Didn't you just start this column? Yet you've apparently already run out of non-trivial topics to write about.
2
Dr Who is the first TV show I can remember watching. Born in 1961 it along with the Beatles, Monty Python and Star Trek were my eyes to the world, life and reality.
I say this just to point to two things. How important they were as conveyors of a deep world view I still embrace. Secondly to point out the utter creative bankruptcy both of the present 'reboots' (exception the improved brave 'Planet of the Apes' trilogy) and the corresponding deterioration in the reasoning and arguments given here by the commentators.
It is not a question of gender roles or representation anymore than it is problem of rampant Feminism as the 'others side' put it. It is a question of the quality of the show as a whole but that is ignored here as it does not 'fit the narrative' of the ideological warfare between the Breitbart Trumpists on one side and the imperialist 'Centrists' of the present day.
This is just another cynical tired airing of identity politics that is essentially just another propaganda article in the total war mentality of the NYT, Washington Post and MSNBC (see UK Guardian for parallel arguments, even on Dr Who).
The real problem with today's Dr Who has nothing to do with having a male or female in the role, it is the fact that the present show has lost all the verve and passion shown by the gay genius Russel Davis when he bought it back with Christopher Ecclestone and then David Tennant. Moffatt killed Dr Who, it like the new Star Wars film are just weak empty sell outs.
I say this just to point to two things. How important they were as conveyors of a deep world view I still embrace. Secondly to point out the utter creative bankruptcy both of the present 'reboots' (exception the improved brave 'Planet of the Apes' trilogy) and the corresponding deterioration in the reasoning and arguments given here by the commentators.
It is not a question of gender roles or representation anymore than it is problem of rampant Feminism as the 'others side' put it. It is a question of the quality of the show as a whole but that is ignored here as it does not 'fit the narrative' of the ideological warfare between the Breitbart Trumpists on one side and the imperialist 'Centrists' of the present day.
This is just another cynical tired airing of identity politics that is essentially just another propaganda article in the total war mentality of the NYT, Washington Post and MSNBC (see UK Guardian for parallel arguments, even on Dr Who).
The real problem with today's Dr Who has nothing to do with having a male or female in the role, it is the fact that the present show has lost all the verve and passion shown by the gay genius Russel Davis when he bought it back with Christopher Ecclestone and then David Tennant. Moffatt killed Dr Who, it like the new Star Wars film are just weak empty sell outs.
2
Maybe I need my glasses, but at first glance I thought that the photo was of Marissa Mayer.
1
Nothing wrong with The Doctor being a woman but why has there never been a female POTUS?
1
As a pale blue dot in a VERY red state, the father of two 20 something daughters (one of them living in NYC), and a life-long fan of thoughtful science fiction-this is welcome news. Given the long-standing ethos of Doctor Who and Star Trek, one would think there was little overlap between Whovians/Trekkers with Trump/BREXIT supporters, but such people seem to exist.
For the historically ignorant loudmouths out there, the progressive, optimistic vision of humanity’s potential embodied by franchises like Doctor Who (DH) and Star Trek (ST) pulled out of space dock on 23 November, 1963 and then again on September 8, 1966. To wit: November 22nd, 1968 the ST episode “Plato’s Stepchildren” aired showing the first black/white kiss on U.S. prime-time television—a mere seven months after Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated. The original ST presented "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combination” as noble goal worth pursuing. In the 1990s, some ST fans were utterly apoplectic at the idea of a female starship captain headlining a Trek series for the first time. Were these instances of some SJW agenda being pushed down viewers’ throats 20 to 40 years ago as well? From the apparent mindset of many of those objecting to the 13th Doctor’s gender, or the casting of the upcoming ST: Discovery, are likely to have thought so.
For the historically ignorant loudmouths out there, the progressive, optimistic vision of humanity’s potential embodied by franchises like Doctor Who (DH) and Star Trek (ST) pulled out of space dock on 23 November, 1963 and then again on September 8, 1966. To wit: November 22nd, 1968 the ST episode “Plato’s Stepchildren” aired showing the first black/white kiss on U.S. prime-time television—a mere seven months after Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated. The original ST presented "Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combination” as noble goal worth pursuing. In the 1990s, some ST fans were utterly apoplectic at the idea of a female starship captain headlining a Trek series for the first time. Were these instances of some SJW agenda being pushed down viewers’ throats 20 to 40 years ago as well? From the apparent mindset of many of those objecting to the 13th Doctor’s gender, or the casting of the upcoming ST: Discovery, are likely to have thought so.
1
This is a female writer trying to stir the pot to get herself some space in the paper. No real story here.
I can't imagine anyone whose face looks more like a female Doctor Who than Jodie. What a great choice!
Much ado about nothing.
Cootie phobic— that has to be a first for the NYT.
It's a story!!!
Broke the glass ceiling by jumping the shark
1
Go, Lindy, go! Loving the textual fireworks:
"The notion of a 'black and transgender' female Doctor is only absurd if you believe that white men are legitimate, full human beings and everyone else is a novelty."
"That’s because inequality isn’t a bug; it’s a feature."
Your voice and insight are incredible, and I can't wait for your next column.
"The notion of a 'black and transgender' female Doctor is only absurd if you believe that white men are legitimate, full human beings and everyone else is a novelty."
"That’s because inequality isn’t a bug; it’s a feature."
Your voice and insight are incredible, and I can't wait for your next column.
3
Judy Dench could pull this off. This young lady, to me, just doesn't fit the image, the image in my mind's eye, of what a viable Dr. Who should look like.
1
This reminds me of when Captain Jack was revealed to be bisexual, leaning more for men. Oh the howls! But it gave that character so many shades, not just the straight white male hero. I expect this casting to do the same and I for one will be watching again.
1
I've never been a fan of Dr. Who. but I think it's great that they picked a woman. But I am curious to see how well the show does now. Will the new doctor be embraced or scorned by fans of the show? I really don't know which way it will go, but I definitely will follow this story to find out.
As a reddit user, I'd just like to take the time to disavow all of the awful things that occasionally appear on the site. Although there's a lot of jerks out there, most of the website is comprised of fun, interesting, and dorky people who have the same sensible, angry left-wing opinions as your average NYT commenter. Glad to hear about this new Doctor; I've not been following the show too intently recently (although one of my favorite summer experiences was binging on the newer seasons when they were up on Netflix) but I might go back to watch it again now. So nice to see a role historically reserved for white men (albeit occasionally excellent and intoxicating white men; looking at you, David Tenant) getting shaken up like this.
1
Jodie Whittaker is an amazing actress and I can't wait to see what she brings to the role. Yes, it will be a change from what we're used to but so what. Everyone hated the character Pearl until they saw the first episode and then they fell in love with her. Give Jodie a chance and give the new writing team a chance. It's going to make for a very interesting season. And yes, call me sexist but I have a huge crush on her.
As a lifetime watcher of Dr Who, Capaldi was the height of sparkling genius. His departure may mean a pivotal end to the revised role since the good old days of black and white when the imagination of incredible story telling mattered and special effects were handcrafted. I'm highly doubtful his successor has the chops to meet past performances. Add to this Moffat's departure and the addition of several supporting cast and the show looks set to become a sorry jumble. My estimation has little if nothing to do with Dr Who being female (I'm a woman)-I'd have jumped for joy if Swindon had accepted the part. She would have smashed the screen! We'll see if this actress can keep the show going...but I'm honestly saddened to hear this news regarding key changes to a much beloved show. BBC please remember The Doctor can be reincarnated at any time...
1
As a white male who is old enough to have watched the very first DR Who in the 1960s, I am thrilled and happy to see a female Dr. This is an overdue development but one which will hopefully revitalise the show which has been a little tired.
Perhaps also worth pointing out that while the character has been played by a depressingly long sequence of white male actors, the character itself has been essentially sexless. It will be interesting to see how this trait is developed by a female actress.
Perhaps also worth pointing out that while the character has been played by a depressingly long sequence of white male actors, the character itself has been essentially sexless. It will be interesting to see how this trait is developed by a female actress.
One of the longest running series in literature is the OZ series. Few people are aware that there are over 50 Oz books. The leader of Oz, through the incantations of an evil conjuror, had been abducted and transformed into an unidentifiable being. During that period when Oz had no royal leader, The Wizard was anointed the ruler.
Cutting to the chase, the boy Pip, who joined Dorothy on an incredible journey, was actually the girl ruler of Oz, Ozma. I believe the tale was written in 1914, regardless, it's a mind twister when it's discovered that Pip is a girl, and many tales later, no one questions the generous rule of Ozma of Oz.
Cutting to the chase, the boy Pip, who joined Dorothy on an incredible journey, was actually the girl ruler of Oz, Ozma. I believe the tale was written in 1914, regardless, it's a mind twister when it's discovered that Pip is a girl, and many tales later, no one questions the generous rule of Ozma of Oz.
1
The best Doctor is, to me, unquestionable. None of them had the spark and life and fun of the Doctor Donna. I wish they could have kept her longer. That was too much fun.
4
You can count me as one of the people disappointed with this. Not angry, or ready to lose sleep over a TV show, but the Doctor has traditionally been male, and has always had male traits. I feel that the hiring of a female Doctor was forced for the sake of diversity. If they think there's a market for it, create a new show with a female lead.
1
It's about time. I stopped watching Dr. Who partially because of the idiotic men cast in the title role. With few exceptions they were less than wonderful. And the story lines kept getting stranger and stranger. Maybe the influence of a woman DR will have an effect and the show will go back to being interesting to watch.
1
Before Eccleston, my favorite Time Lord was actually Mary Tamm's Romana. I would have preferred that the BBC return Romana (number 1) in some new form rather than change the Doctor's actual sex.
There has always been a creepy sexual subtext in Doctor Who regarding his female companions. It got worse when the series was revived. Why was this male Doctor always dragging off these women to travel in space and time and why when dragged off why didn't the women object more, I've always wondered. Also,episodes with Tennant as Doctor implied that Doctor had been married to Queen Elisabeth the 1st for a while. And Capaldi was actually married to half-time-lord River Song (who nobly gave up her future re- generations to save one of the Doctors, which seemed exploitative to me).
When Whittaker runs into River Song or one of the Doctors other female companions it is going to weird. I don't watch Doctor Who for that kind of weirdness.
There has always been a creepy sexual subtext in Doctor Who regarding his female companions. It got worse when the series was revived. Why was this male Doctor always dragging off these women to travel in space and time and why when dragged off why didn't the women object more, I've always wondered. Also,episodes with Tennant as Doctor implied that Doctor had been married to Queen Elisabeth the 1st for a while. And Capaldi was actually married to half-time-lord River Song (who nobly gave up her future re- generations to save one of the Doctors, which seemed exploitative to me).
When Whittaker runs into River Song or one of the Doctors other female companions it is going to weird. I don't watch Doctor Who for that kind of weirdness.
I get the feeling that Lindy West doesn't watch Doctor Who.
Lindy - if you're unfamiliar with the series, the Doctor Who is thousands - not hundreds - of years old, and he only regenerates after he dies, not after an injury. (Don't bother pointing out the time David Tenant regrew a hand. He was still in the midst of a regeneration.)
Lindy - if you're unfamiliar with the series, the Doctor Who is thousands - not hundreds - of years old, and he only regenerates after he dies, not after an injury. (Don't bother pointing out the time David Tenant regrew a hand. He was still in the midst of a regeneration.)
1
Ahh.. to be 35 and to think I had the wisdom of someone who was 55 - ha.
The author's piece is one of those wonderful ones, that retreads any example of male/female identity as some kind of a metaphor for our society's unfair treatment of women. Please.
Make a tv series about Jane Austen, or a female character of Jane Austen's creation, and just to mix things up a bit, make that main female role be played by a man.
We all know many people and groups would be upset, right? Are they 'all' ignorant man-haters? No, of course not.
They, like me, have developed a emotional bond to a particular person or character, and like in life itself, a person's sex is a defining, visual (at least) feature of a person. So I guess I am saying a female Dr. Who, or a male Jane Austen or character thereof, runs afoul of that long held 'special' affection and identification.
The person just is not the same person one has come to love - its that simple.
I (and, I am sure 'most') am fine with a new sci-fi-fi show with a female main character. But I think I have the right to say that I am not happy with the decision, silly as the issue is, to make a beloved male figure, female (or, for that matter, visa-versa), without being lumped in with Trump supporters or the tribe scared white men. Spare me from that!
The author's piece is one of those wonderful ones, that retreads any example of male/female identity as some kind of a metaphor for our society's unfair treatment of women. Please.
Make a tv series about Jane Austen, or a female character of Jane Austen's creation, and just to mix things up a bit, make that main female role be played by a man.
We all know many people and groups would be upset, right? Are they 'all' ignorant man-haters? No, of course not.
They, like me, have developed a emotional bond to a particular person or character, and like in life itself, a person's sex is a defining, visual (at least) feature of a person. So I guess I am saying a female Dr. Who, or a male Jane Austen or character thereof, runs afoul of that long held 'special' affection and identification.
The person just is not the same person one has come to love - its that simple.
I (and, I am sure 'most') am fine with a new sci-fi-fi show with a female main character. But I think I have the right to say that I am not happy with the decision, silly as the issue is, to make a beloved male figure, female (or, for that matter, visa-versa), without being lumped in with Trump supporters or the tribe scared white men. Spare me from that!
2
It makes sense, and it might draw more women to Sci-Fi. The guys are always there, and perhaps a few more will do so for the eye candy. But, as more women get into STEM, they'll probably watch more due to Dr. Who joining the 20th Century, finally.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
Let's not forget actress Michele Gomez who's already settled the topic of a time lord's gender fluidity with her stellar performance as The Master. She even appeared beside her past, male counter-self in an awkward amalgamation of mutual attraction (thus self adulation) and disapproval (self examination) that was played superbly by both actors (John Simm).
You could even extend the construct as a love triangle between the male and female versions of the Master and the Doctor.
No, The Master as a female isn't as controversial as The Doctor as a female, but I think a female doctor asks us to examine ever deeper the meaning of our identity beyond the confines of our external selves. Be it biases due to gender, age, appearance or class.
I'm looking forward to more of the thoughtful story telling and rompish sci-fi.
You could even extend the construct as a love triangle between the male and female versions of the Master and the Doctor.
No, The Master as a female isn't as controversial as The Doctor as a female, but I think a female doctor asks us to examine ever deeper the meaning of our identity beyond the confines of our external selves. Be it biases due to gender, age, appearance or class.
I'm looking forward to more of the thoughtful story telling and rompish sci-fi.
12
I watched the show a few times. The 'science' is just way too goofy for me.
Science fiction to me has to be at least 'plausible'. I realize the 18th century folks would see that something as intangible and abstract as communication via electromagnetic wave propagation is simply beyond the pale.
I would hardly ever doubt that some future generation of folks would experience time travel as routine and as mundane say as surfing the internet using a handheld device such as an iPhone.
What this has to do with the gender of the doctor escapes me.
I really don't care what the gender of the doctor, I just can't suspend.
Science fiction to me has to be at least 'plausible'. I realize the 18th century folks would see that something as intangible and abstract as communication via electromagnetic wave propagation is simply beyond the pale.
I would hardly ever doubt that some future generation of folks would experience time travel as routine and as mundane say as surfing the internet using a handheld device such as an iPhone.
What this has to do with the gender of the doctor escapes me.
I really don't care what the gender of the doctor, I just can't suspend.
They went rather off script casting Peter Capaldi, who I believe is the finest actor in the role since Tom Baker. They have been going from pole to pole in their choices in recent regenerations, and this makes a logical and welcome choice.
7
I must admit, as a woman I have mixed feelings about the casting of a woman as the Doctor. I'll give her a chance, but I know David Tennant will remain my favorite Who, regardless.
6
Just to clear things up, I'm Theo, the 17-year-old son of the owners of this account.
I see that this topic is controversial, and I wanted to contribute my voice as a white straight man:
A female Doctor is progress for everyone.
It's really important to show that women are competent, strong leads and not just side characters to be oggled, especially at a time when someone like the US president was still elected after the release of the Access Hollywood tapes.
