1,933 posts
|
Post by LaLuPone on Jul 17, 2017 8:46:46 GMT
Right warning in advance, this post is going to be a bit weird.
Now in terms of humans, gender identity has nothing to do with sexual preference, as in you can have a trans man who likes other men and a trans woman who likes other women. So what I'm trying to get at here is if there's a male companion next year and a love interest storyline between Jodie and the companion (which there probably will be, I'm sure there'll be at least a kiss), that technically makes the doctor bisexual. Not that I'd have any problem with this but I'm just thinking how's that going to go across with other people and the media, especially the Daily Mail! Wow, I never thought I'd be discussing Doctor Who's sexuality on a forum about theatre 😂
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 8:50:40 GMT
I mean hasn't the Doctor always been Pansexual anyway? (given that with the humans it's inter-species as well?)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 8:53:34 GMT
I don't see why there has to be any kind of romantic storyline, or even a kiss. In fact, if I were writing the first female Doctor, I'd go out of my way to keep everything platonic. It'd be a bit of a case of one step forward, two steps back if we were to finally get a woman in the main role, but refuse to move past the idea that woman can only exist in a story if romance is involved!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 8:55:18 GMT
One of the very nice things about Capaldi's tenure is that there's been no romantic overtones/undertones. Don't get me wrong I've enjoyed aspects of that before (Martha's unrequited love was a great storyline) but it's also nice not to have the 'OMG I fancy the Doctor' element too. If I were Chinball I'd give her a male companion of approximately the same age or older even and just have them merrily bumbling about space and time together.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 9:01:11 GMT
I agree. I think a male companion for Jodie with the dynamic of the Doctor and Donna would be ideal. It gets a bit boring with the companions fluttering their eyes at the Doctor all the time.
Or else. Simply forget the wiping the memory thing and just bring back Catherine Tate as Donna who was quite simply THE best companion ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 9:41:30 GMT
Listening to the Five Live phone in (at times with seething anger, to be frank, at people supposedly like me - white, male, fifties) I think I understand what the problem is for some of them. It's that they have constructed their identity around certain points that, if taken away, are forcing them to question what they had thought settled and they sure as hell are not going to accept that they even have to contemplate that question. This was further shown by a father saying that his young son was upset as he had clearly built his fragile youthful identity on such supposed certainties. A hundred years ago, that attitude was going to serve someone like him well throughout life but the changes in work patterns, the equalisation of gender through contraception etc., the technology that now confronts us with a revelation of otherness that would otherwise be lost to us/them, that is foolish and a barrier to contentment in the 21st century.
It is political, it is very political and, yes, links absolutely wth the generational divides that brought us the Brexit vote, Trumpism and the 2017 election. As to why I feel so out of step with many of my generation, that gap was always there, with that presumption of dominance. Not for me, but having always had male and female role models equally, of never buying into the white male dominance narrative, this current age feels like a vindication. History has winners and losers, it's nice to get towards the latter end of my time here and feel that I am neither emblematic of a dominant culture or feel excluded from the inclusiveness of the new one.
What you hear from those who are ranting at this, is the cry of those who cling to old certainties in a new uncertain world.
|
|
1,584 posts
|
Post by anita on Jul 17, 2017 9:45:32 GMT
Who cares?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 9:47:38 GMT
Clearly a fair few of us given there's 9 pages of discussion.
I don't give a fig about Game of Thrones but I don't post in that thread just to demonstrate how little I care...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 9:50:24 GMT
Oh no, have we been doing it wrong? Am I committing a tremendous faux-pas by not going into the Wimbledon thread to moan about how much I don't really care for tennis?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 9:52:16 GMT
Damnit I could have had 2 weeks of shouting "Balls! Balls!" in that thread. Which actually isn't unlike the Fanboy Dr Who rants now I think of it...
