Nope. I will never accept a female Doctor, I'm sorry. It just seems like needless box ticking.
Sue Perkins in the series in some capacity though would be lovely, some sort of dotty academic type perhaps? Love the woman. Though I guess she's not an actress, but then neither was Kat Jenkins tbh.
Agree. It would be like Father Christmas suddenly becoming a big bosomed blonde with high heels, no legs and called Maria!
Some characters are what they are. Jane Eyre won't become James Eyre. Miss Marple won't become Mr. Marvel.
Leave these things alone.
So many disappointingly closed and vociferous minds.
Timelords are not human so any problems with gender identity are purely what us humans foist upon them.
The show itself has referenced the possibility of them regenerating as female.
Comparisons with any human characters are therefore spurious.
It is possible for the Doctor to regenerate as a female.
Any issues about that come purely from the audience's hang ups and our society's gender stereotypes. Listen to yourselves, you sound like the people who objected to the smoking ban. The ban happened and the sky did not fall in. Now everyone wonders why it didn't happen sooner and what all the fuss was about. This will be same when it happens.
If the writing and the acting's good, all will be well.
Any issues about that come purely from the audience's hang ups and our society's gender stereotypes. Listen to yourselves, you sound like the people who objected to the smoking ban. The ban happened and the sky did not fall in. Now everyone wonders why it didn't happen sooner and what all the fuss was about. This will be same when it happens.
On the contrary, the kick back appears to be mistrust in the production team — i.e. that it would be stunt casting, and that stunt casting usually indicates the poor health of a programme (c/f: Ken Dodd).
So it's not the same thing as objecting to smoking bans per se, it's the same thing as objecting to a system of government that does things just for the headlines regardless of what it actually does.
So many disappointingly closed and vociferous minds.
Timelords are not human so any problems with gender identity are purely what us humans foist upon them.
The show itself has referenced the possibility of them regenerating as female.
Comparisons with any human characters are therefore spurious.
It is possible for the Doctor to regenerate as a female.
Any issues about that come purely from the audience's hang ups and our society's gender stereotypes. Listen to yourselves, you sound like the people who objected to the smoking ban. The ban happened and the sky did not fall in. Now everyone wonders why it didn't happen sooner and what all the fuss was about. This will be same when it happens.
If the writing and the acting's good, all will be well.
You've shot yourself in the foot with that ludicrous smoking ban comparison. That legislation was brought in because the previous way of doing things was considered archaic, outdated and damaging to the public good. Unless you consider current Doctor Who to be any of those things or even in trouble then the comparison just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.
However if you do think that to be the case then you are clearly agreeing that such a move would only be taken in desperation and because there were problems with the show as it is. I happen to think its in perfectly good health and as such stupid gimmicks are not needed. And your implication that anyone who is against a female doctor is somehow 'close minded' is patently laughable.
Because some misguided if sometimes well meaning types view strongly defined, well written, classic female characters as progressive, sacred and not to,be tampered with whereas similar male characters are viewed as part of an oppressive restrictive example of patriarchy that must be challenged at all costs.
The same goes for characters from black African or ethnic minority backgrounds. There is apparently nothing wrong with a black man playing a historically white character or shoehorning historically inaccurate representations of race and culture into films and TV. But if you ever suggested a white man play Shaft? You might as well pop a white hood on your head you imperialist privileged pig.
That's absurd. What's important is the defining traits of the character.
The Doctor is an eccentric alien time traveller. There is no part of the personality or traits of the character where sex would significantly change the dynamic. Apart from his predilection for hanging out with young females, I suppose, but even that's no obstacle.
Take Miss Marple and make her male and you have Hercule Poirot. Apart from a selection of character tics, the only real difference is that he was a professional - a career only available to men at the time. And if you take the same formula and make them American, you get Columbo.
Also, there are more male leads in iconic classic fiction than female. Often female roles are striking precisely because they're written as if they were male characters - which is a real problem these days, as writers think that the only way to make a female character strong is to make them aggressive, rude and brutal.
As for Shaft being white - Shaft was originally envisaged as a black equivalent of an existing white character, James Bond. And Bond's whiteness is a product of his old-fashioned Englishness, Queen and Country and all that, top hole, toodle pip.
Nick Fury works just as well whether he's black or white.
What if he had some sort of botched regeneration, with the effects lasting several episodes?