The Doctor adapts. The people saying that there are "Feminists killing one of the most male dominated shows" don't even understand the Doctor as a character. On a fundamental level, the Doctor is constantly changing and adapting to new environments--arguably part of the reason the show has gone on for half a century. Why can't her gender be one of the things that changes? Just read the samples off of Reddit and see the ingrained sexism in our culture.
A female lead is progress. The Doctor sometimes being he, and sometimes she is progress.
I see that this topic is controversial, and I wanted to contribute my voice as a white straight man:
A female Doctor is progress for everyone.
It's really important to show that women are competent, strong leads and not just side characters to be oggled, especially at a time when someone like the US president was still elected after the release of the Access Hollywood tapes.
The Doctor adapts. The people saying that there are "Feminists killing one of the most male dominated shows" don't even understand the Doctor as a character. On a fundamental level, the Doctor is constantly changing and adapting to new environments--arguably part of the reason the show has gone on for half a century. Why can't her gender be one of the things that changes? Just read the samples off of Reddit and see the ingrained sexism in our culture.
A female lead is progress. The Doctor sometimes being he, and sometimes she is progress.
29
Well said. The Doctor adapts. Unfortunately, humans are slower than him. Some more than others. I suspect The Doctor has been female many times over the years, the millennia
10
Too right, and Jodie will look great in tight leggings!
Of all the Reddit temper tantrums over character changes, this one infuriates me the most. Other characters I might understand their confusion, might worry the change was not driven enough by story arc even as I was glad of the diversity. However, the Doctor was always a character that could and did have many bodies including multiple genders and anybody who watched it over the years knew that. There were sly winks and nods to that effect in dialogue. It's almost weird its taken this long, a true fan might think. So the people weighing in are by definition not true fans. All I care about is can she do the DR right, and fans know what that means. It most certainly doesn't have anything to do with a some performance of masculinity. Good God,the doctor? Have they been paying attention? So these are trogs foisting their ugly war upon a show they do not understand. And never could.
12
I'd love to see some story lines with Captain Jack again, or River Song when she meets the newest regenerated Doctor. Two of my favorite characters besides the companions.
The Doctors have stated that they have been of the opposite sex in various incarnations. Those bringing our narrow minded sexist views into the conversation are not very enlightened. The Doctor would admonish sexism, racism, homophobia and a lot of our other unfounded fears.
13
I can remember the first Dr. Who (William Hartnell) and his battle against the frightening Daleks. Provided Ms. Whittaker can defend us from them I will be happy.
7
When i read the title of the story my first thought had nothing to do with political correctness, feminism, equality seeking. It was nothing more than it would have been had any other actor whose name i didn't know. Oh, okay. My second thought was "that's a logical thing to do." If The Doctor is going to be humanoid then why not be a woman as well as a man?
That there are neanderthals in our society who can't see beyond their own interests is a sad commentary on how far we have yet to go.
That there are neanderthals in our society who can't see beyond their own interests is a sad commentary on how far we have yet to go.
7
Dr. Who is a TV show for goodness sake. One would think the Vatican announced that the next Pope is slated to be a woman (joke).
If Dr. Who is a shape-shifting alien, why wouldn't the character be a woman when circumstances demand; or an Indian man, or Russian woman, or a dog which communicates telepathically? Why is the character British or Scottish, or from the U.K.?
But I am glad a white, female, British actress is getting her shot at playing the lead on a mediocre TV serial. Why not? Bad male actors have been doing the same in myriad sad productions since TV was invented. Frankly, I have always thought Hamlet should be a woman (seriously).
Which leads me to ask: why is human imagination so stuck in the ditch that some show as old and shoddy as Dr. Who is still something people are producing, watching or talking about?
Please deliver all death threats to my front door, in person. No need to ring the doorbell, I have cameras and am betting I can spot the Reddit-dwelling Dr. Who luddites.
If Dr. Who is a shape-shifting alien, why wouldn't the character be a woman when circumstances demand; or an Indian man, or Russian woman, or a dog which communicates telepathically? Why is the character British or Scottish, or from the U.K.?
But I am glad a white, female, British actress is getting her shot at playing the lead on a mediocre TV serial. Why not? Bad male actors have been doing the same in myriad sad productions since TV was invented. Frankly, I have always thought Hamlet should be a woman (seriously).
Which leads me to ask: why is human imagination so stuck in the ditch that some show as old and shoddy as Dr. Who is still something people are producing, watching or talking about?
Please deliver all death threats to my front door, in person. No need to ring the doorbell, I have cameras and am betting I can spot the Reddit-dwelling Dr. Who luddites.
4
Whining about men whining about something most men neither know nor care about.
If that is not worth a Pulitzer what is?
If that is not worth a Pulitzer what is?
3
Hoist with your own petard...
Most all my doctors are women, and none at all are white men. I would be surprised if the next Dr. was a man and don't care that its not. Now if the next Dr. Who had turned out to be a liquid gender full of hetroflexibility I would have to take notice. Not the case.
1
As a fan since Tom Baker, I am delighted. I don't view it as PC, but a chance to explore the character from overdue and different perspectives. How will other characters respond to the doctor as a woman? Bring on Riversong! Or Rose. Or Donna. The possibilities can drive new interesting plots and subplots. Or the producers may just ignore the doctor is a woman aspect and continue on the every other week dreary plot lines. Personally, I hope they explore the gender issues. I have seen plenty of not so good male Doctors and no shortage of unresolved sexual tension plot lines. I am hoping for the best with this new casting of an excellent actor.
4
I don't think River would have a problem; this would be her third wife.
Done watching Dr. Who.
4
Good for you! Now you can try dating!
1
If one is losing sleep over a fictional character even an iconic one being portrayed by a woman...then one has some deep seated personal issues.
13
It's those same deep seated issues that denied us our first woman president.
Didn't we already have this argument (read: tantrum) 20 years ago with Captain Janeway?
14
We see this tantrum anytime people try to include representations in popular culture that assume the default person/hero isn't a straight white male. Apparently acknowledging that women are 50% of the global population is too PC.
1
Let Whittaker have her run as the doctor, but pray tell just how is Caitlin Jenner a terrible suggestion? My vote is cast for the next open slot!
2
Caitlin Jenner is only a terrible idea because she is not a good actress. There are plenty of trans persons who would be better, and that I would support. But your broader point is well taken,
Um...is Caitlin Jenner acknowledged as a quality actor?
Your suggestion makes little sense.
Your suggestion makes little sense.
It is fascinating to imagine a being that can regenerate into any gender, age, and, I wouldn't be surprised to learn, species. Though perhaps it would be limited to any bipedal humanoid species. But this presupposes the idea that no gender, age or species is inherently better than any other -- excepting, of course Daleks and Weeping Angels being worse. I look forward to seeing what Chibnall and Whittaker will make of Doctor Who, and especially of that initial period where the Doctor adjusts to his (and now her) new form and tastebuds. The universe of Doctor Who doesn't tend to treat women differently from men in terms of status, in any case. I can't wait for Christmas.
It is usually people who are discontent with themselves who seek to confirm lesser status on others. and all you can do is ignore them when possible, and otherwise do your best not to allow those attitudes to affect society.
It is usually the people who are not content with themselves
It is usually people who are discontent with themselves who seek to confirm lesser status on others. and all you can do is ignore them when possible, and otherwise do your best not to allow those attitudes to affect society.
It is usually the people who are not content with themselves
5
Keep in mind that for the corner of the Internet that has a toxic response to this casting, there is a legion of fans who are celebrating.
I am white, male, and a Doctor Who fan for the last decade or so. And I am pumped for this new regeneration. It has long been a point of curiosity for me and others I know what a female Doctor would be like. How will it change the character? What kind of interactions will it introduce? Will it ever not be funny when the Doctor reintroduces themselves to someone they knew in a past regeneration and addresses the whole, "Yep, female now" question?
What I am most looking forward to is that moment that comes with every regeneration, when the person on screen manages that combination of brilliant, crazy, and zany that makes us collectively go, "That's the Doctor all right. New face, but still the same daft old man who stole a magic box and ran away. Man? Whatever, who cares. It's the Doctor."
PS: It isn't like this choice is completely out of left field. Over the last several years the show has given at least a couple examples of Time Lords who swapped genders between regenerations. Last season's finale even showed one such example on screen.
I am white, male, and a Doctor Who fan for the last decade or so. And I am pumped for this new regeneration. It has long been a point of curiosity for me and others I know what a female Doctor would be like. How will it change the character? What kind of interactions will it introduce? Will it ever not be funny when the Doctor reintroduces themselves to someone they knew in a past regeneration and addresses the whole, "Yep, female now" question?
What I am most looking forward to is that moment that comes with every regeneration, when the person on screen manages that combination of brilliant, crazy, and zany that makes us collectively go, "That's the Doctor all right. New face, but still the same daft old man who stole a magic box and ran away. Man? Whatever, who cares. It's the Doctor."
PS: It isn't like this choice is completely out of left field. Over the last several years the show has given at least a couple examples of Time Lords who swapped genders between regenerations. Last season's finale even showed one such example on screen.
11
What percentage of Dr. Who fans are boys between the ages
of 6 - 14 ?
Who do they imagine themselves to be at that age ?
That alone should tell you why this is a bad idea.
of 6 - 14 ?
Who do they imagine themselves to be at that age ?
That alone should tell you why this is a bad idea.
2
Ok, let's take this piece by piece.
First, six? Really? I understand that Dr. Who was originally positioned as a family show, and that eight and up was the original target, but that's pretty clearly been upped over the last few years: Moffet was not targeting pre-release; if anything it was YA, but realistically, late teens/early twenties.
Second, the BBC has confirmed that their demographics show that the audience is somewhere between 40 and 50% female. So, no matter how many male kids are watching, it's not the majority of the audience.
Third, are you seriously arguing that the primary responsibly of the casting department is to pick a good role model for pre-teen boys? Because if it is, someone forgot to inform the scriptwriters; I'm pretty sure that 'good role model' is not exactly top of their chart.
Fourth, what about all the little girls who have been watching for years? I can honestly say I never once thought 'I want to grow up to be Tom Baker's Doctor', but that didn't stop me from enjoying it as a (just) ten year old. If you're seriously arguing that boys can't enjoy a show with a female lead, then, my friend, I'm going to have to suggest you consult another excellent source of British wackiness: perhaps a little 'imagining seven impossible things before breakfast' might help?
First, six? Really? I understand that Dr. Who was originally positioned as a family show, and that eight and up was the original target, but that's pretty clearly been upped over the last few years: Moffet was not targeting pre-release; if anything it was YA, but realistically, late teens/early twenties.
Second, the BBC has confirmed that their demographics show that the audience is somewhere between 40 and 50% female. So, no matter how many male kids are watching, it's not the majority of the audience.
Third, are you seriously arguing that the primary responsibly of the casting department is to pick a good role model for pre-teen boys? Because if it is, someone forgot to inform the scriptwriters; I'm pretty sure that 'good role model' is not exactly top of their chart.
Fourth, what about all the little girls who have been watching for years? I can honestly say I never once thought 'I want to grow up to be Tom Baker's Doctor', but that didn't stop me from enjoying it as a (just) ten year old. If you're seriously arguing that boys can't enjoy a show with a female lead, then, my friend, I'm going to have to suggest you consult another excellent source of British wackiness: perhaps a little 'imagining seven impossible things before breakfast' might help?
1
I don't get it. Perhaps you should spell it out.
I think the article is a desperate attempt to prove misogyny on a scale that doesn't reflect reality. I watched Dr. Who as a child in the 70s and 80s and the show was neither genius nor particularly entertaining, the cast female or male won't change that. Trump did not beat Hillary because of sexism but because she was the wrong candidate. Trump voters would have voted for Sarah Palin in a second had they had the chance. There might be an us versus them mentality in many parts of society between women and men but for NYT to feed this notion and exaggerate the scale is irresponsible. The problems we have to solve locally, statewide, nationwide and globally can only be solved together women and men. Listening to voices from internet chat rooms and giving them a forum as is done here exaggerates their weight and importance and possibly feeds a notion that these sentiments are part of society in general.
5
You missed out Dr. Who under Steven Moffat was extremely entertaining and showed flashes of genius on a few occasions. Indeed, it's the change of showrunners that has me concerned. (Truth be known, however, I thought he lost his touch the past couple of seasons.)
The sexist comments are not contained in the dark corners of the internet alone. Mainstream news media is full of them, both from content producers and the general public. In the UK, female public figures regularly receive sexist hate mail and threats of rape and murder. I imagine things are not altogether different in the US.
My 13 year old, brownskinned, American daughter is an enormous fan of this show. The makers of this show are speaking to an audience that is not just a bunch of white guys. To all the complainers out there: you aren't the only fans of the show.
11
Ms. West: Please stop conflating Trump with all white men and, specifically, with those white men who are annoyed with the casting of a female Dr. Who. It's unclear why women cannot start their own franchises rather than take control of something that has historically been for men. It is possible, and human, to feel frustration at constantly being called a misogynist when in reality, most white men are just trying to get by like everyone else. We are not all wealthy, connected, and filled with hatred for minorities and women. Saying we are only hurts your argument and forces white men to push back harder on non-issues like the casting of a woman in this role.
7
"historically been for men" and therein lies the problem. your statement exemplifies exactly why a female doctor is important--to say that women are welcome in every space, even in places where they historically were not. voting was historically for men. that doesn't mean it is now.
Nothing in this article "forces" men to push back harder. That's a choice you made. Please don't pain yourself as a victim; it's both ridiculous and unbecoming of a man.
Mychnado about nothing. There is only one Who that truly constituted the Doctor: Tom Baker
3
To me, the character of Dr Who has always been that of an absent minded Oxbridge professor, slightly autistic, quirky and brilliant. The brilliant bit, I am sure a female actor can do. But as a generalization, the rest of that character troupe comes from stereotypical male traits. Sure, the time traveling alien bit will still be there, the blue Tardis will still be there, the doctorial title will still be there. But the character is likely to be totally different. Will it really still be the same Dr that I love and have come to identify with? (well, the autistic and absent minded bits at least).
4
How about Theresa Mae, Britain' S current PM. She has that removed, quirky, spacey autistic thing down.
While I do agree generally with the casting of a female Doctor Who (long past time anyway), and Lindy West does raise some interesting points, I feel West should have stayed closer to the subject of the BBC and Doctor Who, or at least rename the Op-Ed to actually reflect the content of her writing.
The show is Doctor Who. The Time Lord pf Galifrey is The Doctor.
1
I think the problem here may be over reaction. People who love their stories are naturally resistant to change. Even when actors of the same gender and race are switched out it cases consternation. Yet we also live in a world that is not blind to the realities of race, gender, and culture. The more severe a change to a character, the more severe the change the character's back story as well. Fans are just that, fans. They like their characters, and when they suddenly flip genders, or race, or even hair styles fans get upset (same thing happened when Hermione Granger was portrayed as a black woman). Fans come around, but we should be cautious in reading 'ism's into character changes when more mundane explanations like fans being curmudgeons about their characters may be more accurate.
2
I am chagrined by the misogyny found in the fanbases of progressive franchises like Doctor Who and Star Trek. Both of these universes are based on a Progressive Secular Humanist vision that is inclusive when it comes to race, gender, place of origin, etc. I'm not sure how such raging misogynists can consider themselves "fans" of such shows when they seem clueless about the underlying values espoused by these franchises. It doesn't matter to me who portrays The Doctor as long as they bring something special to the role that continues the honored tradition of the Time Lords. If these so-called fans can't handle such diversity, they can always watch reruns of Two and a Half Men to feel better about themselves.
11
@Robert Karma "Progressive Secular Humanist" is not a requirement for inclusiveness. And, plenty of "Progressive Secular Humanists" are misogynists. Just sayin'.
