Who should become the next Doctor after Whittaker?

[Kor]

I think the doctor should be reborn as a kid. That would be breaking new ground.

Kor

 

[jaime]

That isn't logic, that's pigeon holing. Someone with an alleged 200 plus IQ shouldn't need the difference explained. There is no inherent logic to the statement "I am male and therefore as a male I look to male role models"



Humans are tribal, but it is amongst the very worst qualities we possess and one of the few redeeming features of tribalism is how the parameters that define the tribe are flexible. Certainly a innate tendency towards tribalism is no defence for sexism.



False equivalence, identifying with someone and seeing them as a role model are distinct phenomena. As males we have no shortage of onscreen representation of characters we can identify with, on the contrary we already have way more than our fair share. There is no legitimate case for claiming we are underrepresented or lacking in characters to relate to.

Role models, on the other hand are something else entirely, they are about the values and principles by which that character behaves and how we choose to adopt or reject them. There is no a priori reason for such a character to bear any demographic resemblance to the viewer.



Personally I'd rather we looked for the best ones for humanity generally.

There’s much to agree with there, particularly the end part, but...
The role model/same gender argument cannot be wrong when used by one side of an argument, and right when used by the other.
‘Finally girls have a Doctor of their own’ ‘Finally they can look up to the Doctor’ ‘The new girl Ghostbusters are such an important role model for little girls’ I am paraphrasing here, but they are arguments that have been used when things like this occur (I think girl Ghostbusters are a great idea, incidentally, but the film was awful, the whole thing managed to insult a chunk of fans, be sexist to men,be sexist to women, it’s cast...the whole thing was a train wreck once we got to see it. Such a waste of effort and skill. Ok..maybe it’s not quite as bad as some believe, I’ll see if I can watch it through in one go again some day.) and if it’s going to carry no water to support one side of the argument, then it can’t carry water on the other side either, realistically.
Aside from that, I have already talked, at length, about how small children do tend towards role models that match their gender, how Doctor Who was/is/should be made with them in mind as much as it’s adult viewers, the specific unique function the Doctor had in this regard, and why that is still needed now.
I still think it’s odd that the companion (traditionally female, at least for the lead companion...excepting Jamie McCrimmon.) is not regarded as being as important as the Doctor, and why we consider them second class in that regard. They’ve certainly run even more of a gamut than the Doctor, and are more typically to absolute focal point of the episodes anyway...they are also, by design, the character with whom we are supposed to identify, what with them usually being human.

I might not agree with much of what starsuperion says sometimes, but I will defend his right to say it basically.

And since I keep swing back to staying on topic....I don’t think about who follows Jodie, I am waiting to see what she does with her turn.
However..the more I think about, the less I look forward to a crowded Tardis with whotsisname in. He’s going to be the new Mel. I can just...feel it in my bones. They’ve been wrong before mind you. Donna wasn’t as bad as I expected her to be, once she joined the series proper. Even if she and Bernard both were very much in something like their usual vein.

 

[jaime]

Boom. Yes. That’s who I’m thinking of.

She’s...an interesting person. Mainly a comedy actress rather than an outright comedienne. She also pulled a Steven Fry and quit the country in huff, which always strikes me as a bit odd (though sometimes I can see why..) she’s only ever been supporting cast in things here and there on screen (mind you David Tennant was a borderline nobody, his biggest thing being his audition for who in...sorry I mean starring role in....Casanova, before he did Who. Matt Smith more so, though they dug up his bedroom scene with Billie Piper when he got the role.)
Have never seen her in anything long enough to really find her funny. She’s in Harry Potter of course, but those films are more notable for who isn’t in them rather than is in them sometimes. All the usual suspects roll up, Cambridge footlights scattered here and there.

 

[jaime]

I think the doctor should be reborn as a kid. That would be breaking new ground.

Kor

See Dark Season, by Russell T Davies, and quake in fear as the Seventh Doctor has clearly turned into Marcie.

 

[jaime]

She told a story once about giving a blowjob to an American soldier. Before she realized she was gay. It was hilariously told.

The mind boggles. One wonders if there was a causation in there....
(I should make it clear this is entirely a joke. I am sure American Soldiers are very nice people, and that people’s sexuality is not generally formed by experiences in the way this joke implies. Of course, it’s possible Margoyles made the same joke.)

 

[Timby]

Logic..

