I don't think it is a matter of being offended - it's more a case of just hating it.

Yes, now and again a show can try new things, and Dr Who does by having a new Doctor and new companions and new enemies.

It's been having new Doctors, new companions and new enemies for over 51 years. I see nothing wrong with branching out of a comfort zone.

That being said, everyone is entitled to their opinion as well.

I disagree. It's the history between Missy/the Master and the Doctor that gives extra meaning to those exchanges. A fresh character would simply not have had that.

A new character we've never seen before that the Doctor just happens to have a long history with? Flashback to 1960s/70s/80s TV, methinks.

I can see the argument both ways, but ultimately I can't help feeling that making Missy the Master was publicity driven first, story second. That's my big worry about where the show is going - and my main worry about casting a female Doctor. That it's mainly done for the tabloid fallout and to boost ratings.

Missy is great and I can't wait to see her again but I still think we're a long way off a female Doctor, if ever at all.

Some of the OPs reasons in their list were bizarre too. Overreacting a bit there.

Oh god I am so sick of people saying that Who is all about change so any change must be good right? Tell me did you like it when Colin Baker choked Nicola Bryant? Did you like it when Colin was given that awful coat? Did you like it when JNT tried to change the TARDIS exterior from a police box in the 80's? Also the change over from Hartnell to Troughton happened 3 years into the show when the character was barely established. Its now 51 years! Trying to suddenly rewrite it that he is gender fluid when he clearly identifies as a man. He called himself grandfather. Is a stupid idea.

Well you just clearly proved you haven't read either my message or my article.

And no offence but drop the condescending attitude. Telling me I need to re asert my attitude to gender equality. Why is it people who are for a female Doctor can't just debate with people? They have to call them sexist without addressing any of their points.

In my article I don't bring up a female Doctor. My criticisms against Missy are all to do with what she does to the Doctor/Master relationship IE making them lovers which is infantile, the idea that she is a cliche, the idea that she is sexist as she fulfils the stereotype of a femme fatale who has to use her lips to throw the hero off guard and the fact that she is clearly a publicity stunt.

Not once did I mention a female Doctor as a reason for Missy being awful.

I only mentioned a female Doctor in the sense of yes I am aware I don't want one, but that doesn't affect how I feel about Missy.

If anyone has a female Doctor on their minds when judging Missy its you lot who are for a female Doctor. You want one so badly you are willing to put up with anything to do with Missy.

Missy is another Moffat female prototype that he got slated for for years, but no one is slating him this time.

Also Missy is like a sexist joke told in a pub in the 70's. "Oh if the Master became a woman he couldn't call himself Master he'd have to call himself Missy and he'd have to fancy the Doctor".

Yet you put up with that and you say that Missy is perfectly believable as being the same character as the ones before her which makes me want a female Doctor even less, as if your putting up with Missy just because you see it as some accomplishment then god knows what you'll put up with with a female Doctor.

She'll have to call herself Nurse Who and fancy the Brigadier if she is anything like Missy.

Also you made me laugh when you said that I have a sexist attitude because apparently the stories I said wouldn't work because I think women have to twist their ankles and need the big strapping man to rescue them.

Really did you read my post at all, did you!

It was the total opposite.

Here read it again and tell me.

Do you want a female Doctor to be saved by her male companion every story? That's what happens in the first series of New Who with Rose and 9. Rose saves the day in fr more stories, 9 only saves the day in two episodes. Rose saves the day in far more stories and is made out to be cleverer than him despite his alien intelligence. She saves the day in the finale and single handedly destroys the Daleks.

In series 3 Martha saves the day in more stories and in the season finale and is made out to be the more sympathetic one.

In series 4 Donna gets the Doctors powers and uses them better than he does and is proven to be a better Doctor than he is! "Universe been waiting for someone like me".

In series 5 Amy not only saves the day in as many stories, but also remembers him back into existence.

In series 7 Clara is retconned into being the main hero of every single Doctor Who story ever made! She also convinces him to undo the biggest mistake in his entire life and convinces the time lords to give him new lives.

Then when he changes into an older man Clara doesn't fancy he begs her to stay and look after him.

