God, I hope not otherwise there really is a Celebrity Love Island - and that means Abi Titmuss actually exists. Which of course she doesn't (apparantly she's created with CGI).

Dear BBC, I would like to protest in the strongest terms at the pinkening of my forum which was a direct result of this evenings subversive episode of Doctor Who.

What if my little, innocent sister reads your post...what do I tell her the c word is when she asks and what do I tell her about the opinion thatsome people think it is OK to wish people dead numerous times? What you have said about dying is much more explicit and will be much more likely to raise questions from an innocent 7 year old than anything in tonights DW episode.

Or, bearing in mind the wire cutters, "The Doctor Winces".

But these were not innocent interpretations, and I did not see a duality, watch the episode again. If you see it then fair enough.

But giving a child a false statement is like censoring them to the actual facts a point raised by another poster.

annoying little chap?

Of course, if you come from my part of the country, your little sister will probably know what the c word is.

I don't even want to think about that....

I thought it was a great story tonight and the actress playing Nancy was great too!

As for the issues prominently raised, I think kids have been exposed to far more issues and innuendo on all sorts of tv including kids.

If anyone feels that strongly about the amount on Doctor Who, there's always the off button for next week, as they're unlikely to edit anything out now, as the protesters seem to be in a minority.

My point from the word go, was never my issue, its the issue of people who dont want there children exposed to this.

What you tell your sister is that the c word was exactly what you think I meant, that Adric was a character and more to the point an annoying one that nobody seemed to like, and I doubt very much that your innocent sister would have the intrest to wade through 13 pages to get to those points.

Sounds painful... does it itch too?

Same here (in my 40s though!) and I'd say very cheeky script in places.

Can't wait for next week when the slitheen hit Cardiff Bay

Can't argue with that grant - also, just when I'm thinking this new series is only going to surprise me now with the finale and Bad Wolf, it sparks off a debate about sexuality content...fan-tastic! Sorry...but it is...fan-tastic

For those in any doubt? This is an example of the use of innuendo to humorous effect

I don't know if my sister knows about that word...don't think I want ot know yet either....


...but the fact that you came up with the word 'chap' easily proves the point that you can interprate thigns differently...maybe the word 'chap' was the word that was intended...I don't know....but it could easily have been thought to have been somehting else..there could ahve been dual interpreations of what the owrd was...alll equally valid and all the truth depending on who you are talking to as they all make the state fit in with the flow of the discussion, only some ad something 'more' to it than others.


This is exactly what happened in tonights DW. And it is easy to only see one interpretation, but given a moment to think about it, like if you were asked to clarify something to a child, there should be no difficulty in coming up with an answer that fits in with the story and is, in your eye, suitable for the intended recipient of that information. Just beacuse you may not tell them one way of interprting the eword or line doesn't mean the one you tell them is wrong or incorrect...who is to say which is the real way something should eb intrepretted? The fact that there are two or more ways to interprate something should tell us there is no correct way. Thus one cannot be lying or deceiving or hiding the truth from someone fro telling them one thing.

Just again, not that i'm getting repetative. :yawn: The points I have mentioned should be raised, but over time. Not just addressed in one episode. If spread out there is good evidence for dual meaning, careful explanation. But in one episode out of 13 you cant really avoid it.

I'm glad someone else is the same as me... Its a long time since I a series that made me feel I couldnt wait till the next episode.... The whole series has been brilliant...

did the tardis
materalize into capt jacks spaceship
just before it blew up ?

is that how he got into the tardis ?

i cant remember

Yes it is.

cheers

I thought your point was that you had no problems with the issues, but rather thought there were too many treated at once. No this post seems to have you saying some people don't want children exposed to these issues?


But isn't that being deciptful? People don't write 'c.......' without meaning something else...surely in order to follow what you said earlier and explain things I would have to tell her one of only a couple of word that would be written like that...words I would probably rather her not know yet....just like in DW you can hide one meaning if you think it is unsuitable for your child and tell them the equally obvious (to most adults) innocent story.

(Oh, and what does it matter that my sister may have to wade through 13 pages? She might have been following the thread all along, or jumped in at the point with your 'c...' comment. The fact that it is written is enough for there to be the option for some child to find it and ask questions.

And considering how innacurate the tardis usually is I think that was quite a feat

Oh come on. It's not exactly as if the episode was end to end knob gags! There were a few knowing lines in the show. Good. That's what family entertainment should have. Something for ALL the family, including the adults. It was not crass. It was not blatant. It was just fun, and I wish we could have a lot more of it on TV.

And the final scene with the three of them flirting in the TARDIS was utterly charming. I couldn't stop smiling.

I really don't accept that you cannot see any valid non-sexual interpretation of the "butcher discussion".

Only if you stubbornly refuse to accept the duality of interpretation - that everyone else seems able to appreciate - is there any need to give a child a false statement.

Even then - is it irresponsible to tell a child that the cow mounting another cows is "just playing" rather than explaining that they're simulating sexual behaviour in the absence of a bull on the dairy farm?

Must be very difficult to be the parent of a completely innocent child when you are a parent who insists on telling them the unvarnished truth about every aspect of human and animal behaviour - and I really don't see why television should be expected to adjust its output to pander to such an imaginery group of people.

Just one question.

Why should homosexuality be treated as an 'issue' in the first pace? Surely the way to remove any problems peopl have with it in society from the next generation is to treat it as part and parcel of everyday life and not make an issue out of it. Therefore whether it is relevant or not, surely hinting at it in passing lie they did several tiems in tonights episode is a good thing.

If you think of homosexuality liket his then there really weren't that many issues in tonights epsidoe at all.

Not telling anyone off or anything - but - I just feel it's rather a shame that the discussion of perhaps the best TV programme in many many years seems to have been totally dominated by one issue.