I am male, and therefore as a male, I look to male role models.That's part of human nature, which no matter how much social engineering and education otherwise and to the contrary, mother nature always wins out. Humans are tribal, hence why we have sports, so we can root for our teams. A round peg fits into a round slot, but doesn't fit well in a square one. Not that there's anything wrong with female role models, I just identify as a male, in this lifetime, in this shell. I may come back as a female next time, who knows. But I've embraced that role in this reality, and I'm gonna find the best ones to emulate my life around for personal success.

"Root for our teams."

Jesus, your misogyny could not be more transparent.

 

[jaime]

"Root for our teams."

Jesus, your misogyny could not be more transparent.

Implying humans tribal tendencies find an outlet in team sports is mysoginistic?
I am not making assumptions about the chap, but that link seems a bit....tenuous.

 

[Marynator]

What I feel you're really missing about female role models, is you're not understanding how big a deal it is to get to be that role, which is why it's so important for women and girls.

You don't know what it's like being told "No, you can't do this", or "No, you can't be that". "No, you can't be the President, you can be the First Lady", "No, you can't be a doctor, be a nurse", "No, you can't be the hero, you're a damsel", and saying "No, you can't be the Doctor, you can be a Companion" feels oh so much the same. I don't feel you really realize what you're saying, or how much it hurts, and how what you're saying is so similar to what men have been saying and doing for so long.

These role models are so very important because they show girls "Yes, you can be the lead", you don't have to settle, or accept just what men tell you you should be grateful to get, roles they've chosen for you. And it's so important for boys to see, that yes women are worthy of respect and admiration, that yes you can look up to her, and want to be like her, and you don't have to idolize her any less just because she's not a man. I feel it would be such a wonderful role model for young boys to see a male companion aiding a woman Doctor, what a valuable lesson for him to see and learn?

I feel we should have several female Doctors in a row, so everyone can see she wasn't just a fluke or aberration or mistake, that she's just as normal as her predecessor male Doctors, and to balance out old disparity, then maybe start switching back and forth?

 

[The Laughing Vulcan]

What I feel you're really missing about female role models, is you're not understanding how big a deal it is to get to be that role, which is why it's so important for women and girls.

You don't know what it's like being told "No, you can't do this", or "No, you can't be that". "No, you can't be the President, you can be the First Lady", "No, you can't be a doctor, be a nurse", "No, you can't be the hero, you're a damsel", and saying "No, you can't be the Doctor, you can be a Companion" feels oh so much the same. I don't feel you really realize what you're saying, or how much it hurts, and how what you're saying is so similar to what men have been saying and doing for so long.

These role models are so very important because they show girls "Yes, you can be the lead", you don't have to settle, or accept just what men tell you you should be grateful to get, roles they've chosen for you. And it's so important for boys to see, that yes women are worthy of respect and admiration, that yes you can look up to her, and want to be like her, and you don't have to idolize her any less just because she's not a man. I feel it would be such a wonderful role model for young boys to see a male companion aiding a woman Doctor, what a valuable lesson for him to see and learn?

I feel we should have several female Doctors in a row, so everyone can see she wasn't just a fluke or aberration or mistake, that she's just as normal as her predecessor male Doctors, and to balance out old disparity, then maybe start switching back and forth?

I said way back up the thread that the string of male Doctors since the reboot has lasted around 10 or 12 years. That's enough time for a young fan to grow up from behind the sofa, graduate from school, and maybe even start a family of their own. That means a generation has had a continuity of role model, in terms of gender most certainly, but also in terms of storytelling style and ethos for the programme. The new generation of fans who will be starting with Jodie deserve to grow up with a constancy of role model as well.

I also said that Doctor Who isn't for us. It is for the kids, it's just a bonus that anyone old enough to vote also watches and is entertained and invested enough to post on a web forum about it. But really, our sensibilities are secondary concerns. It's more important for Doctor Who to cater for an audience who is still young enough to not had misogyny inculcated into their mindsets.

 

[jaime]

What I feel you're really missing about female role models, is you're not understanding how big a deal it is to get to be that role, which is why it's so important for women and girls.

You don't know what it's like being told "No, you can't do this", or "No, you can't be that". "No, you can't be the President, you can be the First Lady", "No, you can't be a doctor, be a nurse", "No, you can't be the hero, you're a damsel", and saying "No, you can't be the Doctor, you can be a Companion" feels oh so much the same. I don't feel you really realize what you're saying, or how much it hurts, and how what you're saying is so similar to what men have been saying and doing for so long.