1
I agree that being a Progressive Secular Humanist is not a requirement for inclusiveness. It is just the philosophical foundation of Doctor Who and Star Trek. I would like to see some evidence that supports your second claim. All of the Secular Humanists I have known and met over the past several decades have not displayed any misogyny. I was a member of the New Orleans Secular Humanist Association during my time in the Big Easy. The President and several of the board members are women. The Secular Humanist group I was in back during grad school in East Tennessee was led by a woman. Maybe such SH groups exist where the men act like sexist pigs but I have been fortunate to not have encountered them. Remember that Secular Humanist groups cover a lot of worldview territory from those in liberal Christian churches to Jews to Buddhists to Agnostics to the merely Spiritual to Atheists to those who have no label, etc. The only criteria being that you agree on the goals of Secular Humanism. Now in the area of "New Atheism" I have heard claims of misogyny and sexual harassment in stories posted online. There seems to be a schism between the Hard Science Atheists and the Social Justice Atheists aka Atheism+. I've never been involved in a situation where that schism occurred. So all I know is what I have read about online.
What do those folks on Reddit know? Jodie is born to be Doctor Who!
4
Two of the reboot (three if we include Hurt) were not major fans of the show, but Capaldi was a huge fan who even wrote in to the show when he was IIRC 12 years old and Tennant said he went into acting just because being the Doctor was his childhood dream! Those two were figuratively born for the role.
1
Many moons ago I watched this show for a few minutes. The low production values and soap opera look (shot on tape) told me to never come back. I do not recall if the show had a script. Best of all, we have no TV access, so watching this new version of a not very good product is not possible.
The question now is: who is going to be Dr. Who's sidekick/companion? a young man, young woman or a transgender?
3
"A woman ends an all-male streak, and somehow that is a loss for men." This certainly sounds more compelling than "A woman ends an all-male streak, and somehow that is a loss for some Internet users I came across." But which is actually supported by your article?
4
At least it's a Britt that has the role. Could you imagine what would be said if it were say .... an American????
5
A more accurate byline for this story: A woman ends an all-male streak, and somehow that is a loss for some men I came across on the internet.
3
Equality is the future. I am disappointed, and may be a bit surprised, that some science fiction fans still have their heads struck in the past. I have always liked Dr. Who for its quirkiness; I think that Ms. Whittaker will do great if she manage to keep to this tone of the show.
2
I'm pretty sure this is the definition of a straw man argument, and a noticeable pattern in the author's writing. The only proof that people are upset, are a random sampling of Reddit comments (followed by an admission by the author that you can find anything on the internet, although this doesn't stop her from spending the entire column arguing with a bunch of Reddit trolls).
I've never seen the show. Personally, I'd like to think that the show is doing what's best for the show. If that's a woman or man, so be it. In this case, I'm fine with choosing a woman for historical purposes. I really don't think many people care, and, there are plenty of people who are openly supportive.
I've never seen the show. Personally, I'd like to think that the show is doing what's best for the show. If that's a woman or man, so be it. In this case, I'm fine with choosing a woman for historical purposes. I really don't think many people care, and, there are plenty of people who are openly supportive.
4
I'm a fan of Dr. Who and I am a fan of Broadchurch. I have no doubt in my mind that Ms. Whittaker can take on this role and make it both her own and great. But, if drawing from the cast of Broadchurch, I'd have preferred Olivia Colman. She's an amazing actress and I think would have been an incredible Doctor.
I look forward to Ms. Whittaker's portrayal. But, I will always wonder what could have been, had Ms. Colman been cast.
I look forward to Ms. Whittaker's portrayal. But, I will always wonder what could have been, had Ms. Colman been cast.
5
Colman or Swindon would have been the best news!
More attractive women on BBC TV? What male of the species could refuse?
3
My son is autistic, and he and his autistic friend deeply love Dr. Who. They get mad when something threatens their fantasy lives, which are very, very important to them. And they get mad explosively.
I'm not saying that there isn't plenty to worry about with how males are reacting to this and so many other things. And the Dr. Who character seems like a perfect one to develop in this direction. But some outraged voices on the internet are not necessarily Trumpsters or Bannonites; they're just boys in men's bodies, but have brains that don't deal well with our changing, very confusing, and unpredictable world.
I'm not saying that there isn't plenty to worry about with how males are reacting to this and so many other things. And the Dr. Who character seems like a perfect one to develop in this direction. But some outraged voices on the internet are not necessarily Trumpsters or Bannonites; they're just boys in men's bodies, but have brains that don't deal well with our changing, very confusing, and unpredictable world.
5
I'm not surprised your autistic son loves it. Peter Capaldi's stated intention as the Twelfth Doctor was to move away from the romantic boyfriend doctors to embody more of the doctors of the classic series with a touch of the alien. They were slightly removed from the petty concerns of ordinary humans and not always able to grasp their emotions. I read that some viewers with Asperger's or on the spectrum really identified with his portrayal and saw it as the way they interact with confusingly emotional humanity. I read a fan commentary by an autistic woman who listed many of the tics and mannerisms of the Twelfth Doctor as her own. It gave me a new appreciation of how the show has continued to expand its world to include all kinds.
5
Dr. Who can be female. Why not? But this article reminds me of disaffected Catholics who decry institutionalized sexism and prejudice in the church. Misogyny is in its DNA, can't be picked out like mushrooms off a pizza. In an age of vastly superior television shows like G.L.O.W., why are we writing think pieces on low budget boys' fantasy? Can't we just do better than rewarming the dog's breakfast?
2
As long as real women are facing very real efforts to deny them access to contraception and healthcare, the question of who plays a fictional character on a TV show does not matter. At.all.
5
Sanderling1,
Agreed it shouldn't matter much to adults in the grand scheme of things. But I do think that it can and should matter to young girls. And I know and love a 11 year old girl who's thrilled that her beloved Dr Who is now a woman.
Agreed it shouldn't matter much to adults in the grand scheme of things. But I do think that it can and should matter to young girls. And I know and love a 11 year old girl who's thrilled that her beloved Dr Who is now a woman.
10
"Of course, it’s possible (and, often, not especially illuminating) to comb the internet for every flavor of bad idea, but this tantrum, though silly, seems particularly emblematic of our current cultural moment."
You can go looking for ways to be offended all you want. (I guarantee there is a Reddit for basically any opinion; at least you recognize that.) But don't go claiming (even implicitly) that these views are "particularly emblematic of our current cultural moment." Here in deeply-Conservative rural Nebraska, we really don't care that the 13th Doctor is a woman.
You can go looking for ways to be offended all you want. (I guarantee there is a Reddit for basically any opinion; at least you recognize that.) But don't go claiming (even implicitly) that these views are "particularly emblematic of our current cultural moment." Here in deeply-Conservative rural Nebraska, we really don't care that the 13th Doctor is a woman.
4
You don't actually have to go "looking" too much. If you're interested in the series the official Doctor Who page on Facebook is a likely port of call. It had a huge amount tantrum throwing in comments.
5
Dr. Who also battles against The Daleks
An unforgivable omission from this excellent article!
An unforgivable omission from this excellent article!
2
I assumed the "evil fire hydrants" mention was a reference to Daleks. Or did I miss an episode...?
Same here.
That would be the "evil fire hydrants" in paragraph three.
"Of course, it’s possible (and, often, not especially illuminating) to comb the internet for every flavor of bad idea"
This is the most important line in the article. If you're going to get upset about internet trolls, then I envy the amount of free time you have.
This is the most important line in the article. If you're going to get upset about internet trolls, then I envy the amount of free time you have.
4
why are men so fragile?
6
Saying that is just as wrong as it is to say no woman can be Dr. Who, or asking, "Why are women so stupid? "
.
By the way, I 'm not fragile at all. I'm happy to see a female Dr. Who.
.
By the way, I 'm not fragile at all. I'm happy to see a female Dr. Who.
5
SOME men are fragile - and it's because they know without an advantage over others, they don't make the cut. Others just get an ego boost out of playing victim and using it as an excuse to put down women and society.
Plenty of men don't see any issue with female Dr. Who nor do they expect preferences nor priority over others on any basis other than merit. Generalizations - they're just always wrong.
Plenty of men don't see any issue with female Dr. Who nor do they expect preferences nor priority over others on any basis other than merit. Generalizations - they're just always wrong.
2
Whittaker is a fine actress and will do a lot with the role. As for the change in sex, it's amusing that people find it OK that the Doctor can change into a completely different person, but not OK that that different person is a woman. If you accept one possibility, you pretty much have to accept the other.
10
When I was a lad, we science fiction fan nerds could in general be counted on to be among the more progressive, open-minded folks you were ever likely to meet, an attitude that probably went hand-in-hand with our status as societal outsiders with a fringe interest in that weird science fiction stuff. To paint with the over-broad brush of stereotype, it was the jocks and bullies who tormented us who were the closed-minded reactionaries.
Ah, how times have changed. Now that science fiction has gone mainstream and it's no longer considered a bit odd, or even unseemly, for an adult to take an interest in a show like Doctor Who, it seems that nerds are just as capable of being closed-minded and reactionary as any other segment of society.
Ah, how times have changed. Now that science fiction has gone mainstream and it's no longer considered a bit odd, or even unseemly, for an adult to take an interest in a show like Doctor Who, it seems that nerds are just as capable of being closed-minded and reactionary as any other segment of society.
10
This isn't a loss for men. It's a gain for the human race.
3
Doctor Who is a big deal in the UK, indeed, close to a national institution. Several commenters have suggested/complained that the trolling comments were "cherry picked" just to fit the writers "agenda." They weren't. They represent a significant portion of the, especially, UK responses (over 30% disapproval according to one poll). A measure of the depth of this issue is the fact that a major British daily published nude pictures of Ms. Whittaker a day or two after the announcement! Think about that. It's hard to be shocked any more in the current political climate, but that was shocking. Hardly "just a TV program."
6
I have been a fan of the Doctor since 1985. I did not think anybody could play it better than Tom Baker but none since has disappointed me.
I am looking forward to struggle again without getting ginger hair.
I am looking forward to struggle again without getting ginger hair.
1
I am for women's equality (e.g., opportunity, pay). That doesn't mean I agree with many feminists, some of whom it sometimes seem seek to banish the differences between men and women, which are real. And as someone who loves literature and history, I cordially dislike (I swiped that from Tolkien) the willy-nilly replacement of well-established characters who happen to have certain identities - e.g., Hamlet or James Bond or Othello - with actors with other skin colors or genders - simply to satisfy their notions of diversity - when it makes no sense. It has not about protecting white males. Mr. Miyagi has to be a male and has to be Japanese. I would oppose to the same degree having Othello or Joan of Arc played by George Clooney. Why? Because it's inconsistent with the story. Will it ruin my life if they do? Of course not. I probably just won't watch. Sadly, it is trend in Hollywood to do this. I'd rather they write new stuff.
But, here, there is no reason in the space-time continuum that Dr. Who cannot be a woman. The creature we know as the doctor assumes the body of a human. Why a male one? It may be traditional, but neither the story nor logic requires it at all. In fact, it's somewhat inconsistent that it is always a male. I say go for it, but please don't make the show all about feminism, or you will ruin it, just as The Ellen DeGeneres Show (the series, not the talk show), which I liked a lot, was ruined by making it all about her sexual identity.
But, here, there is no reason in the space-time continuum that Dr. Who cannot be a woman. The creature we know as the doctor assumes the body of a human. Why a male one? It may be traditional, but neither the story nor logic requires it at all. In fact, it's somewhat inconsistent that it is always a male. I say go for it, but please don't make the show all about feminism, or you will ruin it, just as The Ellen DeGeneres Show (the series, not the talk show), which I liked a lot, was ruined by making it all about her sexual identity.
3
I always find it really interesting to watch BBC shows and mentally compare the ethnic composition of a British city like London to the ethnicity of the actors you see in their shows, as well as the depictions of what constitutes a Briton and how social classes are depicted / ignored. I would be interesting to see a comparison of statistics on how ethnically and culturally one-sided British TV is relative to Hollywood. Of course everyone in Britain has to fund BBC through their TV tax, so there is also a question of taxation without representation. Glad we rebelled against that.
3
As an American, I really appreciate BBC programming because I often see brown people like me more often than in American shows. But I have never been to London so I don't know if it is somewhat representative. Still, it is far more validating than what I see on American TV.
3
I'm not sure how anyone actually watching Doctor Who for at least the last decade or so could be among those trolls. The show has emphasized again and again and again the gender fluidity of the Time Lords-- it's referenced and discussed pretty much every few episodes-- the whole huge Master/Missy storyline for example has the Doctor trying to remember what gender both of them were at the time they met. Acting overly surprised or outraged over a female Doctor would suggest somebody who hasn't actually watched the show in a long, long time, if ever.
16
What makes you think any of the critics of this move actually watch the show?
Just another excuse for the old white male guard to complain at the injustice of it all, despite > 6000 years of pretty much complete control.
Just another excuse for the old white male guard to complain at the injustice of it all, despite > 6000 years of pretty much complete control.
7
Bug vs feature. What a nice, modern analogy! Been thinking about feminine equality in this context for hours now. I don't think I can approach inequality as anything other than a bug and call myself a feminist.
4
This is the second article of West's that I've read. Both follow the same pattern;
Criticize a response of a small, non-randomized sample of the "white" (whatever that is) male population and generalize the response to all white males. She should get out more, think a little more clearly, or both.
Criticize a response of a small, non-randomized sample of the "white" (whatever that is) male population and generalize the response to all white males. She should get out more, think a little more clearly, or both.
7
I don't see where she's generalized the *reaction* to all white men, at all. She faults only "certain online communities." The mention of white men at the end is alluding to representation, and she's exactly correct. White men do not need to see more "people like me" on screen--if anythimg, fewer.
3
Poptimus, lindy west thinks quite clearly. Which words or sentences led you to believe that she generalized this to all white males?
2
It is reassuring to see that your sample of her writing was in no way small or non-randomized. After all, you read two whole articles! Therefore you can safely draw broad conclusions about not only all of her writing, but also her social habits and intellectual prowess. Well done!
5
I wonder what people would say if the next James Bond were a womanizing lesbian.
6
I would pay to see that.
2
What I find most disconcerting about this article isn't the author's argument, it's that a lot of op-eds strike this tone that "nerd" culture (comic book and sci-fi) is somehow inherently sexist. The men described as being fans of sci-fi and comic books are described in derogatory terms as if they are all trapped in their parents basements covered with soda, potato chips and are afraid of women. It has been my experience that this is so very far from the truth. In fact, many comic book male fans are especially forward thinking and were more accepting of a female hero far before it became an issue at the fore. Take the recent Wonder Woman movie for example..the anticipation for a proper, strong and intelligent representation of that character spanned years before the national discussion, and several generation of MEN were apart of that crowd. I know that, thanks to the efforts of the marvel studios movie machine, that more and more of comic book culture is coming to merge with pop culture: but learn the crowd before making general, blanket, and misinformed statements. The trolls on Reddit decrying this casting (or any sort of forward thinking) are simply that, trolls. They are instigators and honestly, most likely never watched this show or consumed any sort of comic book/sci fi culture outside of the recent spat of movies and video games before. If you look, the vast majority of true fans of comic book and sci-fi culture are completely fine with it.
12
I believe the writer went out of her way looking for these snowflakes.
There are many actual cases of misogynistic abuse on social media. You don't have to go to Reddit looking for misogynists talking to each other. I'm not sure why you would, in fact.
If you're going to go looking for illiberal thoughts in the dark corners of the Internet, can you make it for something important?
There are many actual cases of misogynistic abuse on social media. You don't have to go to Reddit looking for misogynists talking to each other. I'm not sure why you would, in fact.
If you're going to go looking for illiberal thoughts in the dark corners of the Internet, can you make it for something important?
3
Have you read the comments on this article? Lots of people making the same arguments the author complained about. If you don't see sexism in the world it's because you don't want to.
3
Go to the official Doctor Who Facebook page, look at the comments. Hardly the darkest corner of the internet.
2
Don't watch Dr. Who or know much about it. I do know that Jodie Whittaker is a terrific actress. Isn't that what TV, movies and the theater all about? Good for her!!!
8
It's really astonishing that people are upset that a woman was casted. And their blatant sexism and prejudices couldn't be anymore obvious.