|
|
1,584 posts
|
Post by anita on Jul 17, 2017 9:56:22 GMT
Sorry I just couldn't resist winding you all up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 9:59:57 GMT
'No balls, please'
Sue Barker missing an obvious response to the reveal, there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 10:12:35 GMT
Okay so I just went on Gallifrey Base to see if everyone was as thrilled about the 13th Doctor announcement as I am, and now I'm starting to see what you were all talking about a few pages back  I think by mostly reading threads that were purely factual (when's the next series gonna be on, who's writing for it etc) I managed to avoid the brunt of it but there has been some truly horrendous stuff said. I feel for Jodie and I hope that the powers at the BBC were wise enough to advise her not to google her own name, or pop online to see what people are saying. Having said that, I do think the lovely comments outnumber the nasty ones by at least three to one. One of the things that's mildly annoyed me about Series 10 (the most recent series) is the "bite-sized social justice". Social justice issues were frequently explored, but instead of being with nuance over the course of an episode or a couple of episodes, it would be via a smug retort between two characters of a few lines, and then everyone would move on. The worst offender for this was Thin Ice, where they had the opportunity to tell a coherent and meaningful story about 19th Century racism but instead laced it with two dimensional supporting characters and self-congratulatory little comments every few minutes. My point is, the next Doctor is going to be a woman. If she goes back in time she will face misogyny and nastiness from people, and she will not be able to command the same respect as her twelve predecessors. PLEASE, PLEASE let this be actually explored rather than by having the companion go "ha, even in 1879 they still had broflakes" and then Jodie respond "masculinity has always been fragile, if it wasn't, why do you think they'd need to hate women so much?" (Actually I'm gonna write that down because that's quite a nice exchange). But I'm sure you get my point. We need stories based around issues, not issues popping up whenever a convenient joke surfaces. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 10:48:45 GMT
So what I'm trying to get at here is if there's a male companion next year and a love interest storyline between Jodie and the companion (which there probably will be, I'm sure there'll be at least a kiss), that technically makes the doctor bisexual. Not that I'd have any problem with this but I'm just thinking how's that going to go across with other people and the media, especially the Daily Mail! Torchwood had Captain Jack Harkness, who'd basically shag anything with a spine. Half the time he wasn't even that discriminating. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 11:21:13 GMT
So what I'm trying to get at here is if there's a male companion next year and a love interest storyline between Jodie and the companion (which there probably will be, I'm sure there'll be at least a kiss), that technically makes the doctor bisexual. Not that I'd have any problem with this but I'm just thinking how's that going to go across with other people and the media, especially the Daily Mail! Torchwood had Captain Jack Harkness, who'd basically shag anything with a spine. Half the time he wasn't even that discriminating. Did they even need a spine?  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 11:55:01 GMT
Torchwood had Captain Jack Harkness, who'd basically shag anything with a spine. Half the time he wasn't even that discriminating. Did they even need a spine? Nah ...the more bendy the better!!
Favourite tweet today was the bloke who said 'Dr Who should never be wank fodder' and the woman who replied 'I've got some bad news for you...'
|
|
239 posts
|
Post by dizzieblonde on Jul 17, 2017 12:56:32 GMT
Did they even need a spine? Nah ...the more bendy the better!!
Favourite tweet today was the bloke who said 'Dr Who should never be wank fodder' and the woman who replied 'I've got some bad news for you...'