That's what the dynamic between the Doctor and his companion is. He is the super intelligent alien who is still very flawed and needs the human character to not only ground him, but save him and keep him sane.

Ironically the companion is the more empowering role for women.

Here you have a male character who is a super intelligent alien but who still needs a female human to help him.

It sounds like a recipe for the worst kind of sexism but thy manage to reverse it quite well by having her be the cleverer of the two.

Of course that's not to say Who hasn't been guilt of sexism in the past. 6 and Peri were very sexist, but that's when it has been at its worst. When its at its best the companion is as much a hero as he is like Barbara, Romana, Leela, Zoe etc in some ways more than he is.

And that's why a female Doctor wont work, because if you want to keep the companion Doctor dynamic, but reverse it then you are actually gonna make it sexist for women.

You are gonna have a female character who is super intelligent, but still not as clever as her male companion who is 19! You are gonna have a female character need young men to constantly save her!

Like I said imagine new who in reverse and then tell me that I don't want a female Doctor because I think women all have to be damsels in distress.

She Doctor meets Rory, she only saves the day in 2 episodes, rest of the time its Rory. Rory saves the day in the season finale against the Daleks whilst she Doctor stands at the side helpless and Rory says "I want you safe my Doctor". Yeah that would be really empowering for women.

Series 3 She Doctor goes insane without Rory her big strong man to help her. She meets Martin who fancies her and tells her how tight her suits are. She Doctor is made out to be selfish and uncaring towards poor Martin. In the season finale She Doctor is stuffed in a bird cage by Missy. Martin saves her and she Doctor is made to feel bad for not feeling the same way as Martin.

Series 4 Donald shows up and gets she Doctors powers and uses them better than she ever did and tells her she is useless.

Series 5 Jamie Pond remembers her back in existence.

Series 7 Clarence is retconned into being the hero of every story in She Doctors era. Without Clarence she would have been killed over and over. Clarence also convinces her to undo the biggest mistake she ever did, and then convinces the Time Lords to give her new lives and saves her. Then when she regenerates into someone Clarence doesn't fancy she begs Clarence to stay with her because she is so scared to be on her own and needs help.

Tell me would that have been empowering for women?

And don't say that those are stories written for the gender, because the point is that's what the Doctor companion dynamic is.

The Doctor is actually a needy character who is dependent on those around him. Even the first Doctor needs Ian and Barbara. Barbara often saves him like in the Edge of Destruction, the Keys of Marinus and The Dalek Invasion of Earth.

Reverse the dynamic and you will have a needy female hero that needs young men to keep her safe and sane! Without Rory she will drown the Racnoss, without Jamie Pond she will be living on a coud, without Clarence as her guardian angel she will die.

A female Doctor will reinforce the idea of women being damsels in distress more as here we will have a female character needing a male to help her even when she is a time lord.

The only way round that problem is to make it a female companion, but as I said then its like Xena or Supernatural, the cast is all one gender and those series are never ass popular as say Doctor Who or Buffy that have heroic roles for both.

Sorry if I sounded aggressive I am not, I just feel strongly about this. Thank you for your response, though as I made clear I don't appreciate being told I need to re think my ideas on gender equality. I am for equality and I do wish people would stop bringing up sexism to do with this.

He/She didn't read my post properly as I never said that a she doctor wouldn't work because women have to be damsels in distress. I said the opposite!

Again why do you have to call everyone who doesn't want a female Doctor sexist.

Again I ask you do you want the same companion/Doctor dynamic to be kept up?

Do you want the she Doctor to be constantly saved by he male companions?

Do you want Clarence to be retconned into being the hero of every one of her stories, do you want Rory to blast the Daleks, the she Doctor to go nuts without her and drown the Racnoss, Martin to free her from a bird cage, Donald to get her powers and use them better than she does, Jamie Pond to remember her into existence an old (and by old I mean 56) she doctor beg Clarence to look after her when Clarence doesn't want to because he doesn't fancy her any more.

The Doctor is a needy character, who needs people in his life to hold him back, help him and save him.

Reverse that and have a needy female character who needs young men to help her and save her all the time and it will seem sexist.

The only way round it is to have a female companion, but as I said do that and you erase all roles for men in the show. Shows that have roles for both like Doctor Who and Buffy are always more popular than shows that don't like Supernatural and Xena.