4
Maybe we wouldn't be searching Reddit for reactions and then writing NYTimes op eds about them. Seems a BIT cherry picking.
2
Big deal. I'd like to see us stop seeing EVERYTHING through a racial/gender/sexual lens. Please.
5
I don't see the need for changing a male character to a female one just for the novelty of it. But then again, I can only assume that the show runner's are doing this as a way to increase viewership. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, but I'm skeptical.
1
A woman in a role is only a "novelty" if you see a man as the default person. The question should be, what justification can there be for casting only men, over and over, into a role that actually has no inherent gender?
11
I love you.
2
It's fascinating how people see this choice as some politically correct nod to feminism - without seeing the streak of previous male doctors as some chauvinistically correct nod to patriarchy.
25
Very much looking forward to Jodie Whittaker as The Doctor. I haven't watched Broadchurch (although I am adding it to my queue shortly after I write this), but she was excellent in Attack The Block (a movie very much in line with the Doctor Who universe).
5
Terrorists are still killing innocent people and Trump is president. Oh, no! And now you tell me the next Dr. Who is a woman??? Where will it all end, I ask you???
2
Good writing, acting, and directing is what is important. All actors who fit the role should be considered regardless of genetic makeup.
The argument that science fiction success must accept that males dominate science fiction and that males cannot identify beyond their own genetic makeup is just not true. Consider the 2017 Wonder Woman -- the movie is one of the most popular of the year. Why? Because of excellent writing, acting, and directing.
Power to all people!
The argument that science fiction success must accept that males dominate science fiction and that males cannot identify beyond their own genetic makeup is just not true. Consider the 2017 Wonder Woman -- the movie is one of the most popular of the year. Why? Because of excellent writing, acting, and directing.
Power to all people!
6
The problem is not gender, it is PC. Create a Dr Who spin off with a female lead and leave the original alone. Star Trek did it. Other shows have done it. And certainly Hollywood has tried, unsuccessfully I might add.
Somehow the tinkering with icons rankles. Try something new. Example Hunger Games. That surely worked in every sense.
Somehow the tinkering with icons rankles. Try something new. Example Hunger Games. That surely worked in every sense.
1
I think you're missing the point. Dr. Who can be male or female. A spinoff would be appropriate to give the call box its own show.
10
Dr. Who has never had a gender. Time lords don't.
12
Who cares about her gender. Time lords don't. Her energy is perfect for The Doctor. I hope she's as much fun in the role as David Tennant.
13
At this rate we might as well turn James Bond, another long-lived British stalwart of the entertainment world into Jane Bond. Some characters are so well-defined, either by the character or the ability of a given actor to give life to that character, that any other definition or re-interpretation just doesn't work. Think Ving Rhames in the "reincarnation" of Kojak, for example. Despite Mr. Rhames' talent, along with Chazz Palminteri as his boss, the show "died" after only nine episodes. Kojak is Telly Savalas, and who loves you, baby.
I thought the BBC had done quite well and was rather ingenious with turning Dr. Who's rival Gallifreyan "The Master" into a Mistress. But there are some times that the basic formula should be left unchanged. The Star Trek franchise got around this gender/racial tinderbox with spin-off series that both did well. "Deep Space Nine" featured African-American actor Avery Brooks as the commander of the space station, and the "Voyager" episode gave us the strong female characters of Kate Mulgrew as Captain Janeway and Jeri Ryan as the Borg Seven of Nine.
So, it will be interesting to see if The Doctor's TARDIS will fly with this next metamorphosis, or whether it will end up flying into a black hole of ratings failure, taking the Daleks, Cybermen, The Master/Mistress along for the ride.
Stay tuned for further developments. And now, a word from our sponsor.
I thought the BBC had done quite well and was rather ingenious with turning Dr. Who's rival Gallifreyan "The Master" into a Mistress. But there are some times that the basic formula should be left unchanged. The Star Trek franchise got around this gender/racial tinderbox with spin-off series that both did well. "Deep Space Nine" featured African-American actor Avery Brooks as the commander of the space station, and the "Voyager" episode gave us the strong female characters of Kate Mulgrew as Captain Janeway and Jeri Ryan as the Borg Seven of Nine.
So, it will be interesting to see if The Doctor's TARDIS will fly with this next metamorphosis, or whether it will end up flying into a black hole of ratings failure, taking the Daleks, Cybermen, The Master/Mistress along for the ride.
Stay tuned for further developments. And now, a word from our sponsor.
5
Cultural and cultish icons are often freighted with more weight than they should be. But Dr. Who is an exception for those of us who have been watching for decades. The notion that the non-conformist Doctor might look like a human female celebrates the delight of the entire series. If we can accept that an upside-down trash can—devoid of any personality—can be a mortal enemy of the Doctor, it’s really a small step to cast a woman for the part. And about time.
20
I haven't watched much Dr. Who, but I greatly enjoyed the episode in which he battled shimmering bits of tin foil.
7
Captain Kathryn Janeway from Star Trek Voyager was first for a major Scifi franchise. Though kudos to Dr. Who too.
6
Ms. West, I've been a Whovian since way back in the early '70s and although I agree that there was some outrage by certain segments of the internet, it seems to me that this change has been meet by almost universal approval by everyone interested in the Whoniverse. The Master has been portrayed (brilliantly) by a female over the past three seasons and this helped smooth the way for most of any holdouts.
I personally think that Ms. Whittaker is an absolutely fantastic choice for The Doctor, not only was she great in Broadchurch alongside another tremendous Doctor, on a geek level, it is cool to see that one episode of the Black Mirror has started two people who have gone on to star in two of the most entrenched Science Fiction families of all time - I see some Star Wars / Whoniverse cross-over fanfic in the not too distant future...or will it be the distant past?
All-in-all, Whovians are a very welcoming bunch and it is a bit dissappointing to see someone trawling Reddit for negative comments when, on the whole, this announcement has been met with great anticipation.
I'm quietly excited for who till be the next Jim Bond now :)
I personally think that Ms. Whittaker is an absolutely fantastic choice for The Doctor, not only was she great in Broadchurch alongside another tremendous Doctor, on a geek level, it is cool to see that one episode of the Black Mirror has started two people who have gone on to star in two of the most entrenched Science Fiction families of all time - I see some Star Wars / Whoniverse cross-over fanfic in the not too distant future...or will it be the distant past?
All-in-all, Whovians are a very welcoming bunch and it is a bit dissappointing to see someone trawling Reddit for negative comments when, on the whole, this announcement has been met with great anticipation.
I'm quietly excited for who till be the next Jim Bond now :)
10
I love it, about time, Jodie Whittaker will be brilliant.
4
Dr. Who has been on television since the 1960s. It has had over 50 years to build a sci-fi fan following and establish its canon. To the best of my knowledge, gender change in time-lord regeneration has been introduced only over the last three seasons. I cannot speak to the writers' intentions, but it does seem to be an attempt towards greater representation and diversity.
As a non-white male, I have been delighted by this trend in the entertainment industry in general (Rey and Jyn in Star Wars, the diverse Rogue one cast, the awesome Wonder Woman movie, the modern adaptation of Sherlock with a female Dr. Watson, etc.).
However, as a sci-fi fan, it bothers me quite a bit that the writers are willing to break the established cannon for the sake of a political consideration. There are, in my view, better ways to achieve the same goal - for instance, by introducing an equally important female time-lord (time-lady?) character. In recent times, Dr. Who has showcased genuine diversity among its strong supporting characters. And this has enriched the show. However, a female Doctor is a step too far for me (as was Missy).
As a non-white male, I have been delighted by this trend in the entertainment industry in general (Rey and Jyn in Star Wars, the diverse Rogue one cast, the awesome Wonder Woman movie, the modern adaptation of Sherlock with a female Dr. Watson, etc.).
However, as a sci-fi fan, it bothers me quite a bit that the writers are willing to break the established cannon for the sake of a political consideration. There are, in my view, better ways to achieve the same goal - for instance, by introducing an equally important female time-lord (time-lady?) character. In recent times, Dr. Who has showcased genuine diversity among its strong supporting characters. And this has enriched the show. However, a female Doctor is a step too far for me (as was Missy).
2
Absolutely; although I have rarely watched Dr. Who since it came back on the air several years (I was a fan of the early Doctors), I definitely am not interested in watching now. Dr. Who is a male, not a female.
1
Why assume this is being done for political consideration?
The choice of a male, 12 times in a row - THAT was a political consideration as well, by your standards, right? What is the difference - either way a choice is being made - and BOTH choices have people who support and oppose it based on culture wars and such. 1 out of 12 - and you think that is too much.
The choice of a male, 12 times in a row - THAT was a political consideration as well, by your standards, right? What is the difference - either way a choice is being made - and BOTH choices have people who support and oppose it based on culture wars and such. 1 out of 12 - and you think that is too much.
8
@Details: "The choice of a male, 12 times in a row .. was a political consideration ... right?" No, because the character was originally conceived as a male character, and only for the past 3 years or so has the notion of a gender-changing/gender-fluid time-lord been around. My point is - the choice of a white-male actor for the Doctor is not because of some sort of entitlement, it's because that's how the character was originally created.
Also: "1 out of 12 - and you think that is too much." That is a quota-based argument, and *if* a female Doctor is being introduced for those reasons, then the arguments of political considerations are harder to refute. Furthermore, I find that to be more demeaning to the woman who landed that role because it suggests that male actors have had their quota of being time-lords.
Also: "1 out of 12 - and you think that is too much." That is a quota-based argument, and *if* a female Doctor is being introduced for those reasons, then the arguments of political considerations are harder to refute. Furthermore, I find that to be more demeaning to the woman who landed that role because it suggests that male actors have had their quota of being time-lords.
"The Doctor, they seem to believe, is yet another white male birthright, like the American presidency, like the planet." Or like Ghostbusters.
Ms. West, thank you for calling out these ridiculous - and, sadly, now commonplace - tantrums thrown by men who freak out when a woman (or a black, transgender woman!) gets to do something cool.
Ms. West, thank you for calling out these ridiculous - and, sadly, now commonplace - tantrums thrown by men who freak out when a woman (or a black, transgender woman!) gets to do something cool.
13
This is what's known as a straw woman argument. Further, no one cares and it accomplishes nothing.
1
I'm more than ready for a strong female Doctor but we need an actor with a bit more age, history, and great maturity for this particular role, especially following the mighty Peter Capaldi, who brought gravitas and a touch of alien back to a character who has, at this point in the story, lived over 2000 years. Too young, male or female, is wrong for the character.
I was really hoping for a woman in her mid-40s to early 50s that has a long résumé to undergird her feminine take on the long-lived gender-fluid alien, like Tilda Swinton or Helena Bonham Carter. I was ecstatic to see Peter Capaldi chosen for the most recent incarnation because young hot white male with a thin résumé was okay once or twice but not really interesting and wrong for the character.
But I guess ageism is the last great battle only now ramping up and youth-obsessed fans really freaked out last time over an "old guy", no matter his acting excellence. What would have been even more groundbreaking this go-around is a realistic and professionally capable woman over 50.
I was really hoping for a woman in her mid-40s to early 50s that has a long résumé to undergird her feminine take on the long-lived gender-fluid alien, like Tilda Swinton or Helena Bonham Carter. I was ecstatic to see Peter Capaldi chosen for the most recent incarnation because young hot white male with a thin résumé was okay once or twice but not really interesting and wrong for the character.
But I guess ageism is the last great battle only now ramping up and youth-obsessed fans really freaked out last time over an "old guy", no matter his acting excellence. What would have been even more groundbreaking this go-around is a realistic and professionally capable woman over 50.
6
I think she can do it. I definitely agree with you about Peter Capaldi, much better than the doctor prior to him - although not as good as David Tennant. But this actress I think has what is needed for the role.
2
Details:
"She can do it" but that wasn't my point. She's 34 with her "looks" still but after age 40 roles decline dramatically for female actors. This an issue in Hollywood that will grow as older audiences demand more good stories that include them as well.
This is an alien who aged 1000 out of a 2000 year lifetime just in the span of Matt Smith's Eleventh Doctor. Capaldi was perfect to follow those years that included war and his take was akin to someone struggling with PTSD. Hence his aversion to soldiers, brusque detached manner, and self-doubting question "Am I a good man?" He processed, softened, and evolved over the span of three series but is now tired of living. To see the universe anew through female eyes is a perfect next step. That the character is now of greater age and currently a male actor in his late 50s, it's the perfect time in the story and a rare opportunity in television to cast an older woman.
It's very Whovian to argue over "best" doctor so I'll end with mine. I love the irrepressible jauntiness of David Tennant's Tenth Doctor but he pales beside the depth, complexity, and passion of Peter Capaldi's Twelfth Doctor. It's difficult for a man in his early 30s (at time of casting) to match the skill and experience of one in his late 50s and whose IMDb page was more varied and nearly 3 times as long. But Tennant was right for the Tenth Doctor, Capaldi was great for the Twelfth Doctor, and now is the perfect time for an older woman to pilot the Tardis.
"She can do it" but that wasn't my point. She's 34 with her "looks" still but after age 40 roles decline dramatically for female actors. This an issue in Hollywood that will grow as older audiences demand more good stories that include them as well.
This is an alien who aged 1000 out of a 2000 year lifetime just in the span of Matt Smith's Eleventh Doctor. Capaldi was perfect to follow those years that included war and his take was akin to someone struggling with PTSD. Hence his aversion to soldiers, brusque detached manner, and self-doubting question "Am I a good man?" He processed, softened, and evolved over the span of three series but is now tired of living. To see the universe anew through female eyes is a perfect next step. That the character is now of greater age and currently a male actor in his late 50s, it's the perfect time in the story and a rare opportunity in television to cast an older woman.
It's very Whovian to argue over "best" doctor so I'll end with mine. I love the irrepressible jauntiness of David Tennant's Tenth Doctor but he pales beside the depth, complexity, and passion of Peter Capaldi's Twelfth Doctor. It's difficult for a man in his early 30s (at time of casting) to match the skill and experience of one in his late 50s and whose IMDb page was more varied and nearly 3 times as long. But Tennant was right for the Tenth Doctor, Capaldi was great for the Twelfth Doctor, and now is the perfect time for an older woman to pilot the Tardis.
1
First of all, not all men have an issue with the Dr Who being a woman. In fact I would say - most are intrigued. I think the bigger real issue is why it took so long? Do the producers, directors, and writers feel more comfortable with male archetypes and/or male-female pairings? Did they run out of male archetypes and were forced to either regurgitate a past one or get a female archetype in there and they flipped a coin?
Also, as a character whose primary drive is to heal and protect, Dr Who actually makes more sense in the current zeitgeist as feminine.
Moreover, even as a guy, he runs around with these really attractive women and nothing ever happens. Go figure. ... I guess he is a real man's man.
I doubt most of the trolls who complain really care. The fact that they chose to troll this issue is because they are keenly aware of the same thing you pointed out - unequal treatment of women is horrifyingly still "a thing" even in the most supposedly civilized societies. However, it doesn't mean they agree with positions they take in their trolls.
Trolls will troll, primarily for attention and mainly nothing more, and with this article in NYT you just fed them a huge and beautiful filet mignon of attention. So expect more trolls and trolling to come.
Also, as a character whose primary drive is to heal and protect, Dr Who actually makes more sense in the current zeitgeist as feminine.
Moreover, even as a guy, he runs around with these really attractive women and nothing ever happens. Go figure. ... I guess he is a real man's man.
I doubt most of the trolls who complain really care. The fact that they chose to troll this issue is because they are keenly aware of the same thing you pointed out - unequal treatment of women is horrifyingly still "a thing" even in the most supposedly civilized societies. However, it doesn't mean they agree with positions they take in their trolls.
Trolls will troll, primarily for attention and mainly nothing more, and with this article in NYT you just fed them a huge and beautiful filet mignon of attention. So expect more trolls and trolling to come.
6
Wow. Is there truly nothing that activists won't co-opt to turn into a speaking point for their pet cause?