it really is fascinating to see the reactions - and look at it from a male v female fan perspective. Female fans are entirely used to their media being presented in a 'male' format, and having to adapt their 'fannish' behaviour to what they are presented with. So, if it's a male hero, this is being presented to the girls as 'you want to be WITH him' (even if the Doctor was - mostly - a character that didn't spend a lot of time on sexual/romantic interactions) and for the male eye 'you want to BE him'. That reversal is clearly proving very, very difficult for some fans - and I'm not saying that's the reason for everyone's reticence, it just explains quite a lot of the reactions - where men are saying it's 'ruined their childhoods' etc, because they can't reconcile the media they treated as hero worship, and the stuff they reacted to as a 'desire' thing, usually hot women in a very definite 'non-hero/damsel' role. I suspect there will be a lot of scholarly (and pop-psychology!) essays written about this, but it does appear to boil down to some version of the 'toxic masculinity' thing - that has led little (and big) boys to only accept media images that don't threaten their masculinity. So, for a young boy in the 60's, 70's and clearly even today, he is taught that it's 'OK' to like Doctor Who, because he's an acceptable hero for men (especially the nerdier ones!). Now though, girls of all ages have actual heroes, who are the same gender as them, and gives them those greater aspirations. Can boys like that female hero for exactly the same reasons as the girls will? - of course, but there's a whole section of society who will ridicule them for it. That's why you end up with massive backlashes against all-female Ghostbusters, and all of the recent movies and TV that have female heroes, without the need to reduce them into the romantic role. Is this kind of affirmative action the way to go? - plenty of opinions, but you'd have to convince me that the quality of the media being produced is specifically reduced, purely because of a female hero. Because, that's the argument here isn't it? People are threatening to switch off because 'it won't be as good as before'. So, I guess the proof is in the pudding! We just have to wait - and endure the battling different sides of the fandom until then! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 13:07:24 GMT
Thing is, as we get a female Doctor, odds are good we'll get a male companion. Up until now, boys have been able to see themselves as the Doctor while girls have been able to see themselves as the companion, and if you look at most of the companions (especially since 2005), they've been reasonably ordinary people who've been brave and brilliant and compassionate, while the Doctor has always been a quirky genius but an alien one. Not only am I excited to see girls FINALLY getting to see themselves in the title role, I'm excited that boys will now be able to see themselves as the ordinary people who save the universe anyway. The companion has always been the way into the Doctor's universe for the audience anyway. Far too much genre fiction has revolved around the idea of a Chosen One, bring back the stories about ordinary people who aren't special but who step up to the plate anyway. The companions have been a great example of that (apart from Moffat's irritating insistence on making Amy and Clara mysteries to be solved first and rounded individuals as a distant second), and it's going to be great for boys to have that experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 13:09:11 GMT
I think I prefer the angry-shouty-Daily-Fail types because at least you know where you are with them. Those decrying it in the name of some 'higher purpose' of Male role models, and dressing it up in intellectualism can frankly do one. A friend of mine wrote a 2000 word article on just that and as much as I try (and I really did) to see it from her point of view, I honestly cannot see how making gender of the Doctor flexible is 'toxic' for young boys. Sigh.
Meanwhile back to the nob jokes and Daily Fail types...far more entertaining.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 13:13:36 GMT
Also- bouncing off Baemax's points, I don't see this as the same as the say Ghostbusters gender-switch. We might get 2 years of a girl then back to a boy etc. All it does is make it flexible so in theory we can go one on one off as it were...I just don't GET how that is bad for boys and role models.
We've had super-awesome girl companions almost consistently. Even the bad ones have been good compared to a lot of TV. We've had one really great male one so far (in new-Who) in the form of Rory (super supportive partner, Male nurse, clever bloke didn't rely on beating folk up) so now we get to have hopefully another Rory and another and another etc. How is that taking anything away? it's giving boys another type of role model. You don't have to be the hero every single time to be the hero is also a valuable lesson. (one girls have had 50 years of in Who thanks very much)
|
|
19,799 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 17, 2017 13:13:45 GMT
Oh well, Jodie will probs go and get herself pregnant and leave a bloke to take over again anyway  |
|
19,799 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 17, 2017 13:14:12 GMT
(That was a joke, do not come for me!)
|
|
19,799 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 17, 2017 13:14:42 GMT
(Shows how men's minds work though eh ) |
|
19,799 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Jul 17, 2017 13:16:13 GMT
Actually there's a new plot twist for you. Mrs Who gets pregnant and gives birth to a new Time Lord (or Lady).
No?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2017 13:18:41 GMT
Actually there's a new plot twist for you. Mrs Who gets pregnant and gives birth to a new Time Lord (or Lady). No? Is she having it with another Timelord? because last I heard the Doctor was the last...unless Missy comes back again...and that's messy. Unless John Simm does....
Oh Christ my head hurts.
|
|