Then they could experiment with having a female doctor and see what happened. He/she would be like a Jeckyl and Hyde type of thing, disappearing under a table to pop back up again as a female once or twice an episode (well that's not very creative I'm sure they could think of a better way than that). Might give the actors a rest too - only having to be there half the time
I don't know if it would work. I do think it is a male character and even though he's an alien there have to be some similarities to humans (that might be why he looks human in the first place) otherwise a lot of people will just switch off and we wont have a show to watch before long. I'd certainly still watch if it happened. I'd want to see how well it worked ( or didn't as the case may be). As long as we get the best actor available (male/female/black/white/in a weelchair/pink with purple polkadots) then it might just work out whatever happens.
You've shot yourself in the foot with that ludicrous smoking ban comparison. That legislation was brought in because the previous way of doing things was considered archaic, outdated and damaging to the public good. Unless you consider current Doctor Who to be any of those things or even in trouble then the comparison just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.
However if you do think that to be the case then you are clearly agreeing that such a move would only be taken in desperation and because there were problems with the show as it is. I happen to think its in perfectly good health and as such stupid gimmicks are not needed. And your implication that anyone who is against a female doctor is somehow 'close minded' is patently laughable.
I disagree. You choose to attack my parallel, rather than the central point, which was this: if/when it happens after a while everyone will wonder what the fuss was about.
I could have chosen any number of changes made in the past that are now considered common sense and left people wondering how on earth people used to think otherwise. I chose to use that one to avoid being accused of calling people bigoted (which is what would have happened if I'd used slavery or racism or women's or gay rights).
If you're not open to (this) change then what else can you be but closed minded? Not laughable at all.
Oh and you continue to assert that a female Doctor would be gimmicky. Can you not see that it would depend entirely on the quality of the writing and the actress?
Please note the absence of loaded and belittling words like "stupid", "ludicrous" and "laughable" in my argument. You use those words in place of a reasoned position. I see the "respect" you have for my position. It should be possible to have a debate without being insulting to the other's position.
Regardless of whether the Doctor should be a male or female surely the point is - why change the characters sex other than as a gimmick ? There are certain roles either in fiction or on screen (in some cases both) where the character is recognised as being male or female. For example why cast a black actor as Bond ? In the origional novels, his creator, Ian Fleming gives him a family background and description which a black actor would not and could not fit. In the Doctors case however, because the character changes then there would be no problem casting a black actor in the role, providing it was done to get the best actor available and rather than as a gimmick. In the case of changing his sex to a female then I believe this would be purely be for the gimmick reason. I do not believe there has ever been an on screen discussion where it has been established that a regenerated male timelord has developed into a female. Yes I know that when Matt became the Doctor and was examining himself he exclained "I'm a girl !" but that was more in shock than anything else. No, I am of the firm belief that the Doctor should always remain as a male character and I think it would be a huge mistake to change that. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Why cast Bond as a blonde? Plenty of people questioned that beforehand and look what happened. The quality of Craig's acting and the film made those concerns evaporate.
I want to stick to the idea of the producers casting the Doctor down to their own wishes and the actor's availability which surprises the audience, rather than it become the result of a popularity contest or campaign. Woman or no woman.
Why cast Bond as a blonde? Plenty of people questioned that beforehand and look what happened. The quality of Craig's acting and the film made those concerns evaporate.
That's hardly as fundemental a thing as a character's gender.
If Bond had been cast as a woman, I suspect there would have been an outcry.
I'm all for pushing boundaries and striving to be creative and fresh, but there are many ways to do this without changing a fundamental of the show - that the doctor is a male character.
That's hardly as fundemental a thing as a character's gender.
If Bond had been cast as a woman, I suspect there would have been an outcry.
I'm all for pushing boundaries and striving to be creative and fresh, but there are many ways to do this without changing a fundamental of the show - that the doctor is a male character.
True, and blond or not is not central to Bond's character, but you're ignoring the fact that Bond is a human character and the Doctor is not. The possibility exists for Timelords. He's alien.
Objections to the Doctor regenerating as a female are all about us and our human preconceptions and misperceptions about gender and, stemming from that, perceived risk to the success of the show.
My perception is that gender is not fundamental to the essence of the Doctor's character. If opponents think it is, what does that say about their attitude towards women? To my mind it seems to imply that they think women can't be strong, ethical leaders. I would applaud such a bold (in today's society) change even though, inevitably, the tabloids would have a field day.
True, and blond or not is not central to Bond's character, but you're ignoring the fact that Bond is a human character and the Doctor is not. The possibility exists for Timelords. He's alien.
Objections to the Doctor regenerating as a female are all about us and our human preconceptions and misperceptions about gender and, stemming from that, perceived risk to the success of the show.
