.

I'm really not sure what you mean by that.

Content of character over identity, race, creed, sexual orientation. Etc...that's not what modern SJW ism is about. They've flipped it, and that's a very dangerous situation.

Again, I have to disagree. Character over identity etc. is definitely the right way to go in personal situations, as in, I chose my friends by their character, not by their sexual orientation, which makes perfect sense. But when it comes to business where one group is underrepresented i have to disagree. For one in business character isn't always of the import, but skill is, but I don't think you meant that. I do believe that when two individuals have the same skill set and are considered for a job the one from the underrepresented group should be recruited. Ideally that would take a few months or so until there's equal representation and then the skill over identity thing applies. And should "feminism go too far", and sudenly men have only 40% of the jobs I would be absolutely in favor of recruting in favor of men, I just don't see that situation happening any time soon.

Hitler worked to do so against the Jews..there is a slippery slope there in that ideology. I'm worried that it gets this volatile and with all the name calling, it seems it is not ending soon. I would think some would sit back and really look at what this ideology is saying, and just not parrot someone else's ideological reasons.

Hold on, hold on, that is a wee bit radical. Hitler harbored a deep hatred for jews, believed in one race being superior to the others and was in charge of a party that was constructed to overthrow the fragile Weimar Republic the first chance they get and as effectively as possible, thereby creating a dictatorship with no freedom of press, of speech, or of assembly, one party, no unions and the full legislative and executive power, united in one person. And the NSDAP achieved that within the first six months of the Nazi regime. I think it is highly overblown to compare people, who want equal representation by preferring women to men for some time, to Hitler.

 

[jaime]

No complaints from me, I loved Missy.


I don't know how exactly you define SJW, but for me an SJW is an actual leftist, and I don't think that Moffat would really fall under that category. I mean, most of the times when he attempts to do something feminist it comes off really forced or insensetive, like the transgender horse or that time the general regenerated back into a female and said something like "How do you deal with these egos", which feels like he wanted to reach out to the feminist audience, but from what I've heard he kinda failed with that. All the leftists I watch on YouTube and the few real life leftist who fans I know found that particular line rather forced. My point is, I don't think that Moffat can be accused of being an SJW. I do think that he can be accused of virtue signaling, going by the wikipedia definitions, virtue signaling being effort to do something moral to enhance one's standing in a social group, but as I said he kinda failed that and made everybody dislike it.


I think I really should watch Broadchurch sometime... I have only ever seen Whittaker in one role, in an episode of Black Mirror, but I can't really say from that alone if I think she can play the Doctor. I do however definitely like the promotional images like this one and this one.



I just read up on this on wikipedia. One thing, I kinda missed all the initial drama as I wanted to stay spoiler-free of who was casted as 13 until I actually saw the christmas special, which unfortunately failed... Anyway, I could Chibnall try to keep the casting as good a secret as possible by not giving away the character's gender. I'm also not sure if the two statements I've read are that contradictory. He said he wanted 13 to be a woman after he said tha nothing was ruled out casting wise. I could see that meaning they had a list of actors they considered for the role and the first couple of those were female, not that they exclusively casted for female actors, but I could be wrong there. I don't really know a whole lot about the Doctor Who casting process.


Yeah, that probably wasn't the brightest idea. She probably should have phrased it like "to all those who are skeptical of me because of my gender" and not as a statement to all fans. From what I've read about meninist that's more of a satirical thing, so I don't think it can be really equated to feminism.


I'm really not sure what you mean by that.


Again, I have to disagree. Character over identity etc. is definitely the right way to go in personal situations, as in, I chose my friends by their character, not by their sexual orientation, which makes perfect sense. But when it comes to business where one group is underrepresented i have to disagree. For one in business character isn't always of the import, but skill is, but I don't think you meant that. I do believe that when two individuals have the same skill set and are considered for a job the one from the underrepresented group should be recruited. Ideally that would take a few months or so until there's equal representation and then the skill over identity thing applies. And should "feminism go too far", and sudenly men have only 40% of the jobs I would be absolutely in favor of recruting in favor of men, I just don't see that situation happening any time soon.


Hold on, hold on, that is a wee bit radical. Hitler harbored a deep hatred for jews, believed in one race being superior to the others and was in charge of a party that was constructed to overthrow the fragile Weimar Republic the first chance they get and as effectively as possible, thereby creating a dictatorship with no freedom of press, of speech, or of assembly, one party, no unions and the full legislative and executive power, united in one person. And the NSDAP achieved that within the first six months of the Nazi regime. I think it is highly overblown to compare people, who want equal representation by preferring women to men for some time, to Hitler.