These role models are so very important because they show girls "Yes, you can be the lead", you don't have to settle, or accept just what men tell you you should be grateful to get, roles they've chosen for you. And it's so important for boys to see, that yes women are worthy of respect and admiration, that yes you can look up to her, and want to be like her, and you don't have to idolize her any less just because she's not a man. I feel it would be such a wonderful role model for young boys to see a male companion aiding a woman Doctor, what a valuable lesson for him to see and learn?

I feel we should have several female Doctors in a row, so everyone can see she wasn't just a fluke or aberration or mistake, that she's just as normal as her predecessor male Doctors, and to balance out old disparity, then maybe start switching back and forth?

Except in the UK, the head of state is a Queen atm, and none of us are ever going to be that unless she’s our Nan, or we somehow have a very odd war. Prime Minister, next step down, is currently on its second female incumbent, and while we should get few more in the commons, great strides are being made. I think we are probably within ten years of a female Bishop, probably within twenty of a female Archbishop (by the glacial pace of the older religious groups, that’s bloody fast.) female Doctors are ten a penny in my experience (all but one out of about eight at my local surgery) and there’s quite a few surgeons too at the local hospital...you can include one transexual in that figure, too. Male nurses are a thing here, barely worthy of comment at this point (see Rory for more info, it wasn’t unusual having a male nurse in TV drama either....Casualty practically starred one for a decade or more.) Almost none of what you mention is considered socially acceptable in the UK really, hasn’t been for some time in most fields (though I have been on the receiving end of some ‘oh it would be better if mum was the stay at home parent not you’ statements, so some are clearly tough nuts to crack.) and certainly is not acceptable by law in the UK.
While we do like to put some of our television roles on a pedestal (Blue Peter presenters are like saints, Doctor Who’s, Doctor Who Girls -as I think the tabloid calls them, usually ignoring any male companions - all sort of just one tier below royalty, able to create misty eyed nostalgia for days gone by and be used as primitive dating system for our lives. Oh..Blue Peter Pets too. I am Goldie generation by the way.) I think it’s not exactly a thing to hold up in this case. This idea that ‘the next five, the next seven’ ‘should’ be women too is anything but a ‘that’ll show em’ kind of thing.
For some people, being the Doctor is dream, one few of us, male or female, will ever get (I bet twenty years ago Tennant and Capaldi would have thought their dream was dead. I am surprised Tennant didn’t stay for longer.) and for some, it’s just a job (Ecclestone, Tom Baker at the time, Troughton...Davison to an extent. Smith when he got the role.)
For Jodie...hmm. I suspect it’s just a job working with a writer she likes writing with. I would love to see an interview showing otherwise, just because it would be interesting to hear her view on the character.

But then I’ve talked about the soft power of the role before, talked about how the companions are as important as the Doctor in general terms, and talked about why the Doctor is a very specific figure, and why that perhaps should have been left as is already. None of it comes from some hidden misogyny, none of it comes without thinking very hard about it from the point of view you describe. There is only one Doctor I suppose, so depending how you see the character, you are going to come it from different perspectives.

 

[starsuperion]

I’m really only addressing your point about late era Moffat writing here but...

Look again at the subtexts. Moffat pushes ‘good dads’ and ‘dads protecting their children’ way up, in a way not seen since James Potter got wiped out on his doorstep trying to protect his wife and child. That’s a powerful and good thing to see on TV, and people criticised the hell out of at least one of those episodes, without getting how good. Rain resisting the cyberisation actually is. Fuck those criticisms. I’m a dad and I punched the air. Because yes, we would tear the cybercontroller a new one for our kids, and not stop till you could stamp Pepsi on it’s side and use it to serve cold beverages.
The emoticon aliens episode was borderline ‘right wing’ propaganda. ‘You want to come live here, in this utopia thes guys built...admittedly with some of your resources...well, you are gonna have to pay rent, and forgive the fact that a (software) generation ago, something these guys in front of you have no memory of and didn’t benefit from, killed your ancestors due to mistakes made by the system in charge, and be good neighbours’. I still don’t know how that (a) got past the fandom and (b) actually makes me feel. They even had the lead family be played by Continental Indian big name stars.
The Zygon Inversion also plays really really hard with politics, with integration being the thing that is most important to not killing each other.
The monks is totally about the danger of having your history rewritten under you, and the dangers of letting a powerful group take that control, with your consent, on the promise of some great fear. That’s a smack hitting the left and the right.
There’s highlighting of the idea of Victorian Britain as a Matriarchy and as a Colonising force that nonetheless integrated its subjects in...whatever that Gatiss episode on Mars was. Which also comments on all sorts things as it goes...bravery, the idea of being forced by a system to commit acts that you know are wrong.
Moffat generally plays it right down the centre, mocking overt statements as he goes, and I am surprised there hasn’t been more outcry at these and other things that swoop under the radar. I love that Rory punched Hitler and stuck him in a cupboard, it’s great...the only good thing in the episode really...when the Doctor smacks the racist in the one on the frozen Thames. His stuff around gender and regeneration has been a bit fuzzy (Missy going all ‘trap’ to borrow a term I only really know from video game controversies. Is gender change a choice in regeneration? Is it as rare as it seems to be, and possibly only a side effect of being in a second cycle of regenerations? That’s what seems to be suggested on screen by events, even if dialogue muddies the waters.)
Moffat is a small c conservative, possibly big C too...his writing on Coupling back in the day also presents him as someone the prefers the middle ground of politics. (Labour supporters as the evil empire, and conservatives as the rebel alliance...because you can’t still be the underdog when your party is in power.) Everytime he did something ‘virtue signalling’ he either did it organically, or made fun of it at the same time. He’s a difficult one to judge, and I think he gets attacked but the right and the left because they both think he’s on the other side. Poor sod.