Also no based on Missy I don't want a female Doctor as clearly the current crop of writers would handle it dreadfully.

Ironically Missy is the most sexist thing I have ever seen in Who's long history.

Like I said Missy is like a sexist joke told in a pub "if the master became a woman he would have to refer to himself as Missy and would want to kiss the Doctor".

You are all talking rubbish if you say that Missy is believable as the same character as any of her predecessors.

Obviously you need to change the Master, but not so much that its not recognizable as the one before.

Could you imagine Roger Delgado nibbling on Jon Pertwee's mighty nose?

Could you imagine Anthony Ainley smooching Peter Davison's face off.

Could you imagine the Burned Master putting Tom Bakers hand on his chest and saying seductively "two hearts both of them yours".

Can you imagine Eric Roberts saying that the Doctor loves him so much?

Can you imagine John Simm's Master going to all that effort to get him a present?

Missy is so sexist its not true. The idea that a female villain can only hurt a male hero if she uses her feminine wiles or that the female villain has to want the male hero.

Moffat has just written Irene Adler, River Song and Tasha Lem again!

The fact that you all think Missy is fine makes me want a female Doctor 10000000 times less. You put up with the Master being made into the Doctors sex kitten just because hey now he's a woman that must make it a positive thing right?

If Moffat writes the she Doctor the way he did Missy he will call her the Nurse and have her smooch the Brigadiers face off and have to seduce Omega to beat him and everyone will say its fabulous just because he has made the Doctor a woman.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...-timelord.html

Moffat's got a boner for Timelord sex changes I doubt he'll recant anything, but I agree with you it was a horrendous decision. I wish people could leave out political correctness in my favorite tv/movies, gender/sexual politics should be left to shows like Hollyoaks etc. :sleep:

There seems to be a concerted feminist campaign to bring feminist issues into all of the media we interact with, it is even happening in computer games just now. I seriously wish that publishers/producers etc would tell them where to shove their agenda, I just want to watch tv and play games to escape all this nonsense, it's getting ridiculous.

Matt, I like that you have offered an opinion and that you've backed it up by explaining why you have that opinion. Its not often that people do this.

I loved the original Master, Delgado especially, when I was younger I wanted to grow up and have a pointy goatee

That being said, personally I loved Missys' portrayal. She was wickedly deceptive, insanely devious and so wickedly twisted. I don't think she did anything that overtly disrupted any of the previous stories between the Doctor and the Master either.

Just my opinion !

An apology after the offence, especially the second time, is worthless and disingenuous.

Sorry If I appeared condescending, that was not my intent. I merely wanted to point out what was clear from your earlier post (that you clearly don't recognise about yourself).

I did not read your article.

So it's ok to have a needy male Doctor, but not a needy female Doctor? That's what your examples indicate is your attitude. The examples don't hold water anyway as, had the Doctor been female then, the stories would have been written differently. Don't you think it's possible for the companions to be written in such a way as to help a female Doctor in different ways from the dynamic you're used to? Or is it that no female should ever be portrayed as being in need of help? Or needing to learn a lesson? That's taking political correctness too far for me.

Passion and coherent arguments rarely go well together.

Its okay man sorry if I sounded pushy and aggressive too.

Anyway onto your points its not that I think its okay to have a needy male Doctor, its just that well the only reason for changing the Doctors sex would be to give women a heroic role on television, but the Doctor is a woman wouldn't really do that. Like I said we'd have a female character who is dependent on the men in her life.

Its not that there shouldn't be female characters like that, but I think we have had too many female characters like that on tv.

Also the whole point is that is the Doctor/companion dynamic. I mean that's what it always is. The only time its not that is when the companion just stands at the side saying yes Doctor no Doctor.

Also there are other reasons I don't like a female Doctor.

I think regeneration is a delicate balance. What makes it work is that the Doctor is different, but also the same. I don't think a woman would be believable as being the same character. Not because women can't be heroes, just because the Doctor is really the perfect gentlemanly character. He is like Bernard Quatermass, Sherlock Holmes, Jason King, the ultimate British Gentlemanly hero. I know he isn't technically British, but you know what I mean.

