I used to imagine Doctor 5 was having a little fling in those Tardis bedrooms with Tegan, whilst Nyssa and Adric were doing their studies!!
But as for Matt Smith (not The Doctor) being gay? Naa, I think not. He's seems a bit flamboyant and very 'studentish' to me, which is natural for his age...but he's one of the lads at the end of the day.
Mind you, if he wanted to 'experiment' (which a LOT do!) I wouldn't say no

Who says? Certainly not the BBC, since the Chelonians-one of the races mentioned in the trailer for next weeks episode-originated in the books, and so did the Blathereen, who've appeared in The Sarah Jane Adventures.
Yawn. Boring, incorrect stereotype.


And you'd be wrong, since there's been no official statement on canon.

There is even a book that implies that the Doctor has been involved in sexual relationships.....and being grown or however they are made doesn't mean they are sexless....who knows they may just do it for fun

And the fact that Susan had her grandfather's blessing to shack up with a human, and Leela was left with a Gallifrayen....its seems that it isn't only RTD and Moff who need to be told about this aparent asexual persona of the Doctor

Mickey asked him about his past dalliances (which included Cleopatra - could be coming up soon...) in TGitF. In TDD it was established that 'dancing' was used instead of saying sex, and he 'danced' with Reinette - also in TGitF. And he alluded to the ruination of The Virgin Queen's 'virgin' epithet...

Definitely not asexual then.

Quite a randy bugger, in fact...

Cleopatra coming soon? (Cleopatra ... cominatcha!)
Really?

Which has been more than mentioned now in the current series with even less subtlitly than the first time...at least it was just Queen Bess has lost her nickname (which went over many people's head) the first time round....for all we know the Doctor could have a different nickname for her...but Moff has made sure that we are aware of what exactly the nickname was

Only in new Who. Which is therefore irrelevant, as what was established over several decades prior to 2005 is more important and overrides any revisionist history as far as I'm concerned.

Then you really have nothing....because there is nothing concreate to suggest over all that the Doctor is aseaxual....he may have not supposedly shown interest (I would argue against that too), but that doesn't mean there was anything to deny what happens in the future.....its a bit like saying that as kids we don't get into any sort sexual relationship, therrfore this is proof that we are asexual beings as adults....

And for a show that is so contradictory, I think it is a bit extreme saying that everything in the past overides the new Who...considering you hate it when they contradict...surely it shouldn't matter then?

Lol, you crack me up with your mental canon arguments. If there's no official statement, then that means no one is right, surely? Not that you're right! Also, I think you'll find that if there's nothing official re: canon, then the only thing we *can* be sure of is the t.v. show! To dismiss whichever elements of THE TELEVISED SHOW you wish is even more bonkers. As far as I'm concerned, every new bit of information *enriches* what has come before, it neither validates or invalidates it and if it doesn't quite match, then what the heck. And what exactly was established "over several decades prior to 2005" that the new show has contradicted?! The Doctor sh*gging?

Given that Matt has been romantically involved with the Brazilian songstress Mayana Moura in the past, (as well as reportedly dating Daisy Lowe) I presume he's straight. But really, it's nobody's business what his orientation is.

I just don't get this "Canon" thing.

I don't believe that all the writers of Doctor Who episodes frantically check whats gone before to see if something they are about to write is "canon".

They remember something that's gone before, and try to match current Who up with that, or they don't and so there's a contradiction, or they need to alter something for plot purposes, so they do, and that's another contradiction

It's only on here and similar that people are bothered about "canon".

Well said.

Its quite funny to get wound up about a fictional history in a TV series about time travel, where obviously "time can be changed" and the fictional history re-written at the drop of a hat.

The BBC should just do a "crisis" and wipe the slate clean, it would be worth it for the fanboy rage if nothing else

I'd say that the makers of the show do try to respect the canon, but I doubt, like you say, that they do a lot of research on it.....but the fact that so far the show has been made by fans....chances are they know the history inside out!!!!

Now, I don't think that MS is gay but either way, it wouldn't be any of our business imo.

Now, with regard to the character of the Doctor:


Hehe, there was that humorous exchange between Jack and CE in series 1 that indicated the Doctor has quite a relaxed attitude about human sexual preferences; it also showed that it was nothing out of the ordinary for him to contemplate (reinforced ofc by Ten's attitude).



Actually, I quite agree - I wouldn't call it aberration, myself, but Ten was standing out as - imo ofc! - the first and (for me) only ever really sexy/fanciable Doctor incarnation (and I don't usually fancy skinny blokes). I loved some of the others incarnations (and I do really enjoy Eleven's characterisation), but I certainly wouldn't have fancied either of them.

Which suits me fine because really, I don't NEED a fanciable Doc (having said that: I will always fancy Ten though - and Jack ofc ; but that was icing on the cake, not core ingredient).

