Saw this today and felt like sharing.

I'm a fan of the Moff, but clearly this youtube poster isn't:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2OoLLXOXcY


I personally think some fair points are being made, but in Moffats era the absence of family detail surely doesn't actually mean that Moffat is bad at writing female characters ?? Or am I missing something. If anything their characters are strong enough that we don't need to know every detail about their parents, past, family etc.

Its just one of the old tropes wheeled out by the anti Moffat brigade and in this girls case the 'OMG it isn't like it was with Tennant' anymore brigade.
I didn't sit through that video. I've heard it all before mostly from jumped up middle class females whove just attended their first gender studies elective class and think theyre being all fancy. One could just as easily pontificate about the emasculation of young men in New Who if one wanted to write a thesis on such a thing.

The other linked videos to that account are telling enough to enable me to write them off namely 'Why the Eleventh Doctor is a douche' and 'oh great another white dude'. I wont even bother to feign outrage at the arrogant inverse racism in that second one (Would it be acceptable to make a video entitled Oh Great Another Black dude? Of course mot. Hi double standards!) and instead will just express my bafflement that someone with an accent more fitting for Downton Abbey feels the need to parrot crude americanisms. Oh yes! Because that's all it is. Parroting. Not an original thought in it.

Edit- i foolishly clicked play on her anti Eleven rant. In the first minute she claimed that Eleven groomed children, physically abused Clara and sexually assaulted Rory, Tasha Lem and Jenny. With not even a hint of irony. Not even a jot. These people scare me. Genuinely bat shit insane. EVERYTHING IS RACIST AND SEXIST AND HOMOPHOBIC AND TRANSPHOBIC AND HAS A SUBTEXT! EVERYONE IS A BIGOT! except me and all mt friends of course she says entitling a video 'another white dude'. Because you can't be racist or prejudiced against white people of course. Welcome to clown school.

Now we know who signed that bloody petition.

Damn you Judge for putting me in a bad mood on a Saturday night!

Anyway. I'm busy writing a strongly worded letter to Warner Brothers asking why they insist on still showing those Bugs Bunny cartoons where he would surprise Elmer Fudd and kiss him. That's sexual assault in a cartoon SHOWN TO CHILDREN. FILTH! FILTH! FURY! Where was the consent? Its outrageous. Don't even get me started on Wile E Coyote and as for Pepe Le Pew? Serial rapist. What is this world!

It's an interesting topic...obviously Doctor Who reflects the times in which it is made, and generally I think it comes out okay. The marvellous Ian and Barbara were both highly intelligent and well rounded characters; often Barbara had the more thoughtful moments; Eg The Aztecs.

There has been this idea that the female companions were just there to look decorative and scream and stuff (in the media, but also when I've talked about the show with casual viewers I know) particularly with regards to C20 Who, but looking at all the companions, I'd personally say only Victoria and maybe Peri (sorry Daveyboy) fall into that category. Sure, Leela is a good example of the "for the Dads" idea purely for what she wore, but the writing, characterisation and Louise's talent transcended that.

Moffat, though,is definitely a sexist git, what with his "male gaze" and daring to depict interesting, often complex female characters.

Edit: Just pondering on the thread title, not bothered with the link. And would just like to add, some fans might see Jo Grant as a retrograde step after Liz Shaw, but I like them both. Jo might've been ditzy but she was no bimbo.

I find it quite funny how seriously the YouTuber takes the characters' histories, which are a bit melodramatic. I do agree that there's a lack of character development in recent shows but this does not need to be shown by the characters' families. I like the family aspect but it's not vital; there are other ways of developing characters.

I would be fascinated (ok i wouldn't really) be interested to learn what that youtubers thoughts are on the way RTD and friends often wrote Captain Jack. Is objectifying someone fine as long as you do it to both genders or if objectification of someone is bad then is it just bad? I think such a question might pose problems for someone who is so sure of their world view they probably wouldn't like it to be challenged.