Craig. Not rain. Effing spellcheck.

Moffat at times contradicts himself too. While saying to Bill that Time Lord's have no concept of Gender, all the while making Hartnell stand in be a sexist bigot in the Christmas Special. The Smack bottom comment was forced as well, seeing as only family may at times speak to each other in that way, given in context it was Susan he was arguing with, a child and grand daughter. Show me anywhere Hartnell's Doctor did the same outside of that one scene. In addition, it wasn't Hartnell asking for sandwiches in the 5 Doctors, that line was another stand in. I felt like the writing in the Christmas Special was presented to play to the #me too movement and sexism tropes paving the way for the first female doctor, already making a mockery of Hartnell's legacy. I'm sure he would be horrified today to see his legacy tarnished in such a way.

 

[Captaindemotion]

Boom. Yes. That’s who I’m thinking of.

In a Whovian context, I’ve also seen her named in a sort of parallel universe thread where the Doctor was always played by women - she was the mirror Tom Baker. Great nomination, IMHO.

 

[Marynator]

But you see, despite all you're saying, I'm still so very hurt to see people who are so upset a woman is the new Doctor. I feel this tells me it's not so rosy as you're saying? You don't have to hear people actually saying those things, I mean it's what actions say, how we're shown and instructed from youth.

You say you have no hidden misogyny, but that's not what I'm hearing when you say you don't want a woman Doctor. I feel you're saying to me "A Companion is good enough for you". Why? If a Companion is so wonderful, then why not a male Companion and a female Doctor? If what you say is true, shouldn't it not matter to you? I mean, you can say as much as you want, but at the end all I'm really hearing is "I only want male Doctors because he's a male institution". I don't feel we'll have equality until every single last male institution is torn down and rebuilt.

When you say "A woman shouldn't be this, men only" you're being sexist, however you rationalize it.

 

[starsuperion]

That isn't logic, that's pigeon holing. Someone with an alleged 200 plus IQ shouldn't need the difference explained. There is no inherent logic to the statement "I am male and therefore as a male I look to male role models"



Humans are tribal, but it is amongst the very worst qualities we possess and one of the few redeeming features of tribalism is how the parameters that define the tribe are flexible. Certainly a innate tendency towards tribalism is no defence for sexism.



False equivalence, identifying with someone and seeing them as a role model are distinct phenomena. As males we have no shortage of onscreen representation of characters we can identify with, on the contrary we already have way more than our fair share. There is no legitimate case for claiming we are underrepresented or lacking in characters to relate to.

Role models, on the other hand are something else entirely, they are about the values and principles by which that character behaves and how we choose to adopt or reject them. There is no a priori reason for such a character to bear any demographic resemblance to the viewer.



Personally I'd rather we looked for the best ones for humanity generally.

Fascinating...

Each of your suppositions can be discredited by concrete scientific studies and data. Unfortunately I am currently on lunch and my phone, otherwise I would provide links to the studies that show real scientific research that supports my position.

Please don't use my intelligence as a slight against me, that's a bit too much for polite conversation. You don't have to explain anything to me, while there's concrete data that you may want to read to get the truth of what I am espousing.

