http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s7/do...9-episode.html

I've never seen Torchwood so I'm not familiar with this lady's writing but I always like to see new writers to the show so good news. The only thing I hope is that she is of suitable quality and she has not been brought in as a 'token' female writer after the pressure to do so. They need the best writers for the job, male or female.

What are people's thoughts on her previous work?

Smashing she wrote 3 of my favourite Torchwood episodes

Don't worry she's awesome. Her Torchwood episodes were very good, subtle when they needed to be but hard hitting when they needed it.

I really enjoyed three of her four episodes of Torchwood, and even that fourth one wasn't bad. Her two contributions to Series 1 were her best, and the first of those, Out of Time, was not only my favourite from hers but also my favourite single story from pre-COE Torchwood (although Adrift in Series 2 comes close).

I've been saying for a while I'd love to see her write for Series 9, and it's brilliant news that she is...I never expected it. It's also great news that we'll be having the fifth female writer in the history of Doctor Who, and the fifth episode penned by a woman in the revived series. On that note, I also want to admit to being very fond of Helen Raynor - her debut was pretty poor but not because of the writing, her Sontaran story was very impressive and enjoyable and I also loved her contribution to Primeval

I've been wondering why they haven't asked her up until now, she is a very good writter. Her episodes of TW were by far the best.

Outstanding news if correct - they should have signed her up years ago,

Why would anyone even jump to the conclusion that because a woman's been hired, it might be because of tokenism? What would make that even pop into someone's head? Perhaps more importantly, what could possibly prove to them it wasn't the case?

As if to prove Toms point, the International Business Times (first google hit I found) almost immediately has written an article which in no way congratulates her for getting the chance, in no way says it is a great thing for her or the show, in no way says how talented she is and talks about her previous successes, instead they've written an article which is almost 80% about the dearth of female writers, about time they have one on the show, many people have been asking for it ........ yaadayada - and nothing about her abilities or track record as a writer or whether she deserves it based on merit. The article just states - finally a "woman" has a free "schedule" to write for the show.

http://www.ibtimes.com/doctor-who-se...r-2008-1728579

"Moffat has recently been under a lot of pressure to add a female writer to the staff. Helen Raynor was the only female to pen any episodes since 2005. However, she left after “Doctor Who” Season 4, the same time that then-showrunner Russell T. Davies departed the show."

So - all I can say is - clearly there are some poeple who just can't appreciate someone getting the job because they are good enough .. and focus on tokenism as the reason ...

I never really understood this anxiety either. Even if she was chosen for tokenism, which I'm pretty certain she wasn't, why would they hire a bad token writer?

I get the fuss over the lack of female writers though, given how few have contributed [5 if the article I read is reliable]. Regardless of the reasons for lack of women writers, or the motivations behind present hiring, its a positive thing to happen.

Then again, it would be great if we could get to the point where no one bats an eye-lid at such a notion.

It seems as though her Torchwood episodes were very well received so that's great.

I mentioned 'tokenism' as I'm aware of the world around me. To pretend that hiring a female writer isn't a noticeable thing (Johnnysaucepan) and a talking point is disingenuous. I think it was fairly clear that I wasn't saying it WAS tokenism, rather than I hope (trust) that it isn't. I totally agree that they wouldn't hire a writer who they didn't believe was up to scratch, regardless of external pressure, so I'm sure they believe she can do the job.

On the subject of female Doctor Who writers: I rewatched the 5th Doctor story 'Enlightenment' last night, written by Barbara Clegg. It's one of the most underrated Doctor Who stories for me, and I'm surprised that it doesn't get talked about more and even more surprised Clegg didn't write more serials for Doctor Who.

It would be nice it we could get to that point or at least the point where it leads to different debate.

Having just been watching Outlander - a female writer and director can really produce a different viewing experience in a really good way, because there can be a slight sameness from always having the male perspective (if that sentence makes any sense).

But - Devil's Advocate - unless it is a woman in direct creative control (ie the showrunner / exec producer role) the scripts of a female writer will still be going through the filter of male sensibility.

I think modern fantasy and science-fiction (and Doctor Who is a particularly good example) is a lot more embracing of and inclusive of female sensibilities than it used to be, which explains the huge surge in popularity of the genres with the female audience in the past generation. Back in the day, a show like Doctor Who was widely seen as being for male 'geeks' or 'nerds', despite its family audience, but now it has a very diverse audience. In fact, conventions are generally noted for having a greater number of female visitors these days. increasingly you can make the argument that Doctor Who is becoming more popular with women than men.

What that tells me is that female representation in Doctor Who is actually pretty good, by the average mainstream standard. Although it may still be mostly male perspective instinctively (ie the writers are male and can never have actual life experience of being female), consciously, intellectually, which is just as important creatively, a lot of concern is paid to the issue of female viewpoint and sensibility, which offsets it greatly.

More and more women are moving into writing in the genre. We just have to be patient. in the meantime, it's an issue the creators are very aware of and put a lot of work into.

I'd have agreed up until watching the Wedding episode in Outlander and being surprised at how different it felt and how much more I liked it.

Yes Doctor Who is doing better but it's still starting from a base that assumes male as neutral - you have to accept it because otherwise you stop watching TV.

As for female writer, male director, male writer, female director and all the other combinations - we need them all the different combinations to produce the best results and to stop the show becoming stale.

You're right, which is why I'm fairly dismissive of the subject in relation to Doctor Who, as it's not a particularly sexist show. Sexism is such a broad topic that I don't see any value in talking about it within the context of one average TV programme. I'd rather talk about topics that are more specifically related to Doctor who

As I've said before, sexism is so prevalent that you can find it anywhere you care to look and that makes it a very easy stick to beat someone with... if you have an agenda against, say, the showrunner of a TV programme.

Yes and no. Sexism is very prevalent and we absolutely should be questioning it and demanding better. Male is not neutral.

That said this certain show runner has written some great women who act and do things that further the plot, who save themselves, ask important questions and call the Doctor on his mistakes. He also created and wrote Lynda Day - bitch editor in chief - tough, vulnerable, demanding totally 3D, who I adored as a teen. So I'm not complaining and I certainly don't want to kick him but that doesn't mean I don't think we couldn't have interesting stories in other worlds that have more female characters and stories.

Brilliant news.

Loved her Torchwood episodes.