Nope. It's just a bit of casting, and one female lead out of 12 male leads, but some activists have to go and try to make it into a "thing" because men have to have 100%, dropping to 92% is somehow a horrible takedown.
Silly patriarchy activists.
Silly patriarchy activists.
5
I've enjoyed Dr. Who since the Tom Baker days (and moaned bitterly when he left). But the show always handles its changes with grace, and I'm excited to see what the new Doctor gets up to. Jodie Whittaker was great in Broadchurch -- it'll be fun to see where she takes this iconic role.
8
Some people are always going to freak out by change. Get over it. As a man, I'm happy to see the Doc played by this wonderful actress who rocks on Broadchurch. Please don't lump together "men" as the title of your editorial does. It's as useless as lumping together all "women."
8
When a male character permanently becomes a female, it is a loss for men and for boys who previously had a role model. I don't think it's right to dismiss men's concern over the loss of another protagonist role model character. I bear no ill will toward the cause of female empowerment but lets look at the recent trend in story-telling: Ghostbusters did not gain female partners: they became women. Star Wars: the major episodes now have a female protagonist replacing Luke and Anakin. Rogue One was yet another primary female figure leading the story arc. Wolverine and Thor now have female incarnations. It's different when Superman gets a partner, Supergirl. Or if Batman gets a partner, Batgirl. Or if the next captain of the Enterprise is a woman. It's another thing when a male character undergoes transformation into a woman. That's a replacement of men by women in the social stratum. If Captain Kirk was rebooted as female with a female Vulcan sidekick ... that's replacement and a zero-sum game. Male concerns should not be dismissed. We are right to feel bemused by the current trend. I don't know what the counter-correlary would be: the story of King Elizer, son of Henry VIII who rules England mercifully through the Elizer Era? (instead of Elizabeth). Or John of Arc, champion of the common people of France. As a male who supports female empowerment I'd like to see original female heros that don't erase the male heros for the boys and young men - they need them too.
10
Percaeus- quick question: why do boys need male role models again? Why is it disadvantageous for them to have female role models?
Personally, as a guy who had a mom... you had a mom, right? Anyway, as a guy who had a wonderful, hardworking, accomplished mother, I have always seen her as a major role model. So, what do you think I have lost?
Personally, as a guy who had a mom... you had a mom, right? Anyway, as a guy who had a wonderful, hardworking, accomplished mother, I have always seen her as a major role model. So, what do you think I have lost?
9
Let boys look up to female role models!
4
So, losing 1 out of 12 doctors, 1 out of 8 Star Trek Captains, 1 out of 3 Ghostbuster movies is somehow meaning men don't have role models?
Where was your concern when it was 0 out of 12 Doctors for female role models? Where is your expectation of a female representation in the all male Ghostbusters team (no, the receptionist and the love interest don't count)?
You had things 100% your way, and now that you "only" have 75% your way, you are freaking out - even though you still get an outsized representation in movies and tv shows overall. It's like the nobles being upset that with a parlimentarian democracy, they can no longer chop heads off, and expecting the former peasants to sympathize with them.
Where was your concern when it was 0 out of 12 Doctors for female role models? Where is your expectation of a female representation in the all male Ghostbusters team (no, the receptionist and the love interest don't count)?
You had things 100% your way, and now that you "only" have 75% your way, you are freaking out - even though you still get an outsized representation in movies and tv shows overall. It's like the nobles being upset that with a parlimentarian democracy, they can no longer chop heads off, and expecting the former peasants to sympathize with them.
8
Did people lose their minds when the Master regenerated as a female?
It was not the sex of the character that makes the character where the sex of the character is totally irrelevant, but rather the actor portraying the character. I think Michelle Gomez has been brilliant as the Master/"Missy" and I hope Jodie Whittaker will be brilliant as the Doctor.
It was not the sex of the character that makes the character where the sex of the character is totally irrelevant, but rather the actor portraying the character. I think Michelle Gomez has been brilliant as the Master/"Missy" and I hope Jodie Whittaker will be brilliant as the Doctor.
7
Speaking as one, it really is time for straight, white males to move to the back of the bus. This pathetic demographic has only had, let's say, two thousand years to get their act together, and look at the mess they've made. In a REAL civilization, these clowns would have been relegated to third-class status centuries ago. Enough of the petulant, pouty, whimpering over how unfair any picture without them in it is. You had more than your share of chances to make this a better world. Sit down and shut up.
9
I lost interest when Capaldi became the Doctor. I now look forward to watching again.
3
Was that because of his age?
Not young and hot enough like Matt Smith or David Tennant? They were fine doctors for a while but Peter Capaldi not only brought back the more alien doctor of the original run but also had a complex story arc that developed over 3 series. In fact, you should catch up on Series 8-10 before 11 airs to see what the entity has gone through to arrive at this new incarnation.
If you tuned out because he was too old or grumpy, then you've missed the point of his story: struggling with great adversity, over and over through many lifetimes and doing what's right even in the midst of heartbreak and a weariness of living so long. And now, in order to find the will to move on, choosing to see the universe through new eyes as a woman makes total sense after Capaldi's complex and fascinating journey.
Not young and hot enough like Matt Smith or David Tennant? They were fine doctors for a while but Peter Capaldi not only brought back the more alien doctor of the original run but also had a complex story arc that developed over 3 series. In fact, you should catch up on Series 8-10 before 11 airs to see what the entity has gone through to arrive at this new incarnation.
If you tuned out because he was too old or grumpy, then you've missed the point of his story: struggling with great adversity, over and over through many lifetimes and doing what's right even in the midst of heartbreak and a weariness of living so long. And now, in order to find the will to move on, choosing to see the universe through new eyes as a woman makes total sense after Capaldi's complex and fascinating journey.
2
Nope, had nothing to do with his age. I'm an old woman! The story line and his manifestation failed to capture my interest.
Okay, I respect your opinion and understand it competely. That's the beauty of a show that's evolved over 50 years, plenty on offer for everyone to find their niche. I guess I've seen way too many comments about his "old looks" and comparisons to David Tennant.
Only a small handful of baby-men are having trouble with this. In a previous story arc on Dr. Who, a Time Lord, The Master, regenerated as a woman, Missy, and it was very entertaining!.
9
Why "baby men"? Sexist.
Besides which, Tom Baker is the only Doctor who has ever mattered, and will always remain so.
Besides which, Tom Baker is the only Doctor who has ever mattered, and will always remain so.
3
Calling an infantile person a "baby" is hardly sexist. Ageist, maybe--if they're old enough to walk. The word you're looking for is "perfect".
You're welcome.
You're welcome.
7
So true! For some of us, anyway...
The Doctor himself has hinted that he had been female in the past. They just never got round to it. Congratulations to the first female Doctor! Hairbows are cool now!
6
I resent having my enjoyable character sacrificed on the altar of feminism! It is one thing to create a new series based on a new premise/actor/actress, but another to try to appropriate a role that has been exclusively male for many decades.
One has to reject the weak argument that since The Doctor can regenerate any which way he can be female too. The point is that the male Doctor is essentially an historical figure, one familiar to fans who've grown up with all his incarnations.
Perhaps the composition of the Dr Who fan base has dramatically changed over the years, now being more heavily weighted towards female viewers. Should that in fact be the motivation for the change, I could deal with it.
One has to reject the weak argument that since The Doctor can regenerate any which way he can be female too. The point is that the male Doctor is essentially an historical figure, one familiar to fans who've grown up with all his incarnations.
Perhaps the composition of the Dr Who fan base has dramatically changed over the years, now being more heavily weighted towards female viewers. Should that in fact be the motivation for the change, I could deal with it.
1
Which altar do you prefer for sacrifices?
7
Resent away, it's your right. The world will move on without you.
5
I doubt the people complaining about the new Doctor actually watch the show.
From Capt. Jack in the first season of the reboot to Bill and Missy in the latest, there has been nothing here that wouldn't offend the delicate sensibilities of a reddit troll. Hate is their fandom. I wonder if they're even bothering to Wikipedia a 50 year old British Sci-fi show or if they're just unpacking the same template outrage they always use.
Meanwhile, fans have the joy of speculating about the Christmas episode, a new Doctor, new Companion, new show runner, and arguing about how the show has been terrible since (insert your favorite Doctor or Companion) left.
From Capt. Jack in the first season of the reboot to Bill and Missy in the latest, there has been nothing here that wouldn't offend the delicate sensibilities of a reddit troll. Hate is their fandom. I wonder if they're even bothering to Wikipedia a 50 year old British Sci-fi show or if they're just unpacking the same template outrage they always use.
Meanwhile, fans have the joy of speculating about the Christmas episode, a new Doctor, new Companion, new show runner, and arguing about how the show has been terrible since (insert your favorite Doctor or Companion) left.
16
If Dr Who can morph into anything, then perhaps the writers will have her morph into the last guy in the role and then everyone will be happy. I would think after half a century, even the BBC would try something new--like a different program maybe? How many people have met, gotten married, had kids, divorced and died since this program began? boggles the mind doesn'
t it?
t it?
I enjoyed Doctor Who during the 2005 comeback with Christopher Eccleston in the lead role. I lost patience with his annoying over-the- top replacement, David Tennant. This is the first time I've complained about it online. It's a television show. Meh.
Now it's possible.
The Master and the Doctor can hook up.
The Master and the Doctor can hook up.
1
It was possible before ;)
And I'd be more interested in seeing it between John Simm and, say, David Tennant. Would be a gift to womankind, and a little different and interesting, too.
And I'd be more interested in seeing it between John Simm and, say, David Tennant. Would be a gift to womankind, and a little different and interesting, too.
5
Oh, you have to make it somewhat believable.
In terms of believability. . . Dr. Who doesn't really get together with anyone goes he? He had a wife but that was a love story with no sex alluded to. His daughter is a clone. He had love and sexual tension with Rose but no consummation (however much I hoped for it). That kind exhausts the years I was watching (2005 to maybe 2010). Really that's Doctor Who's charm, though, isn't it? He's so moral and yet with such longing. Maybe he (she) shouldn't get together with anyone.
1
I have loved Ms. West's writing since her time at The Stranger many years ago. Just by watching her explore a TV Show, movie, or political argument in writing I am given both a new deeper understanding and a good laugh along the way. She has a rare gift. That said: reading this, and her previous NYTimes column, is like watching someone argue with their toddler about sharing their toys. It is a valuable lesson for the toddler, but not so enlightening to watch. While young boys on the internet that hate their mothers should be taught a lesson, they are not exactly the -archy in Patriarchy. They are also not the readership of the NYTimes.
It is a waste of her talents arguing with such people, I would love to see her take on (and take apart) smarter arguments.
It is a waste of her talents arguing with such people, I would love to see her take on (and take apart) smarter arguments.
5
I never had any interest in this show, but now that a woman has been cast, I am looking forward to becoming a Whovian. The vociferous, fragile, whiny comments to this article will make my conversion that much sweeter.
7
'This job has always been held by white men', is a battle cry of the soft- and not-so-soft conservative white male supremacists. Today it is applied to defend the American presidency, the priesthood, and many corporate boardrooms as preserves for males, usually white males. Not that long ago, it was used to argue that women (and minorities) should not be engineers, plumbers, police officers, fire fighters, soldiers and sailors, medical doctors, or scientists. Those male bastions have fallen, with benefit, rather than harm, flowing to society as a result.
A woman as Doctor Who is not that ground breaking. The Master, Doctor Who's Gallifrean nemesis, has already been transformed into Missy, played by a woman. Captain Kirk's hallowed spot in command of the Enterprise was later assumed by the female Captain Janeway.
Some very insecure males, or more likely adolescent boys, need to get over themselves and realize that they will share all of this world's occupations and positions of authority with women. The world has changed. There really is not, and should not, be any going back on that. Simple fairness demands that we allow all humans to achieve their full potential.
A woman as Doctor Who is not that ground breaking. The Master, Doctor Who's Gallifrean nemesis, has already been transformed into Missy, played by a woman. Captain Kirk's hallowed spot in command of the Enterprise was later assumed by the female Captain Janeway.
Some very insecure males, or more likely adolescent boys, need to get over themselves and realize that they will share all of this world's occupations and positions of authority with women. The world has changed. There really is not, and should not, be any going back on that. Simple fairness demands that we allow all humans to achieve their full potential.
10
It has nothing to do with male / female and everything to do with who will portray the Doctor and do so in a manner that is canonical with those who have gone before. As I wrote in another comment, the Doctor is a mix of the prophet Job and Mr. Chips. He's eccentric and very Aspy. He's also old, very old. If Chibnall had wanted an actress who can play eccentric, cold, old and Aspy he could have chosen Olivia Colman, also in Broadchurch, who also has a much longer CV. No, he chose the cute looking younger woman, someone that I've seen play empathetic and angry but have not seen portray any emotion that is in the core DNA of the Doctor.
3
Perhaps the producers didn't get the memo that you don't mess with super heroes. Sly, Arnie and Dwayne couldn't play the Doctor. Caitlyn Jenner couldn't play Wonder Woman. The Doctor has to be male, British, aged at least 50 and slightly crazy.
Remember what happened to Ghostbusters ? Let the ratings be the judge.
Remember what happened to Ghostbusters ? Let the ratings be the judge.
2
With the exception of Peter Capaldi - none of the three other recent Doctor's have fit your criteria. Nor - if memory serves - did most of the original doctors past about 1974.
5
I am looking forward to seeing the new Doctor as a woman and all the new possibilities that brings. I will judge her performance by how well she caries it off. Period.
3
I look forward to the day when shows have open casting calls and the best choice for the role is chosen regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation. We're heading that direction but change doesn't happen easily.
My 17 year old niece is overjoyed. We went to comicon so she could meet her favorite Dr Who stars and she mentioned that she hoped the next Dr would be a woman. She felt that having a young Dr Who shook things up and this would be the next obvious choice for a show that stays relevant by taking risks.
My 17 year old niece is overjoyed. We went to comicon so she could meet her favorite Dr Who stars and she mentioned that she hoped the next Dr would be a woman. She felt that having a young Dr Who shook things up and this would be the next obvious choice for a show that stays relevant by taking risks.
7
Congratulations to the organization for casting a woman for the Dr. Who role,
Most excellent idea!
Having seen the work by actress selected, Ms. West, I disagree that she is a strong choice.
Ms West's acting choices are predictable, often simpering: cast eyes down left, now eyes right, look up quizzically. She does not seem to have an inner monologue, thus lacking a connection to the text (this is my personal opinion)
Perhaps this role will bring out the best in her and strengthen her acting chops. In fairness to Ms. West, I have not seen her perform live onstage, so I could be all wrong; what we've seen in her film work could have been producer or editor choice of the scene for a myriad of reasons.
Good luck Ms West, the new Dr. Who; Thrive! Enjoy! Congratulations! ...and if the script directs, please save us from our own insanity, hubris, soullessness! We will be in front of the screen cheering you and the companions on to greater heights!
Most excellent idea!
Having seen the work by actress selected, Ms. West, I disagree that she is a strong choice.
Ms West's acting choices are predictable, often simpering: cast eyes down left, now eyes right, look up quizzically. She does not seem to have an inner monologue, thus lacking a connection to the text (this is my personal opinion)
Perhaps this role will bring out the best in her and strengthen her acting chops. In fairness to Ms. West, I have not seen her perform live onstage, so I could be all wrong; what we've seen in her film work could have been producer or editor choice of the scene for a myriad of reasons.
Good luck Ms West, the new Dr. Who; Thrive! Enjoy! Congratulations! ...and if the script directs, please save us from our own insanity, hubris, soullessness! We will be in front of the screen cheering you and the companions on to greater heights!
2
Ahhh, Jodie Whittaker is the new Dr Who, not Lindy West. Lindy West is the author of this article. The fact that you did not seem to know that renders your acting critique suspect....
8
What many don't understand is why we have to keep rewriting old roles with women in them, rather than writing awesome new ones with unique and awesome women leads. It feels less like attempting to create better representation and more like trying to whitewash white guys out of the culture.