It appears the same person also has taken issue with Moffat for apparently making a joke out of Anderson in Sherlock apparently suffering a breakdown (this wasn't actually explicitly mentioned on screen but assumptions are fine I suppose) and how this mocks people with mental illness.

I just don't get the mentality of these people. Do they sit there waiting for anything that they can possibly take offence at? Its laughable. And not only that but its insulting because there remains so much injustice and bigotry in the real world that needs challenging and engaging with. Whinging about the Doctor kissing Jenny etc just seems like self indulgent navel gazing. Of course its far easier to complain about these things rather than engaging in the real issue in any meaningful sense. These self appointed taste police are so thoroughly dull. Not least because they pick and choose their battles. Oh they don't like Moffat so lets bring him down. You could just as easily level the same claims at RTD. If Moffat had written Lady Christina or Cassandra or the Maid from Turn Left they would have been frothing at the mouth and callousing their finger tips by redialling Ofcom.

Media Studies.

Gender Studies.

There is an agenda here that is not about Who, really

I could be wrong, but I don't have hours of my life to waste on someone's video essays.

I mean, I watch hours of Who stuff, but that's not 'wasting' my time, as such.

It's spending my time as I see fit. Watching that young lady was like marking someone's homework.

*Yawn*

(To clarify, I'm yawning at the argument, not the thread )

Someone needs to sit her down and break it to her that The Doctor's first companion was his granddaughter, but we never found out who her parents were.

There are genuine problems with some of the writing under Steven Moffat, but the fact that he doesn't feel the need to take a minute for a little aside to tell us all about Clara's grandmother is not one of them.

I do find it odd that she didn't consider Rory to be part of Amy's family though. Surely she wasn't just picking and choosing evidence to support a flimsy argument.

People like different things. As I said before I am not really interested in families. Doctor Who shouldn't really focus on families of companions especially when some of the time there is an issue with pacing and rushed conclusions. They need to focus on that issue rather than adding things that add very little to episodes. If you want families watch a soap opera. And it depends on how well the family idea is executed. I didn't think Martha's family added much. It was brilliant having Bernard Cribbins as Donna's grandfather though.

go on admit it, releasing a rant or two actually Puts you in a good mood I'm sure especially when this video clearly deserved a rant. I always love the YouTube comments as much as the content, very telling comments on this one!

Was the family/backstory of all female characters explained in classic who? Oh wait, this youtuber doesn't know what classic who is!

However, thanks Michael for b balancing this beyond this youtuber, but dammit I still can't get that stupid video out of my head Oh man! But anyway to your point, what's the name of hartnells last female companion, anneke ? That scene in the night club she was a hip happening lady of the singing sixties, very with out and of the times. If only wet knew who her parents were .....bugger all thinking of the youtuber, grrrrrr

I think sometimes the Doctor's companions are portrayed as being too "strong".

In trying to avoid the cliche of the screaming female companion in distress, I think the show since 2005 has sometimes failed to acknowledge that there are some scenarios where, regardless of gender, a human being would be screaming for their life.

Why not have male AND female companions who both scream like babies for a change?

Do you have kids?

No-one wants anything screaming like a baby, ever.

And if you do, that's what East Enders is for.

Get aaht of moi pab.

I like most of the characters but there have been a few things.
The doctors effect on the lives of his companions. Wheter they are traveling with him or not. Amy went through four psychiatrists. When she finally grew up "raggedy man" comes back into her life. Amy was the only companion to get married and give birth so far. After losing her child and being left barren she tried to be "normal".Still waitied for her best freind to visit. Eventually had to make the heart breaking choice to leave him behind so she could live and die with her beloved husband. On the subjiect of marriage - River. She waited for him night aftwr night in stormcage. He took her ice skating on her birthday - once. What kind of man takes his wife for romantic "dates" then drops her back at a prison cell ?.Makes you wonder what will happen to Clara before she finally leaves the tardis for good. Hopefully alive and of her own free will.

I agree ŵith the crux of the young lady's point. Character depth has not been one of Steven Moffat's strongest points.




Nope, the world is still turning.....phew, what with one person posting an opinion out of millions upon millions on You Tube.