Now to your last statement, that is subjective and a preference you choose to follow, and anecdotal as it is, is not a reflection of all humanity. It is how you wish to see the world, but how you wish to see reality is not reality itself. But you're entitled to your preference as a free thinking individual, and thus your own personal experience and suppositions tho different from mine should be respected regardless of our differences.

 

[Spot261]

The role model/same gender argument cannot be wrong when used by one side of an argument, and right when used by the other.
‘Finally girls have a Doctor of their own’ ‘Finally they can look up to the Doctor

I haven't, we aren't collectively coming as a feminist bloc so to speak. I'd absolutely hold the differentiation between representative and role model to be ubiquitous.

That being said, as @Marynator points out, we really have to view this in the context of the genuine existing imbalance and how important this is to females. We males have such a huge over representation in terms of show leads it seemingly threatens some men to see an outlier, no matter how little difference it makes to the overall statistical trend. This really matters to female viewers and frankly we can afford to lose one male lead.

Aside from that, I have already talked, at length, about how small children do tend towards role models that match their gender

Do tell that to my four year old son who watches My Little Pony or my ten year old daughter who is Harry Potter obsessed.

The Smack bottom comment was forced as well, seeing as only family may at times speak to each other in that way,

What?

 

[starsuperion]

But you see, despite all you're saying, I'm still so very hurt to see people who are so upset a woman is the new Doctor. I feel this tells me it's not so rosy as you're saying? You don't have to hear people actually saying those things, I mean it's what actions say, how we're shown and instructed from youth.

You say you have no hidden misogyny, but that's not what I'm hearing when you say you don't want a woman Doctor. I feel you're saying to me "A Companion is good enough for you". Why? If a Companion is so wonderful, then why not a male Companion and a female Doctor? If what you say is true, shouldn't it not matter to you? I mean, you can say as much as you want, but at the end all I'm really hearing is "I only want male Doctors because he's a male institution". I don't feel we'll have equality until every single last male institution is torn down and rebuilt.

When you say "A woman shouldn't be this, men only" you're being sexist, however you rationalize it.

I am not saying I don't want a woman Doctor, I'm saying that the way it's been done is disingenuous, and that I'd have preferred a different actress have gotten the role. My reasoning may make you feel like it's the misogyny or sexism, but it's not. Reading into my posts isn't on me, it's how you're taking my texts, and is not what I've been saying all along.

 

[starsuperion]

I haven't, we aren't collectively coming as a feminist bloc so to speak. I'd absolutely hold the differentiation between representative and role model to be ubiquitous.

That being said, as @Marynator points out, we really have to view this in the context of the genuine existing imbalance and how important this is to females. We males have such a huge over representation in terms of show leads it seemingly threatens some men to see an outlier, no matter how little difference it makes to the overall statistical trend. This really matters to female viewers and frankly we can afford to lose one male lead.



Do tell that to my four year old son who watches My Little Pony or my ten year old daughter who is Harry Potter obsessed.



What?

Yea, in the Xmas special, the 1st Doctor stand-in says that to Bill.

 

[Marynator]

I don't know if you've said that specifically starsuperion, I wasn't really trying to address anyone specifically, but whomever was reading my reply to think about.

Oh I had such a thought, if you're talking about how wonderful a role model the Doctor is for boys, well wouldn't it be just such a lovely example for him to see his hero do the right thing and step aside so a woman can have her turn in the spotlight? You say he's a role model, what lessons is he teaching?

 

[Spot261]

Each of your suppositions can be discredited by concrete scientific studies and data. Unfortunately I am currently on lunch and my phone, otherwise I would provide links to the studies that show real scientific research that supports my position.

Oh please do. Given that we are waving unverified real world credentials around it is worth mentioning in a previous career I was a published evolutionary psychologist and part of Robin Dunbars research team at Liverpool. Please do explain to me in great and patronising length anyway though.

Please don't use my intelligence as a slight against me, that's a bit too much for polite conversation. You don't have to explain anything to me, while there's concrete data that you may want to read to get the truth of what I am espousing.

Given I haven't been so crass as to wave my own IQ around on the internet, do lose the wounded victim act. It is you that has been patronising by bringing the whole concept into play. Entirely aside from most of us being entirely aware of the considerable limitations of IQ testing as an empirical tool, it seemingly hasn't occurred to you that my own might well be at the upper end of the distribution. As it happens it is, I just don't really read anything into it.

 

[Kor]

I'm male as well, and the character in recent SF&F that I have absolutely related to the most has been Rey from the new SW sequels!

Kor