Star Wars is doing it the right way. Nobody was clamoring to see Luke become Lindsey, but Rey quickly became one of the best characters in the 40-year-old franchise. But then, Star Wars has always done it right: Princess Leia didn't have to be written as a man first, then ride a tide of broken glass ceilings to the mantle of heroism.
You'd think feminism would prefer women didn't have to stand on the shoulders of men.
Star Wars is doing it the right way. Nobody was clamoring to see Luke become Lindsey, but Rey quickly became one of the best characters in the 40-year-old franchise. But then, Star Wars has always done it right: Princess Leia didn't have to be written as a man first, then ride a tide of broken glass ceilings to the mantle of heroism.
You'd think feminism would prefer women didn't have to stand on the shoulders of men.
7
But the Doctor regenerates, so it's feasible. And welcome.
1
Women have been reading books, watching movies and TV, and basically living a global plotline for a long, long time that excludes them -- is it really so existentially threatening to see women, real and fictional, in positions of authority? Is it really too much like your mom telling you what to do? Deal with it, boys. Trump's odious behavior (and the internet's built-in anonymity) seems to have opened the floodgates of hatred for insecure people to lash out against women, protecting fictional maleness (which has multiple meanings in this case).
Also, Whittaker is a fantastic actress. Oops, does that matter for a TV series at this moment in history, or does only propping up limp male egos matter?
Also, Whittaker is a fantastic actress. Oops, does that matter for a TV series at this moment in history, or does only propping up limp male egos matter?
9
Letting light into a dark room can burn your eyes, and ending a little bit of misogyny can seem like political correctness. "Man up," Internet. Your eyes will adjust.
17
They were thinking of making Wonder Woman a man, but it didn’t test well with audiences.
1
That's probably because there was already a 'Superman'.
6
As a long time fan, I don't have a problem the new Doctor. Whittaker sounds like an excellent actor. What I'm not pleased about is that we'll have to probably wait until Fall 2018 to see new episodes.
4
A female Doctor: About time!
3
Let's be more careful about treating Internet Trolls as if they are a focus group! As a Real Person and fan I'm think it's a good direction that opens a lot of new possibilities. Is supect this is true of most fans of the show. Stop feeding the Trolls.
3
I started watching that show on PBS when I was a child in the 70s. My daughter started watching the Peter Capaldi version and now we watch together sometimes. There's nothing wrong with a female Doctor. In fact, it's about time.
Message to old white dudes, get over it. No one likes you!
Btw, these same old white dudes didn't complain when a Japanese Character in Ghost in the Shell suddenly became white girl Scarlett Johansson. And did they even know that the Emma Stone character in Aloha was originally not white? Of course not, old white dudes love everything being white.
Message to old white dudes, get over it. No one likes you!
Btw, these same old white dudes didn't complain when a Japanese Character in Ghost in the Shell suddenly became white girl Scarlett Johansson. And did they even know that the Emma Stone character in Aloha was originally not white? Of course not, old white dudes love everything being white.
8
E wrote:
"Message to old white dudes, get over it. No one likes you!"
Notice how the NY Times moderators will publish blatantly anti-white and misandrous posts like E's. It's this unchecked bigotry masquerading as progressive politics that leads to Donald Trump.
"Message to old white dudes, get over it. No one likes you!"
Notice how the NY Times moderators will publish blatantly anti-white and misandrous posts like E's. It's this unchecked bigotry masquerading as progressive politics that leads to Donald Trump.
4
I am not 'Whooee' - a term I think I just made up - but I have watched episodes across the amazingly long life of the series. It's been interesting to see the evolution of production values over the years. I would say that the current series has scaled the heights of "Fantasy Island" in its glossiness.
But to the current "issue" people are talking about. One of the captivating things about the series is the title. I mean, really: the indulgent mystery of 'Doctor Who' provides a range of speculation. "Doctor" implies a higher intellect, almost a mad-scientist expectation. "Who" raises questions (who is this person? what is his - her - intention? what is he - she-, really ?) and "who" provides us with enjoyable philosophic meandering.
And, "who" encompasses us all - women, men, girls, boys, humans in our fullness. There's no need for the masculine-feminine ending such as Superman, Supergirl, Batman, Batgirl, with their encased sense of superioirity. Go for it, Ms. Whittaker, for all us whooees. Perhaps someday we will all live in Whoville.
But to the current "issue" people are talking about. One of the captivating things about the series is the title. I mean, really: the indulgent mystery of 'Doctor Who' provides a range of speculation. "Doctor" implies a higher intellect, almost a mad-scientist expectation. "Who" raises questions (who is this person? what is his - her - intention? what is he - she-, really ?) and "who" provides us with enjoyable philosophic meandering.
And, "who" encompasses us all - women, men, girls, boys, humans in our fullness. There's no need for the masculine-feminine ending such as Superman, Supergirl, Batman, Batgirl, with their encased sense of superioirity. Go for it, Ms. Whittaker, for all us whooees. Perhaps someday we will all live in Whoville.
5
I for one think that it improves the franchise. I mean, being an alien, the doctor never was a human male, in the biological sense. Not even sure he was an alien male. For complicated reasons-like censorship - he never reproduced, so hard to say.
Hopefully, the writers will do some gender bending. Like, on the Docs planet, there are no sexes, or they are reversed (whatever that means). Maybe alien males impregnate females who then convey the complete embryo via mind control to the males who give birth. I think some fish do that. And if not, they should try it.
The only reason we group and classify people by sex or race is so that we do not have to think about them as individuals.
Hopefully, the writers will do some gender bending. Like, on the Docs planet, there are no sexes, or they are reversed (whatever that means). Maybe alien males impregnate females who then convey the complete embryo via mind control to the males who give birth. I think some fish do that. And if not, they should try it.
The only reason we group and classify people by sex or race is so that we do not have to think about them as individuals.
5
Really -- You call this 'breaking the glass'???
Tell you what. When you give a Black, Asian, or Latino woman the same role (and yes, there are PLENTY out there who can do it), that's when you can talk about "breaking" something.
By putting another white, blonde person in the part is just more of the same. Get real.
Tell you what. When you give a Black, Asian, or Latino woman the same role (and yes, there are PLENTY out there who can do it), that's when you can talk about "breaking" something.
By putting another white, blonde person in the part is just more of the same. Get real.
7
I was really hoping for Idris Elba.
3
And I'm hoping for Idris Elba as James Bond.
5
Yeeeees! He's got my vote!
1
Mmm. That's the trouble with privilege: equity then looks like oppression.
12
When it comes down to it, the only thing that matters in TV Land is ratings. Accordingly, the only reason this is a monumental event for feminism or diversity is that the focus-group worshiping suits at the BBC feel that their ratings will benefit (or, at least, not suffer) from a female lead. That's progress, to me, and newsworthy. If the opposite happens, though, the show may go through another 13 white/male doctors before it takes another risk.
At this point, anything that the stodgy old white men don't like, I'm for. GO JODY WHITTAKER.
14
As a stodgy old white man, I find this offensive. You have no clue what I am for or against. And this is the downside of privilege. If I responded in kind, by treating young people, members of minority groups or other people who feel themselves marginalized (I.e. non-privileged) as a comic stereotype, I would be roundly condemned. And rightly so. But the fact that one can get away with saying unkind things to or about someone like me does not make such behavior intelligent, attractive or conducive to a better society. You whippersnapper!
Trivia. Is this all Ms. West can think of to write about? There are actually real events of consequence out there. Is Ms. West unaware of them? Time to find another op-ed writer.
3
Is the participle "farting" appropriate for an op-ed piece in the Times? Do readers now have to be embarrassed on behalf of the editors?
3
Farting lizards?? Who cares??
I am not sure how I feel about this particular actress, but have no issues with The Doctor being female. We know from episodes that Time Lords (and other aliens--Jack Harkness comes to mind) that the idea of sexuality and gender is fluid.
However, one of the negative comments (repeated by many the last few days) relates to how she'll act when she's PMSing or on her period. Hello--she's an alien. Not human, alien. Does anybody really think aliens have similar reproductive systems to humans?
However, one of the negative comments (repeated by many the last few days) relates to how she'll act when she's PMSing or on her period. Hello--she's an alien. Not human, alien. Does anybody really think aliens have similar reproductive systems to humans?
9
Who were Mileva Einstein, Marie Curie, Vera Rubin, Claudia Alexander and Maryam Mirakhani?
Who is Mae Jemison, Joan Higginbotham, Lisa Dyson. Shirley Ann Jackson, Trina Christian Coleman, Katherine Johnson, Aziza Baccouche and Chanda Prescott-Weinstein?
Why is a fair-skinned blonde white Doctor Who so revolutionary when the Doctor has had an British Iranian African companion? This selection looks like a pick from Fox News.
A female Doctor Who looking like Viola Davis, Lupita N'yong'o and Danai Gurira would be revolutionary.
Who is Mae Jemison, Joan Higginbotham, Lisa Dyson. Shirley Ann Jackson, Trina Christian Coleman, Katherine Johnson, Aziza Baccouche and Chanda Prescott-Weinstein?
Why is a fair-skinned blonde white Doctor Who so revolutionary when the Doctor has had an British Iranian African companion? This selection looks like a pick from Fox News.
A female Doctor Who looking like Viola Davis, Lupita N'yong'o and Danai Gurira would be revolutionary.
28
Not sure if you're a fan, blackmamba, but it really is revolutionary, at least for this Whoniverse! As would be the dream you write about. I agree it would be great to see a Doctor of color, and I look forward to that day. Can we not be happy for progress, even if there is still further progress to be made?
8
Before this opinion piece makes you think that Reddit and the internet at large are all sexist white males in need of a hero, dataisbeautiful.
"It should definitely be noted that the sentiment-categorised mentions have been overwhelmingly positive, at 80% compared to 20% negative."
https://www.brandwatch.com/blog/react-doctor-who-13/?utm_source=reddit&a...
Of course there are plenty of awful people out there that wrote and believe those sexists quotes in this article, but then again there are just plenty of awful people, we don't promote their ideas by publishing them in the paper. If you disagree with me, publish what ISIS forums say about anything the way you have promoted a few sexists quotes. Neither is news worthy, and no one should be taking their opinions seriously. In their wildest dreams they prayed someone would publish their quotes in a serious paper, and in steps Lindy West to make their drams come true.
Lindy West, IMO you have written this opinion piece in a way that alienates many men that believe in equality and who think its silly/outrageous/sad that people view a different gender taking over a role as a personal attack. On top of that you give more of a voice to your enemy. Could solve all these problems by saying the quotes are a small representation of the total population, as well as the white males you love to group together into sexists and Trump supporters.
"It should definitely be noted that the sentiment-categorised mentions have been overwhelmingly positive, at 80% compared to 20% negative."
https://www.brandwatch.com/blog/react-doctor-who-13/?utm_source=reddit&a...
Of course there are plenty of awful people out there that wrote and believe those sexists quotes in this article, but then again there are just plenty of awful people, we don't promote their ideas by publishing them in the paper. If you disagree with me, publish what ISIS forums say about anything the way you have promoted a few sexists quotes. Neither is news worthy, and no one should be taking their opinions seriously. In their wildest dreams they prayed someone would publish their quotes in a serious paper, and in steps Lindy West to make their drams come true.
Lindy West, IMO you have written this opinion piece in a way that alienates many men that believe in equality and who think its silly/outrageous/sad that people view a different gender taking over a role as a personal attack. On top of that you give more of a voice to your enemy. Could solve all these problems by saying the quotes are a small representation of the total population, as well as the white males you love to group together into sexists and Trump supporters.
2
Ha! I know who all those women were/are - scientists and engineers!
p.s. I watched the first episode of Dr Who in England as a kid in 1963. I hid behind the TV because I was scared. Until I realized the set was made out of polystyrene and the Dr (and Darleks) were actors. But I am not sure I became a scientist because of Dr Who.....
p.s. I watched the first episode of Dr Who in England as a kid in 1963. I hid behind the TV because I was scared. Until I realized the set was made out of polystyrene and the Dr (and Darleks) were actors. But I am not sure I became a scientist because of Dr Who.....
When you move in circles populated by reasonable people you forget that there is a large group of people out there who truly hate women. May of them are violent, in speech or in reality. All of them are very angry. If only there were a real Doctor who could save us from these very real monsters. They're worse than Daleks.
12
If the character is centuries old, how do we even know this is the first woman Doctor?
52
It isn't.!
I was thinking there had been suggestions by the Doctor himself (as in, the last Dr. Who) that he'd been both men and women over the centuries. I think it might have been this last season. I remember thinking at the time that it might suggest a future regeneration as a woman. Wish I could remember which episode.
Though hesitant to comment on any piece written by someone who could use the phrase "glass ceiling" seriously, much less a piece focused on a science-fiction character, I found this grievance-filled article emblematic of what ails American feminism: the search for oppression, the celebration of real or imagined victimhood, and the high dudgeon invoiked when anyone outside the circle of trust makes even the most trivial of snarky comments.
3
Male nerds can seriously suck when it comes to resenting women. I'm a physicist so I know this by harsh experience. You'd think a high IQ and an advanced education would make someone a better person, but it doesn't. I'm even getting turned off to technology because of the sour moaning and defensive postures being taken by men in this community every time they see some cultural advance by women. They think they're so brilliant at math when they can't even compute that women make up half the population. Can you do that math, guys? Can you give it a try? Basically it's just counting to two.
14
This silly male reaction calls for the apt, albeit trite, responses GET A LIFE!
SERIOUSLY? THIS IS ART, DUDE, NOT REAL LIFE. And all the rest.
SERIOUSLY? THIS IS ART, DUDE, NOT REAL LIFE. And all the rest.
5
Here, no one cares. Last season opened with 2.4 million audience, a improvement over the previous season's 1.5 million, but, honestly, a bad gold game will draw more people.
Too bad we can't go back to Kill Bill 1 and 2 and make Uma Thurman the next Bond. THAT would be great.
Too bad we can't go back to Kill Bill 1 and 2 and make Uma Thurman the next Bond. THAT would be great.
Those numbers are not only wrong but meaningless in the rapidly changing way that audiences watch shows now with streaming services, iTunes, and on demand services.
But the fact is the live UK viewing audience watching "The Pilot", the series opener, was 4.64 million live, not 2.4 million, and 6.68 million when 24hour iPlayer audience is included. Furthermore, this was a 25% share of the total television viewing audience for the hour, which is significant given all the other options now available to the UK audience. This does not include the audiences for BBC America, Canada's Space, and the European, Australian, and other international networks that also air the show. Finally, more and more people are streaming the show at their convenience in many different ways. BBC has just signed Doctor Who to begin showing in China as there's a signicant fan base there. So the fandom is only growing. These figures are available publicly at the BBC which has also just recently released a report that places the show near the top of its most popular shows.
As for your love of Kill Bill, no wonder you don't care about Doctor Who. Kill Bill is considered among the most violent movies ever screened. And though the Doctor has found himself in war and times that require violence, he travels unarmed, never resorts first to violence (except when he punched that blatant racist!), nor does the show celebrate violence the war Kill Bill does.
But the fact is the live UK viewing audience watching "The Pilot", the series opener, was 4.64 million live, not 2.4 million, and 6.68 million when 24hour iPlayer audience is included. Furthermore, this was a 25% share of the total television viewing audience for the hour, which is significant given all the other options now available to the UK audience. This does not include the audiences for BBC America, Canada's Space, and the European, Australian, and other international networks that also air the show. Finally, more and more people are streaming the show at their convenience in many different ways. BBC has just signed Doctor Who to begin showing in China as there's a signicant fan base there. So the fandom is only growing. These figures are available publicly at the BBC which has also just recently released a report that places the show near the top of its most popular shows.
As for your love of Kill Bill, no wonder you don't care about Doctor Who. Kill Bill is considered among the most violent movies ever screened. And though the Doctor has found himself in war and times that require violence, he travels unarmed, never resorts first to violence (except when he punched that blatant racist!), nor does the show celebrate violence the war Kill Bill does.