My perception is that gender is not central to the essence of the Doctor's character. I would applaud such a change even though, inevitably, the tabloids would have a field day.
According to the movie he's half-human......
But seriously, although the possibility exists for timelords to regenerate into a different gender, surely 'possibility' is all that it is. It's not exactly been explored in depth by the writers of Doctor Who during the past 50 years, partly because it becomes unsustainable if you think about it. And in my opinion, the wisest course of action would be to leave it as a possibility, not a reality. There are many other ways in which Doctor Who can push boundaries and be creative.
No. A decent actor (Michael French, Martin Clunes, Adrian Lester) and show-runner coming in would be nice, though...
Just so long as Matt's departure doesn't involve the "surprise" return of the dreadful Karen "I can pout and I can shout, but acting seems to be beyond me" Gillan, I'll be happy.
<stands back from the wrath of the Matt, Pond and Moffat-lovers!>
Regards to all!
John
P.S. I grant you, Gillan was good in "Girl Who Waited".
But seriously, although the possibility exists for timelords to regenerate into a different gender, surely 'possibility' is all that it is. It's not exactly been explored in depth by the writers of Doctor Who during the past 50 years, partly because it becomes unsustainable if you think about it. And in my opinion, the wisest course of action would be to leave it as a possibility, not a reality. There are many other ways in which Doctor Who can push boundaries and be creative.
Quite true.
And it is only a possibility. Any show runner wishing to do that now, in today's society, would indeed be taking a risk. And maybe that risk is not needed. But when was that ever a good reason for not pushing the boundaries?
No. A decent actor (Michael French, Martin Clunes, Adrian Lester) and show-runner coming in would be nice, though...
Just so long as Matt's departure doesn't involve the "surprise" return of the dreadful Karen "I can pout and I can shout, but acting seems to be beyond me" Gillan, I'll be happy.
<stands back from the wrath of the Matt, Pond and Moffat-lovers!>
To be honest, I think everyone's going to be too stunned by the suggestion that Micheal French and Martin Clunes are 'decent actors' to bother about any wrath.
I have to disagree with comparisons over race and appearance.
Your appearance doesn’t have ANY bearing on who you are as a person, but your sex does.
I would be totally happy with a black Doctor. Well, actually, I wouldn’t because Doctor Who has always been a little discriminatory when it comes to having a disproportionate representation of black people on screen, but not enough asian people. So for many reasons, I would LOVE to see an asian Doctor.
Comments
Agree. It would be like Father Christmas suddenly becoming a big bosomed blonde with high heels, no legs and called Maria!
Some characters are what they are. Jane Eyre won't become James Eyre. Miss Marple won't become Mr. Marvel.
Leave these things alone.
Timelords are not human so any problems with gender identity are purely what us humans foist upon them.
The show itself has referenced the possibility of them regenerating as female.
Comparisons with any human characters are therefore spurious.
It is possible for the Doctor to regenerate as a female.
Any issues about that come purely from the audience's hang ups and our society's gender stereotypes. Listen to yourselves, you sound like the people who objected to the smoking ban. The ban happened and the sky did not fall in. Now everyone wonders why it didn't happen sooner and what all the fuss was about. This will be same when it happens.
If the writing and the acting's good, all will be well.
On the contrary, the kick back appears to be mistrust in the production team — i.e. that it would be stunt casting, and that stunt casting usually indicates the poor health of a programme (c/f: Ken Dodd).
So it's not the same thing as objecting to smoking bans per se, it's the same thing as objecting to a system of government that does things just for the headlines regardless of what it actually does.
Took the word right out of my keyboard
You've shot yourself in the foot with that ludicrous smoking ban comparison. That legislation was brought in because the previous way of doing things was considered archaic, outdated and damaging to the public good. Unless you consider current Doctor Who to be any of those things or even in trouble then the comparison just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.
However if you do think that to be the case then you are clearly agreeing that such a move would only be taken in desperation and because there were problems with the show as it is. I happen to think its in perfectly good health and as such stupid gimmicks are not needed. And your implication that anyone who is against a female doctor is somehow 'close minded' is patently laughable.
The Doctor is an eccentric alien time traveller. There is no part of the personality or traits of the character where sex would significantly change the dynamic. Apart from his predilection for hanging out with young females, I suppose, but even that's no obstacle.
Take Miss Marple and make her male and you have Hercule Poirot. Apart from a selection of character tics, the only real difference is that he was a professional - a career only available to men at the time. And if you take the same formula and make them American, you get Columbo.