I think the Doctor should always be played by a British man. I wouldn't want a woman or an American or a French man in the role.

I also think casting a woman would open up a huge can of worms too. I mean where will it end. I don't doubt there will be people wanting the next 13 Doctors to be women and there will be big debates over that and people calling it sexist if it goes back to being a man!

Also I don't like this idea that a we have to use the doctor give people representation. I mean where will it end? The Doctor has to give women representation, transgender people too hat next? Will we have to have a black Doctor, a disabled Doctor a muslim Doctor.

I mean I think everyone should get representation on tv don't get me wrong, but create new characters for them.

PS I have no issue with a black Doctor. I just don't think there needs to be one. Neil Gaiman annoyed me when he went on about how 12 should have been played by a black man. Didn't say who just a black man to tick the right boxes UGH.

Also finally I don't want the new writers based on Missy to tackle it anyway as they based on Missy would call her the Nurse and have her shag Omega.

Thanks for your feedback obviously I disagree, but then you know tha already LOL.

It would be interesting if someone did a simple poll. "Should The Master have been brought back as Missy, Yes or No ?" I'm guessing that after reading various posts about "Missy", then the Yes vote would win, although I can't begin to think why.

Is a woman unable to be gentlemanly?

Uh, I didn't. As I said, and I quote myself here "everyone is entitled to their opinion". The only thing I called sexist was the notion that some people would simply switch off and not watch the show purely because it has a female Doctor. If you're not doing something you would have otherwise done when the only changing factor is gender, then it is undeniably sexist.


I'm quite interested in new dynamics actually... the Doctor lives for hundreds of years, and many different lives. Some dynamics will echo others, some will be refreshingly new. A female Doctor offers up a new perspective.


Why does who saves who have to be anything to do with gender? This is the problem with feminism these days - too many people misinterpret it and end up making issues out of nothing. I want stories where The Doctor sometimes saves the companion, and others where the companion turns the tables and the saves The Doctor instead - just as we've always had for years. Gender of either The Doctor or the companion has nothing to do with it - except for people who like to make it a problem.


So basically what you're suggesting is that it is perfectly acceptable for The Doctor who is, as you put it "a needy character" to be depicted by a man, but not be depicted as a woman.

Again, another issue in regards to feminism and one that creeps into Doctor Who sometimes. Women are entitled to be weak. They are allowed to be written to have needs, and wants, and they are going to need saving just as much as any man will. All the writer needs to remember is the flip side that a woman is capable of also being formidably strong, and independent and successful. Now and again the show depicts women who are overly strong and somewhat superior to their male counterparts...it's a kind of sexism against males that gets swept under the rug. It's not too common in Doctor Who compared to other shows, and definitely lower than average compared to the media.

Saying that gender reversal regarding the Doctor and the companion would make things "seem sexist" is a typically lazy approach to not making anything better at all. Doctor Who is a bold show... it can take that role reversal and educate people, and show people how it's done (I'm not sure Moffat is the right candidate for that mind you, but that's my opinion).

The Doctor might need his friends and allies, but he's far from a male damsel in distress. A female Doctor wouldn't automatically become one - and sci-fi has a proud history of strong female characters appreciated and loved by both male and female fans. Buffy is the obvious one, but there are even female characters free of supernatural powers that are rightfully formidable. Dana Scully from The X Files laughed, cried, faught and cowered across nine years - she was sufficiently written as a person...not as a woman.


Um, Sherlock? Despite the fact I have little love for the programme it's undeniably successful and isn't usually considered sexist for having two male leads. Doctor Who has an even greater opportunity to cast other male roles - as it changes its destination nearly every episode and has an endless cycle of guest characters. Whilst I don't think it would ever do it, and whilst I think a female Doctor-male companion set-up is perfectly fine they could hypothetically pull off a female-female lead. It would be very daring but they could. Or whose to say they wouldn't have two companions - a female and a male, alongside a female Doctor.

There's no need to consign the prospect of a female Doctor to failure just because you're personal opinion is to limit what the show is entitled to do.


There was barely a mention of the gender change. Say what you want of the characters motives, or the way she was written into the story - but name one thing that was made worse specifically because she was a woman... there was nothing, you've got nothing.