To use an anachronistic phrase: perhaps she's simply the best man for the job
3
As a “privileged” educated mestizo male baby boomer, whose first Doctor was Tom Baker, it is not at all disconcerting that the new Doctor is a euro female. What engenders this comment is not the predictable misogyny. Which can best be characterized, to utilize a trumpism, as “how sad.”
I write because of my last reading of “The Handmaid’s Tale.” First read when in graduate school (UCB) it provided me with the necessary framework to deal with my personal sexual identification, gay moving into queer. It is an ongoing clarion remind of the consequences for those who do not own their personal identity. They are reduced to objects.
My rereading leads me to take issue with one statement by Ms. West. She writes: “We are not even asking for equality, and it’s too much. That’s because inequality isn’t a bug; it’s a feature.” Inequality is indeed a cultural “feature” but it does not need to be accepted as a fixture. My point? Asking for equality is not too much it is the point.
You go girl.
I write because of my last reading of “The Handmaid’s Tale.” First read when in graduate school (UCB) it provided me with the necessary framework to deal with my personal sexual identification, gay moving into queer. It is an ongoing clarion remind of the consequences for those who do not own their personal identity. They are reduced to objects.
My rereading leads me to take issue with one statement by Ms. West. She writes: “We are not even asking for equality, and it’s too much. That’s because inequality isn’t a bug; it’s a feature.” Inequality is indeed a cultural “feature” but it does not need to be accepted as a fixture. My point? Asking for equality is not too much it is the point.
You go girl.
43
In defense of the male complainers about the casting of this show I can empathize just a tad. When Star Trek was rebooted I was livid when they gave Spock a girlfriend. I refuse to watch any of the Star Trek reboots.
One constant among Doctor Who fans is a collective freak-out when the Doctor experiences regeneration (when the actors change). That the Doctor is now a woman for the first time raises the volume of this ritual to "11." Usually around the third season with a new Doctor, everyone basically settles down and starts to dig "this Doctor." Another two or three seasons after that, and it's time to start all over again with the next Doctor. Cue stage one.
4
Hello, Doctor Donna?? Real fans shouldn't even bat an eye. The Doctor needs to be charming (if acerbic) and larger than life. Anything else is interpretation. The only thing that would please me more is if the 14th Doctor is Idris Elba.
6
I think Idris Elba is definitely the guy. He's got that special something. Sigh.
As far as The Doctor's appearance, the Gallifreyan is an alien. Gender is irrelevant. Any lover of sci-fi must understand this. Jodie Whittaker was amazing on Broadchurch and I look forward to this regeneration. Oh, and "Resistance is futile."
As far as The Doctor's appearance, the Gallifreyan is an alien. Gender is irrelevant. Any lover of sci-fi must understand this. Jodie Whittaker was amazing on Broadchurch and I look forward to this regeneration. Oh, and "Resistance is futile."
1
Ms. West, you are tilting at windmills. A TV show most Americans have never watched and barely heard of cast a female as its lead character. Sure, great, I don't really care one way or another, as is true of most people. Yet, for some reason, you cherry pick negative reactions from Reddit. Why? Why do you care what anonymous internet people think? If I stated "the sun rises in the east," there would be dissent from anonymous internet people. That doesn't mean I should give any weight to their opinions.
22
I can assure you there are MANY Americans who watch Doctor Who and care deeply who the next Doctor is. I have been a fan since my days as a latchkey kid in the late 70s/early 80s (Tom Baker was my Doctor), and I am far from alone. Perhaps you could watch a couple of episodes yourself to develop an informed opinion on the topic, instead of assuming that, because you haven't heard about this and don't care one way or the other, no one else does either.
7
It's been well established multiple times that Time Lords can regenerate into the opposite gender. Did anyone complain when The Master (male) regenerated into Missy (female)? I didn't hear any.
If the Doctor's next regeneration is female because the BBC is attempting to be edgy, and "PC", and say "Ooh, look how rebellious we are," that'd be kind of dumb. Change for the sake of change is pointless.
If the Doctor's next regeneration is female because she is the best actress, and best choice, and her audition was perfect, and they've written some great stories that will support it, then that would be all the right reasons. It doesn't matter what the peanut gallery thinks.
If you look around, you'll *always* find someone who will complain about anything. That's not news.
If the Doctor's next regeneration is female because the BBC is attempting to be edgy, and "PC", and say "Ooh, look how rebellious we are," that'd be kind of dumb. Change for the sake of change is pointless.
If the Doctor's next regeneration is female because she is the best actress, and best choice, and her audition was perfect, and they've written some great stories that will support it, then that would be all the right reasons. It doesn't matter what the peanut gallery thinks.
If you look around, you'll *always* find someone who will complain about anything. That's not news.
2
Just enjoying the commenters who don't seem to understand that "the Doctor" is not an actual medical doctor.
Thanks for another fantastic column, Lindy!
Thanks for another fantastic column, Lindy!
2
There have always been angry little boys in men's bodies, and before the Internet, they were routinely ignored. There is no reason to start paying attention to them now.
5
Newsflash: people on the internet say egregiously misogynistic things.
1
My husband likes Tom Baker, the Doctor Who with the striped scarf. My favorite Doctor is David Tennant. My daughter's favorite is Matt Smith. None of us were wildly pro or con on Peter Capaldi's Doctor. Just going by the odds, if the Doctor's transformation is random and can be into either a male or female body, we should have seen a female Doctor Who long before now. So perhaps those ranting against this choice should consider themselves lucky that it's been delayed so long? Whether or not I'll like this Doctor depends upon how the upcoming season plays out. I am curious to see how the Doctor/Companion dynamic will change. I'll reserve my judgment until I see the shows.
3
Just what the NYT needs: a strident identitarian columnist who plumbs the bowels of the internet and cries "Aha!" when something stinks. Let's ignore single moms and real issues (e.g., sexist workfare programs championed by Clinton I which put more societal value on corporate profits than raising children) because someone said something insane on Twitter or Reddit. It's the Breitbart approach: find the other side's crazies, magnify them, and turn them into a caricature effigy for all the faithful to burn.
I have a shirt that I bought some years ago when David Tennant left the Doctor's role. It says "you never forget your first doctor". I have another one from the Matt Smith years, which says "bow ties are cool" (a frequent line from that iteration of the character). Ms. West would see me wearing these now and, it seems, automatically pin the sexism on the white boy. That couldn't be farther from the truth, but no matter.
Passing judgment, making generalizations, and reinforcing stereotypes is a-okay so long as we're landing blows against the boogeyman, a role that white men seem destined to fulfill for many years to come.
I have a shirt that I bought some years ago when David Tennant left the Doctor's role. It says "you never forget your first doctor". I have another one from the Matt Smith years, which says "bow ties are cool" (a frequent line from that iteration of the character). Ms. West would see me wearing these now and, it seems, automatically pin the sexism on the white boy. That couldn't be farther from the truth, but no matter.
Passing judgment, making generalizations, and reinforcing stereotypes is a-okay so long as we're landing blows against the boogeyman, a role that white men seem destined to fulfill for many years to come.
5
Wounded men can go form a drum circle.
5
The doctor is the doctor in any shape or form. How hard can it be to fathom that? Perhaps he will be a dog soon?
3
All this whining from men's right's advocates, yet somehow they think we appointed them of all people as defenders of manhood? This is grown folks business, boys.
1
Far too many white males believe they have a divine right to the entire pie. Give someone else just a crumb and they throw a tantrum, stump their feet, scream “PC,” and threaten to leave the play box altogether.
Tsk, tsk.
Tsk, tsk.
2
I can't wait for the newest Doctor to fly around in her TARDIS, turn her sonic screwdriver on Daleks, and jump from era to era hurling witticisms and biting observations about humanity. All of those things will simply drown out the haters, whose souls -- unlike the TARDIS -- are smaller on the inside.
62
I've watched Doctor Who since I was child, the Tom Baker days. I was overjoyed when they started the new episodes. Enjoyed Eccleston for a year. Adored David Tennant, grew to love Matt Smith. Could not get interested in Peter Capaldi (he seemed rather disinterested himself) and stopped watching. Absolutely thrilled to see a woman in the role, particularly Ms. Whittaker, and to watch the show again! (After seeing her work on Broadchurch, I think she'll be brilliant!)
3
"arguments against diversified representation are inherently self-defeating. If representation doesn’t matter, then why would men be unhappy with less?"
It's about ethics in Dr. Who journalism.
It's about ethics in Dr. Who journalism.
1
Do we really need opeds about casting choices of a marginal show.
4
OMG!!!! It's a movie and Dr. Who is a fictional character!!!! I am so sick and tired of some white people bemoaning opportunities to recognize and respect other people and perspectives as "politically correct nonsense". Their childish and entitled tantrums, as if God has deemed everything theirs (positions, money, language, on and on) is beyond small-minded and desperate sounding. Thank God there are some people who aren't so dreadfully insecure.
1
Is your evidence that there is widespread male discontent about this from combing Reddit for comments? You can find any sort of bombastic comment you could possibly want on Reddit to fit whatever your narrative du jour is. All articles like this do is fuel the perception (and to be honest reality) that the left hates white men, fueling the rise of Trump and his ilk.
5
Donald Trump gets angry if his dinner is not ready when he gets home. That's the extent of his equal rights program.
1
So I guess the crux of the argument for some is why a woman's body for the 13th Doctor? A lot seems to have been written that requires assumptions of facts not in evidence as to why the Jodie Whittaker got the part.
The only sure fact I can seem to find is that new head writer and executive producer of Dr. Who, Chris Chibnall, said "I always knew I wanted the Thirteenth Doctor to be a woman and we're thrilled to have secured our number one choice."
Did Chris and the BBC react to a call for a woman lead for no other reason than some felt it was discrimination not to have a female Doctor? Or is simply a women's time to take a turn out of fairness. If that is case the PC arguments would seem to have merit. However it occurs to me that keeping the Doctor male, when it is known the Doctor can be either, is political correctness for the male crowd. WMC?
Or did Chris believe that having the Doctor be in female form for at least one incarnation would add to the story and make it interesting in new and different ways that would make it even more intriguing and allow new avenues to be explored in a decades old series? If so he is lucky that he has a character that can morph and being in different forms has been previously discussed without disturbing the canon. But if that is the case the claims of being a victory for PCness are rubbish.
The only sure fact I can seem to find is that new head writer and executive producer of Dr. Who, Chris Chibnall, said "I always knew I wanted the Thirteenth Doctor to be a woman and we're thrilled to have secured our number one choice."
Did Chris and the BBC react to a call for a woman lead for no other reason than some felt it was discrimination not to have a female Doctor? Or is simply a women's time to take a turn out of fairness. If that is case the PC arguments would seem to have merit. However it occurs to me that keeping the Doctor male, when it is known the Doctor can be either, is political correctness for the male crowd. WMC?
Or did Chris believe that having the Doctor be in female form for at least one incarnation would add to the story and make it interesting in new and different ways that would make it even more intriguing and allow new avenues to be explored in a decades old series? If so he is lucky that he has a character that can morph and being in different forms has been previously discussed without disturbing the canon. But if that is the case the claims of being a victory for PCness are rubbish.
Hey, NYT - don't feed the trolls. You think they're not loving seeing their posts in the paper? Send them back to where they were in the pre-internet days - into oblivion and silence. The Doctor would appreciate that.
2
If it were the 51st century, per Captain Jack Harkness, no one would care. I certainly don't. Earth folks, primitive, but such potential.
63
I am just happy to hear that production of Dr. Who will continue
2
None of the nerds wanted Captain Janeway or a female Starbuck either, and ate their words. They'll survive.
90
Be fair - it's a few vocal nerds who hated the female casting - and most others either didn't care or just worried that the character would be made too soft and empathetic. No doubt the same is true here.
My wife, interesting enough, has just begun reading, and watching, The Handmaid Tale.
I have to agree with the writer regarding the internet trolls working, even if they don't understand, to maintain the power white men have held for so long.
It's not political correctness. It's not the natural order of things. It's pure naked power we are talking about. The world is not privately owned by white males.
I have to agree with the writer regarding the internet trolls working, even if they don't understand, to maintain the power white men have held for so long.
It's not political correctness. It's not the natural order of things. It's pure naked power we are talking about. The world is not privately owned by white males.
7
Just for the record, some white men do not represent all white men, and the Internet has a habit of taking the views of a few trolls and making it seem like everyone feels that way. There are a great many men, many of them even white, who are actually enthusiastic for the first female Doctor.
2
Thank you, CV Danes. That was both timely and certainly on the mark. Thanks again.
1
"The notion of a “black and transgender” female Doctor is only absurd if you believe that white men are legitimate, full human beings and everyone else is a novelty." LOVE! No one could say it better sister!
9
My mother was a physician who graduated from med school at the age of twenty-two when almost all med schools wouldn't even accept an application from a female. She was an exceptional practitioner and diagnostician who was revered by colleagues and patients alike. For so many reasons I can think of no finer role model. Shame on the troglodytes and Neanderthals who are uncomfortable with the concept of a female doctor.
5
Imagine if Lindy West had focused entirely upon women's diverse reactions to the new Doctor Who casting choice instead of devoting most of her column to reprinting, amplifying, and assaying the 128-character tirades of disgruntled Twitter chauvinists living in their parents' basements. . . .
Sadly, this column is a wasted opportunity from a historical and cultural standpoint: "The first Doctor Who to be played by a woman," we are told, and yet the columnist spends much of her precious journalistic space merely recapping and reprinting the bigoted male voices which society hears every day. Imagine if West had instead devoted her column entirely to women's reactions and the powerful journalistic statement this would have made. Oh well. . . . Maybe in another twenty years.
Sadly, this column is a wasted opportunity from a historical and cultural standpoint: "The first Doctor Who to be played by a woman," we are told, and yet the columnist spends much of her precious journalistic space merely recapping and reprinting the bigoted male voices which society hears every day. Imagine if West had instead devoted her column entirely to women's reactions and the powerful journalistic statement this would have made. Oh well. . . . Maybe in another twenty years.
2
Gosh. I will have to start watching. Jodie Whittaker is a wonderful actor.
1
Isn't the insistence that the Doctor be played by a man Political Correctness? The producers think that the series will best move forward with this actress playing the role -- indeed, it will add new dimensions and perhaps a new audience -- but they should not cast her because the Doctor must be a man.
Men and women are different. Wonderfully, fascinatingly, perplexingly, exasperatingly, different. We are not only different physically, but we think differently and approach problems differently. Why can't we acknowledge and celebrate our differences? We are not the same and we should be happy that this is so. It is part of the joie de vie!
3
The reactions to the Doctor Who casting announcement seems to be somewhat overblown by Lindy West. People actually have to hunt for the online trolls who have issues with Whittaker's casting as the next Doctor. The overwhelming majority of reactions have been very positive.
If Ms. West (and other journalists) want to find comments from online trolls, it is easy enough to do a search to unearth them. BUT it is disingenuous to base her various musings on the implied premise that there is a vast negative reaction to a female Doctor Who. It would undercut her credibility.
She does mention a qualifier now and again in her piece, but then proceeds as if she had never said it. She seems to be painting the general reactions with too broad a negative brush - and one that seems to be ignoring the overwhelmingly positive reality at that.
This seems to be a case where the writer had a good point to make, but the situation didn't quite provide enough solid specifics upon which to build it. Consequently, the shaky foundation undermines the credibility of the overall argument being built upon it. Better luck next time.
If Ms. West (and other journalists) want to find comments from online trolls, it is easy enough to do a search to unearth them. BUT it is disingenuous to base her various musings on the implied premise that there is a vast negative reaction to a female Doctor Who. It would undercut her credibility.
She does mention a qualifier now and again in her piece, but then proceeds as if she had never said it. She seems to be painting the general reactions with too broad a negative brush - and one that seems to be ignoring the overwhelmingly positive reality at that.
This seems to be a case where the writer had a good point to make, but the situation didn't quite provide enough solid specifics upon which to build it. Consequently, the shaky foundation undermines the credibility of the overall argument being built upon it. Better luck next time.
4
If she had tried to write a piece that said "The new Dr. Who is a women & everyone is OK with that" it would not have been published.