Am not disagreeing with anything you say, I agree with...all of it most likely. (I don’t reD up on the controversies etc around the casting...I think Moffat is pretty centrist, and his writing subtly smacks both sides of the divide for their excesses.)
I would like to mention something like teaching here in the UK, where it’s something like eighty percent female? It’s been a while since I saw the figures. Anyway, my point is, the whole thing is a lot more nuanced than either side chanting ‘they took our jobs’ would like to admit. That’s before we look at manual labour jobs on one side of the caring professions (also pretty manual labour shaped, albeit with less heavy lifting or outdoors work) or things like clerical admin in the public sector, where there are crazy shifts and percentages.
Nuance is what’s missing, tbh. The pendulum is spinning wildly out of the control, and I hope our elected representatives can stop reacting and start being proactive about genuinely fixing things, rather than drawing battle lines and being led by their base instincts for career survival. Not much chance of that, looking in the news though. Still, chin up, brave heart and all that.

 

[Refuge]

How about a 68 year old unattractive woman? Ageism is more alive than sexism.

Honestly? That guy from Death in Paradise would have been perfect.

 

[Jayson1]

I would like to see that at some point. I wouldn't say Hellen Mirren is unattractive but she is pretty old.

Jason

 

[Jinn]

Am not disagreeing with anything you say, I agree with...all of it most likely. (I don’t reD up on the controversies etc around the casting...I think Moffat is pretty centrist, and his writing subtly smacks both sides of the divide for their excesses.)
I would like to mention something like teaching here in the UK, where it’s something like eighty percent female? It’s been a while since I saw the figures. Anyway, my point is, the whole thing is a lot more nuanced than either side chanting ‘they took our jobs’ would like to admit. That’s before we look at manual labour jobs on one side of the caring professions (also pretty manual labour shaped, albeit with less heavy lifting or outdoors work) or things like clerical admin in the public sector, where there are crazy shifts and percentages.
Nuance is what’s missing, tbh. The pendulum is spinning wildly out of the control, and I hope our elected representatives can stop reacting and start being proactive about genuinely fixing things, rather than drawing battle lines and being led by their base instincts for career survival. Not much chance of that, looking in the news though. Still, chin up, brave heart and all that.

Yeah, teachers would be one of the jobs where men lack representation and should be recruited a lot more often. I remember my grade school having literally no male teachers.

 

[Jayson1]

Yeah, teachers would be one of the jobs where men lack representation and should be recruited a lot more often. I remember my grade school having literally no male teachers.

Do people recruit teachers? I mean don't some jobs just hire whoever comes in who is qualified. I know here in Oklahoma we have a teacher shortage and I think we would hire trained chimps if they could do the job and maybe they are doing that in some of the more backward areas of the state. I know colleges at least the more respected ones and I am guessing private schools might be different.

Jason

 

[Jinn]

I think we would hire trained chimps if they could do the job

If they're male trained monkeys...

 

[jaime]

How about a 68 year old unattractive woman? Ageism is more alive than sexism.

Honestly? That guy from Death in Paradise would have been perfect.

Kris Marshall. Would have had a good shot at being able to an impression of him possibly...at least, my dad seems to think I was basically his character in My Family when I was in my early twenties. Which is about the only resemblance to that sit com. Lol.
Yeah, I think he would be good too. Somewhere closer to what gave Who it’s popularity in the Tennat/Smith years.
I hope they change Jodie’s costume after season one...it looks really...cheap and untextured. She looks like a countryfile presenter...though if they go too traditional Doctor garb, that would just be a different kind of countryfile look. Missy already nabbed the Mary Poppins get up.

 

[Professor Zoom]

How about a 68 year old unattractive woman? Ageism is more alive than sexism.

Helen Mirren popped to mind, but then, she’s not unattractive by most standards.

Do you mean physically unattractive or one with an unattractive personality?

There’s a British comedian, can’t remember her name, she might not be considered physically attractive to many, but I find her so funny and sharp that’s its hard to not find her attractive. She’s older, I would guess in her 60s, an out lesbian, a little rounder.

She would be a great Doctor. Can’t remember her damn name. She pops up on Graham Norton quite a bit.