I don't know if Ten did highlight it anymore than past Doctors....yes he was shown to be the most good looking ( and when I say shown I mean by the fact that he said it himself or others said it, but we had Donna balance things out)....but was her more aware of sexaul needs? For example he did feel he "still got it" when Rose/Cassandra kissed him, but is he talking about sex or is he talking in terms of his vanity? He enjoyed the kiss with Reinette, but she did most of the leading....he was in "love" with Rose, but does that mean he wants to sh*g her? With Martha he didn't even seem to notice, didn't think much of the fact that they were sharing a bed, in fact didn't seem to get her being a suprised at that fact that they were sharing a bed, wasn't moved by the beauty of one of the witches, didn't seem to understand how hard it would be for Joan to just go off and travel with him, didn't seem to think much of his "its like when you fancy someone and they don't even know you exist" comment in front of both Martha and Jack, he only kissed Astrid goodbye because she was dead, it wasn't sexual, he felt really glad that Donna didn't fancy him, and he was alittle flirty with Lady Christina, but was very much suprised that she kissed him.....Its only the Queen Bess thing that really goes further than ever.....but he was having a mid-life crisis then


So really most of it wasn't anymore stronger as the words of Nine when he was basically arguing over who has got the better sonic with Jack....or wondering out of him and Rose, who would Jack really want to "Dance" with.....

And Eleven, also despite pushing Amy away, he did kiss her back at one point, just like Ten did with Reinette, but this was Amy, so he was more keen to push her away, she had just told him that she was getting married, and he knew Amy longer and had a deeper relationship with younger Amy than Renitte...so maybe he found it odd....although, once Rory was on board, he did find it funny that Amy would choose him to be her fiance, but Rory as the brother, like Ten he is also vein in his own way, he thought he was handsome, and he loves his bow tie....with Rossana, he made a quip about a certain type of relationship, even though that isn't what she was talking about, he could help but talk in terms of his private at least two points, and asked Rory not to get competative....

So niether of the three Doctor are necessarily more overtly sexual than the other, just have been dealing with different things in different ways....in their own little styles as with everything

Surely you're having a laugh, Tings me old cocker. What happens in Lungbarrow is more kosher than The Lodger? Takes all sorts, I spose ...

Actually I think RTD was very careful about cannon.

However in all cases Story trumps Continuity.

Plus Doctor Who Continuity is already so messy that its impossible not to have some errors here or there

That's what I meant. If they need to change continuity for plot purposes they will. And I'm sure they're aware of what went before, and would try to accommodate that, but nobody could be aware of everything that's happened before in DW.

Except Tingramretro, of course.

Alright, to use old Who then.

Susan, the Doctor's granddaughter (and therefore a Time Lord as well) fell in love with a human called David Campbell. The Doctor locked her out of the TARDIS to make her stay with David and grow up rather than with the Doctor.

So that's Time Lord's being attracted to and falling in love with humans right from the first Doctor's time.

If you take books to be canon, then you'll take the audiobooks of Big Finish to be canon as well, correct?

'An Earthly Child'. Susan is visited by the Eighth Doctor, where it is discovered she has a child with David Campbell called Alex. Alex is part Time Lord, evidenced by his two hearts.

So that adds sex with humans and even reproduction with them.

So what of these is canon? We know the first bit about Susan falling in love with David, because that was on TV. What about the second part?

No, they split up. He was seen at the Coachella Festival with Daisy Lowe though.

Yes, because Lungbarrow came first.

Very well made points both but sadly to no avail in this case since you apply a logical argument and logical argument fails when one or other party changes their view with every passing Post.

And what about the comic strips? The first Doctor was travelling with his grandchildren John and Gillian in the 60s TV Comic.

What about the ice lolly wrappers that told a story, back in the 60s? Surely they are part of "canon" because they are Doctor Who stories?

What about those kids books from the early mid 70s, with K9 having adventures in his spacetravelling K-nel?

Bum. I am falling into that most pointless of subjects: arguing about what does/not constitute "canon". Can't believe I fell for it!


______

Anyhow, Matt Smith isn't gay.

A note: it doesn't matter which medium mentioned a species, individual or technology first - just because the TV show mentions it doesn't mean that either the earlier medium or any fact established in that earlier medium is true.

But you must admit that the very nature of a show like this is that the history can be rewritten to suit the needs of the current stories.

And besides that, the mainstream version of any long-running franchise (usually the television programmes) automatically supercedes the other mediums. This is evident with many other franchises. Things written around/before the mainstream version are only canon until proved otherwise in the mainstream version itself.

You continue to believe what you will about canon, but you will become more increasingly frustrated the longer Doctor Who carries on with it's television series, as that is where all the effort of storytelling goes, and takes precedence over the other mediums, be they historic or current. This is simply true - no further discussion on the matter is needed.