Can you imagine Twelve having a romantic relationship with Rose? Can you imagine William Hartnell snogging River Song? Can you imagine Derek Jacobi watching the Teletubbies, wheeling a crippled Doctor around to the Scissor Sisters and marrying a young woman like Lucy Saxon?

Regeneration changes you...
"He's changed his face, voice, body, everything. New man",
Jack in The Sound of Drums.

"Some new man goes sauntering away",
The Tenth Doctor in The End of Time.

"I might have two heads, or no head!"
Ninth Doctor in The Parting of the Ways.

"She was a bad girl"
Eleventh Doctor, referening The Corsair in The Doctors Wife

There's clearly room and fluidity for absolutely anything to come of regeneration and that is nothing new any more. The only thing against it are the people who seem to think the Doctor can and must remain strictly male unlike other Timelords. The only reason such gender changes weren't witnessed before in Classic Who is because times were different back then - all you're doing now is prolonging those old, outdated ideals where a woman couldn't possibly lead a primetime television show, or more so a man couldn't possibly be recast as a lesser and inferior woman.


Missy kissed the Doctor once. There was no indication that she wanted the Doctor any more than her previous incarnations. "I want my friend back", she even says towards the end of Death in Heaven...indicating a long history between the two characters as always, hinting at some kind of former friendly chemistry... but anything more is just made up to support aimless arguments.


I too got sick of the woman-power writing from Moffat - where he'd substitute girl power as a means to avoid actually writing a proper character. It wasn't sexist, because I think he would have found other means to prop up bland male characters, but it was lazy.
Missy though was a step up from that. She had a depth to her that came with the history of her character and it was used (admittedly sparingly) to flesh her out a whole lot more. Or are you unable to accept that some female characters will simply be strong and independent in their own right, rather than to comply to political correctness?


Again, there were only two or three references across an entire series regarding The Master's identity as a female. You've made a bigger deal out of it in one post than one of the UK's biggest shows made out of it in one year. She alluded to The Doctor as her boyfriend, yes, it was a minor passing comment that meant nothing. She kissed him once before offering Clara exactly the same treatment too. Beyond that, your 'sex kitten' analogy is totally unfounded...you're scraping the proverbial barrel to find reasons to hate something you clearly want to hate, rather than hating it for a good reason.


Just as an aside, Nurse isn't a gender opposite of Doctor. There are male nurses, female Doctor's, and indeed Doctor as in someone who has acquired a doctorate.

Whilst Moffat's track record of writing for women wouldn't fill me with hope that he'd do a female Doctor justice (again because he writes women as women, rather than as people) you have jumped to some very stupid assumptions about the future of the show. Rather than complaining about the quality of character writing from Moffat as would be the more obvious issue you have, you've somehow turned it into an unfounded argument against a female Doctor...simply because you don't like a writer. There isn't a way that that wouldn't at least seem sexist, as frankly your argument is unfounded. I'm not saying that you are sexist, nor undermining your advocation of equality, but if I said to someone I don't want a black Doctor because it would change the dynamic and the way things worked for the show it'd be considered racist. I judge a Doctor on the merits brought to the screen once they've been cast. Doing so beforehand can only serve to be judgemental of their looks, their gender, their ethnicity. You're judging and predetermining a female Doctor on the basis of what you think you know of gender in the media, rather than being open-minded enough to let the show try to do the fight for equality proud.

-

I would be interested to see what changes a female Doctor would bring to the table. Adventures in history would have the chance to be told with a whole new perspective - The Doctor as a woman would struggle to walk around like she owned the place, and the writers would need to come up with refreshing ways to make the character work. This could range from a potential reliance on a male companion to some extent, to far more inventive ways that utilise The Doctor's strengths, all the while highlighting the wrongs of the past to its audience. The same could be said for a black Doctor - the show is bold enough to address past prejudices, and it would be bold indeed to utilise them for its lead character.

A female Doctor is only a flirty, depenent, damsel in distress if the writer writes her that way. A female Doctor is only a girl-power-centric egotist with little personality outside of her gender identity if the writer writes her that way. Your problem is with the writing, not with the gender. It's important to realise that.