Also, there are more male leads in iconic classic fiction than female. Often female roles are striking precisely because they're written as if they were male characters - which is a real problem these days, as writers think that the only way to make a female character strong is to make them aggressive, rude and brutal.
As for Shaft being white - Shaft was originally envisaged as a black equivalent of an existing white character, James Bond. And Bond's whiteness is a product of his old-fashioned Englishness, Queen and Country and all that, top hole, toodle pip.
Nick Fury works just as well whether he's black or white.
Then they could experiment with having a female doctor and see what happened. He/she would be like a Jeckyl and Hyde type of thing, disappearing under a table to pop back up again as a female once or twice an episode (well that's not very creative I'm sure they could think of a better way than that). Might give the actors a rest too - only having to be there half the time
I don't know if it would work. I do think it is a male character and even though he's an alien there have to be some similarities to humans (that might be why he looks human in the first place) otherwise a lot of people will just switch off and we wont have a show to watch before long. I'd certainly still watch if it happened. I'd want to see how well it worked ( or didn't as the case may be). As long as we get the best actor available (male/female/black/white/in a weelchair/pink with purple polkadots) then it might just work out whatever happens.
I disagree. You choose to attack my parallel, rather than the central point, which was this: if/when it happens after a while everyone will wonder what the fuss was about.
I could have chosen any number of changes made in the past that are now considered common sense and left people wondering how on earth people used to think otherwise. I chose to use that one to avoid being accused of calling people bigoted (which is what would have happened if I'd used slavery or racism or women's or gay rights).
If you're not open to (this) change then what else can you be but closed minded? Not laughable at all.
Oh and you continue to assert that a female Doctor would be gimmicky. Can you not see that it would depend entirely on the quality of the writing and the actress?
Please note the absence of loaded and belittling words like "stupid", "ludicrous" and "laughable" in my argument. You use those words in place of a reasoned position. I see the "respect" you have for my position. It should be possible to have a debate without being insulting to the other's position.
In the film Call me Claus the title character, ie Santa Claus was played by Whoopi Goldberg... close. Female, black but not blonde.
Hmm, Whoopi Goldberg as Dr Who? :rolleyes:
That's hardly as fundemental a thing as a character's gender.
If Bond had been cast as a woman, I suspect there would have been an outcry.
I'm all for pushing boundaries and striving to be creative and fresh, but there are many ways to do this without changing a fundamental of the show - that the doctor is a male character.
Now that I would say no to. I find her very hit and miss and she is due a 'miss' soon - though when she is good she is indeed very good.
But, Dr Who - while an alien - is somehow very, very British. And Whoopi is very, very American.
True, and blond or not is not central to Bond's character, but you're ignoring the fact that Bond is a human character and the Doctor is not. The possibility exists for Timelords. He's alien.
Objections to the Doctor regenerating as a female are all about us and our human preconceptions and misperceptions about gender and, stemming from that, perceived risk to the success of the show.
My perception is that gender is not fundamental to the essence of the Doctor's character. If opponents think it is, what does that say about their attitude towards women? To my mind it seems to imply that they think women can't be strong, ethical leaders. I would applaud such a bold (in today's society) change even though, inevitably, the tabloids would have a field day.
According to the movie he's half-human......
But seriously, although the possibility exists for timelords to regenerate into a different gender, surely 'possibility' is all that it is. It's not exactly been explored in depth by the writers of Doctor Who during the past 50 years, partly because it becomes unsustainable if you think about it. And in my opinion, the wisest course of action would be to leave it as a possibility, not a reality. There are many other ways in which Doctor Who can push boundaries and be creative.
No. A decent actor (Michael French, Martin Clunes, Adrian Lester) and show-runner coming in would be nice, though...
Just so long as Matt's departure doesn't involve the "surprise" return of the dreadful Karen "I can pout and I can shout, but acting seems to be beyond me" Gillan, I'll be happy.
<stands back from the wrath of the Matt, Pond and Moffat-lovers!>
Regards to all!
John
P.S. I grant you, Gillan was good in "Girl Who Waited".
Quite true.
And it is only a possibility. Any show runner wishing to do that now, in today's society, would indeed be taking a risk. And maybe that risk is not needed. But when was that ever a good reason for not pushing the boundaries?
:eek:
Your appearance doesn’t have ANY bearing on who you are as a person, but your sex does.
I would be totally happy with a black Doctor. Well, actually, I wouldn’t because Doctor Who has always been a little discriminatory when it comes to having a disproportionate representation of black people on screen, but not enough asian people. So for many reasons, I would LOVE to see an asian Doctor.