You don't have to hunt for long as this comment section is full of them.
3
A Facebook friend posted a meme of "Doctor Who" bingo, which contained a square for each of the objections to the show runner's casting decision.
I had already seen all of them in a single thread.
I had already seen all of them in a single thread.
5
First, cool. The new Dr. Who is a woman. Second, I get it. There are reasons to welcome this apart from its generation of new interest in an iconic character of our popular culture. Third, it's instructive that Ms. West's final sentence grates for some of us. She talks about what "they" need. I'm one of the "they," I suppose. And the sentence diminishes me in the same way that all such references to a "they" diminish the referenced. Reminders that both our DNA and our culture have kept us sinners against the ideal of equality within diversity do hurt, don't they.
1
I don't watch Dr. Who (watched a few episodes, didn't like it), and casting a woman for the role after twelve men have played it, seems like no big deal, especially if the role is apparently a shape-shifting space alien. So no objections from me in this particular case.
Nevertheless, it just fits into the zeitgeist, where every single established and cherished cultural icon seems to be in need of being consumed by the, yes, feminist agenda, whether it fits or not. That is what is really bothering many people.
Nevertheless, it just fits into the zeitgeist, where every single established and cherished cultural icon seems to be in need of being consumed by the, yes, feminist agenda, whether it fits or not. That is what is really bothering many people.
1
Every one? Really?
1
Apotheosis of film, television, everybody happy with all the programming, happy with the representation of society in film and television (male, female roles, representation of this race, sex, etc.)?
The apotheosis of film and television will succeed by compression of the human. Increase population, overpopulate. Damage the climate, the environment, drive people indoors. Contain, constrain people. Closely watch children, drive them carefully in educational track, drive them more and more into finally box home, box job. Turn them into consumers with increasingly only dreams as consolation. Increase supply of drugs in society for pain psychic and physical and to escape barren reality.
Plug people's minds more and more into computer, film, television, have them dreaming as much as possible in their free time. They either work or are shuttled home to plug in and dream. At first actors and actresses fill out roles, represent our dreams to us in film and television. Gradually all of society when not working takes up the hobby of acting, and we all more and more not only sit and watch our dreams but actively pretend to be other people for others to watch.
Millions of people more and more plugged in and watching their dreams and when not watching pretending to be anything other than what they actually are. Everyone happily represented, everyone happily pretending to be this or that, who or what...America the industrious actually at end industry and prison of daydream.
The apotheosis of film and television will succeed by compression of the human. Increase population, overpopulate. Damage the climate, the environment, drive people indoors. Contain, constrain people. Closely watch children, drive them carefully in educational track, drive them more and more into finally box home, box job. Turn them into consumers with increasingly only dreams as consolation. Increase supply of drugs in society for pain psychic and physical and to escape barren reality.
Plug people's minds more and more into computer, film, television, have them dreaming as much as possible in their free time. They either work or are shuttled home to plug in and dream. At first actors and actresses fill out roles, represent our dreams to us in film and television. Gradually all of society when not working takes up the hobby of acting, and we all more and more not only sit and watch our dreams but actively pretend to be other people for others to watch.
Millions of people more and more plugged in and watching their dreams and when not watching pretending to be anything other than what they actually are. Everyone happily represented, everyone happily pretending to be this or that, who or what...America the industrious actually at end industry and prison of daydream.
I am a Dr. Who fan and a guy. I think it's great that a women will play Who. It will be great fun. I can't wait for the regeneration sequence when Jodie Whittaker first realizes she have breasts. The next encounter with Missy should also be a hoot.
As for all the negative tweets and comments, I am absolutely certain they are a very small minority. But, like Trump supporters, they feel great resentment about anything that challenges their view of how things should be. They whine very, very loudly.
As for all the negative tweets and comments, I am absolutely certain they are a very small minority. But, like Trump supporters, they feel great resentment about anything that challenges their view of how things should be. They whine very, very loudly.
6
I've been a fan of Doctor Who for more than 40 years, and I have seen every actor portraying the role. I love the show, and I cannot wait for the Jodie Whittaker era to begin. This "bro" culture boom that social media amplifies is mean spirited nonsense and should be ostracized and shut down. The most disturbing part of this story is the rot in a segment of our society.
6
Well, I don't see how they could avoid a story about the Doctor encountering "lady issues" for the first time after 2000 years of being men, but that's not a bad thing. Done right, it could be funny.
The idea of a female Doctor has been floated since Tom Baker left the show. I'm not offended by it, and it's logical. The show has already shown two Time Lords becoming Time Ladies on regeneration, the Master/Missy and The General. Why would the Doctor be exempted? He'll be a guy just because he always has been? To be honest, I believed that, so I was pleasantly surprised that he will be a her...or she will be...uh...you know what I mean.
I'm interested to see how Jody Whittaker's new Doctor turns out; my guess she'll have her fans just like all the other Doctors have.
One thing is certain: anyone who hoped Doctor Who would stop messing with pronouns is going to be disappointed. :)
The idea of a female Doctor has been floated since Tom Baker left the show. I'm not offended by it, and it's logical. The show has already shown two Time Lords becoming Time Ladies on regeneration, the Master/Missy and The General. Why would the Doctor be exempted? He'll be a guy just because he always has been? To be honest, I believed that, so I was pleasantly surprised that he will be a her...or she will be...uh...you know what I mean.
I'm interested to see how Jody Whittaker's new Doctor turns out; my guess she'll have her fans just like all the other Doctors have.
One thing is certain: anyone who hoped Doctor Who would stop messing with pronouns is going to be disappointed. :)
3
As a Whovian for over 40 years I'm thrilled with the selection but would have enjoyed the essay more if the author had displayed she even has a clue about the actual show and it's culture .
4
What makes some of these reactions so pathetic is that, when you read the anti-female comments, it becomes obvious that at least some of the "freak-out" is coming from people who are not actually all that familiar with the show. They are simply jumping onto a bandwagon they see rolling past.
The fact is that the majority of long-time followers of the show are well aware of the fact that there is nothing new about the idea of a Time Lord (the Doctor's species, for those not familiar) changing gender - the possibility has been mentioned numerous times in the past, and has been demonstrated for the last three seasons by his arch-nemesis changing from the (male) Master to (female) Missy. And I think that most of us are eagerly anticipating the change. Not for any reasons of "PC", but simply because of the myriad of possible new directions this opens up for the coming storylines.
The fact is that the majority of long-time followers of the show are well aware of the fact that there is nothing new about the idea of a Time Lord (the Doctor's species, for those not familiar) changing gender - the possibility has been mentioned numerous times in the past, and has been demonstrated for the last three seasons by his arch-nemesis changing from the (male) Master to (female) Missy. And I think that most of us are eagerly anticipating the change. Not for any reasons of "PC", but simply because of the myriad of possible new directions this opens up for the coming storylines.
6
I suppose we should be pleased there are Breitbart Cuck Haters smart enough to watch Doctor Who. Or at least to bellyache about it.
Since no actual Gallifreyan actors seem to've shown up to audition, the only thing that matters to this Doctor Who fan is if Ms. Whittaker's charm and quirks work in the scripts she's given as the Thirteenth Doctor. That's it. It either works to serve Mr. Chibnall's vision for the Doctor or it doesn't.
In my view, as a Whovian for 40 years, Peter Capaldi and Bill never did quite work, though I can understand their longing for a Darker Doctor after Tennant and Smith's goofy and sweet Doctors. Capaldi didn't work but that wasn't because Peter Capaldi was older, crankier, Scottish/Italian, or that Bill was a woman or black: they simply didn't need each other's company enough to justify TARDIS adventures. Rose needed out of a dull London, Amy Pond needed her Raggedy Doctor to fulfill her girlish dreams, but Bill's needs weren't served by the Doctor, and it showed in him grabbing a guitar or shades as if those would make up for lack of emotional core behind the crankiness. He was miscast.
Two things will decide whether the Thirteenth Doctor works or not: a strong relationship to her Companion, and great scripts. Having enjoyed her in "Broadchurch"--which Mr. Chibnall wrote, I love her quirks and think she's an inspired choice. Now, get her the Companion and the scripts.
And go back to whining in you mum's basement, Brexit Boys.
Since no actual Gallifreyan actors seem to've shown up to audition, the only thing that matters to this Doctor Who fan is if Ms. Whittaker's charm and quirks work in the scripts she's given as the Thirteenth Doctor. That's it. It either works to serve Mr. Chibnall's vision for the Doctor or it doesn't.
In my view, as a Whovian for 40 years, Peter Capaldi and Bill never did quite work, though I can understand their longing for a Darker Doctor after Tennant and Smith's goofy and sweet Doctors. Capaldi didn't work but that wasn't because Peter Capaldi was older, crankier, Scottish/Italian, or that Bill was a woman or black: they simply didn't need each other's company enough to justify TARDIS adventures. Rose needed out of a dull London, Amy Pond needed her Raggedy Doctor to fulfill her girlish dreams, but Bill's needs weren't served by the Doctor, and it showed in him grabbing a guitar or shades as if those would make up for lack of emotional core behind the crankiness. He was miscast.
Two things will decide whether the Thirteenth Doctor works or not: a strong relationship to her Companion, and great scripts. Having enjoyed her in "Broadchurch"--which Mr. Chibnall wrote, I love her quirks and think she's an inspired choice. Now, get her the Companion and the scripts.
And go back to whining in you mum's basement, Brexit Boys.
9
I'm disappointed because I think she's a terrible actress. And really disappointed that the person who brought us that mess known as Broadchurch will be in charge. So expect really bad writing, less than one dimensional characters, and just a mess. It was obvious they were going to cast a woman by the things they were saying in the current series and when they announced Chibnall was going to be running it I knew he'd pick this actress. This does play to a lot of cross casting being done in recent years just to sort of "let's shake things up" kind of thing. Which means you're either really desperate or really unimaginative.
3
And in the case of Chibnall, definitely unimaginative. The first series of Broadchurch was excellent, and I stopped watching half-way through the second. Quite why there has been a third is beyond me. His record on writing for Who has been at best middle of the road, and sometimes awful. I'll watch, but am expecting the Hindenburg, not a Saturn V.
1
Why should casting a fantastic female actor for a gender agnostic role be political and choosing a male actor not political? Male is not normative any more or less than female is. Isn't choosing male actors 12 times in a row for a role that could be 50/50 the political act?
189
Some people have trouble grasping that the choice of white men is based on race and gender just as much or more than the choice of non-whites and/or females is based on race and gender.
4
I would venture it's more a commercial act. You shill what the audience will pay for.
I am amused by the "not picked on merit" comments, as if there were a set of clear and objective criteria for 'being good at playing Doctor Who' and all the showrunner needed to do was to add up the numbers, see who came out top and then hire him (the assumption generally being that it would be a him, because men have already been demonstrated to be very good at being the Doctor).
There isn't such an objective criteria, of course. There is only the current requirements of the show's producers and writers. Since Chibnall wants the next series to involve storylines about a female Doctor of course he was going to audition female actors. There is no "better" male actor who is being unreasonably overlooked- male actors simply didn't meet the requirements of the show this time round.
There isn't such an objective criteria, of course. There is only the current requirements of the show's producers and writers. Since Chibnall wants the next series to involve storylines about a female Doctor of course he was going to audition female actors. There is no "better" male actor who is being unreasonably overlooked- male actors simply didn't meet the requirements of the show this time round.
5
This argument is inane - there is only one Dr. Who - and that's the irreplaceable Tom Baker. Sorry, folks, my nostalgia for the 70's (and my youth) trumps* any rationality on this point - I simply cannot accept ANYONE else as the Doctor. I'm fine with this (no need for expensive therapy to resolve this conflict), after all, it was just a tacky, somewhat silly, very low-budget, sci-fi television show. All that said, I must confess, every fibre of my body shouts with antipathy at the idea of a woman Doctor. It would be like finding out Darth Vadar was really a woman under that black suit - I mean, maybe that would be politically correct, but it is narratively absurd.
I know before this announcement there are many for whom only one Doctor will be their true Doctor, that's fine. But then it shouldn't matter to you that an Alien character is regenerating into a female body (a move that doesn't even require narrative retconning and something the show's original creator wanted to do as early as the 1980s) . Of course it would be absurd to make Darth Vader a woman, although it's not like the Star Wars saga hasn't had its fair share of absurd twists, but this is something that has always been possible in the world of Dr. Who and it's not even remotely the same thing.
3
Bravo Doctor Who! Great to see someone play the Doctor who has tremendous acting ability and the already displays the doctorey, timey wimey vibe already!
5
As a white male, I am relieved to know that the Doctor will carry on quite nicely in an other-gendered form for at least the next few years. It's the DOCTOR! Old, shorter and playing a recorder, tall with white wavy hair, with a scarf and curls (jelly baby?), with celery in the lapel, ornery with a clown coat, scholarly with a bumbershoot, seen rarely but heard for years, a renegade, with funny ears, a dashing Shakespearean, a tweedy goof, older and darker, and now - a blonde who, I am not ashamed to say as a straight, white male, is not hard to look at. Not at all. And if in a few years, the Doctor changes again, the universe will still remember that it IS the DOCTOR!
7
I was a huge Dr Who fan when I was around 13... its a kid's book character after all. Not only that but the character has changed (evolved) multiple times over the years. So the fans are kind of used to the dude becoming something else. My original guy had a mop of curly hair and wore a really long scarf. Does he even still have a sonic screwdriver? But honestly, it's for KIDS.... So if a new generation is just now discovering this character, are they really going to care if he's a she or a he? And if you're a 40 year old man getting in a huff about this, you need to get a life. In a hurry.
4
A woman ends an all-male streak, and somehow that is a loss for men. Actually, it is a loss of viewers for this old show. Oh, and it's OK to be white. Without us there would be no Dr. Who, as well as most of the advances of Mankind!
"...as well as most of the advances of Mankind!"
I suggest you do a little more research.
I suggest you do a little more research.
3
I guess we should have expected that the insecure, thinned skinned, white broflakes would have a fit over this but luckily, their influence is in decline and the future belongs to those who embrace change. She was terrific in Broadchurch and she will make a wonderful Doctor.
7
I'm so tired of (many, not all) men finding a way to be threatened by every little gender adjustment that society makes.
Since this show is all about the main person regenerating him/herself every few years, this new version should not be all that hard for them to swallow. But the jolly good sense of it only seems to enrage them more.
They'd better get used to it. As more and more young men forego college so that they can sit in their parents' basements staring at screens with their joysticks in their hands, we'll watch how the world changes.
More women in college, then more women running things (I can only hope).
Since this show is all about the main person regenerating him/herself every few years, this new version should not be all that hard for them to swallow. But the jolly good sense of it only seems to enrage them more.
They'd better get used to it. As more and more young men forego college so that they can sit in their parents' basements staring at screens with their joysticks in their hands, we'll watch how the world changes.
More women in college, then more women running things (I can only hope).
6
Leave us not forget, Joanna Lumley was the first female Doctor...just not exactly canon.
3
Too bad they still chose someone blond, skinny and youthful. Better would be a charismatic but pudgy and older type -- experienced, a tad dumpy but brilliant and clever. Like my favorite Dr. Who played by Tom Baker. I hope she makes lots of sly feminist cracks pointing out gender inequalities in that clever way that reminds us all frequently how whacked out the gendered social order really is.
2
If the transition from a male to female Dr. takes the story in a good direction, who cares? The show has felt stale for a couple years now. On the other hand, if this is simply a stunt to mollify the SJWs of the world, then the drop in ratings and viewership is their punishment.
As West writes in her article, it's possible to comb the internet for tantrums. Just because she calls this action out doesn't mean she's not guilty of perpetrating it.
As West writes in her article, it's possible to comb the internet for tantrums. Just because she calls this action out doesn't mean she's not guilty of perpetrating it.
1
But, then, there's already been a great precedent for this transition...the Master regenerated to Missy, and the sparks and story line became even more interesting!
2
As a Whovian from way back, I think the new casting is great! Having a woman as the Doctor won’t diminish the number of viewers; indeed, more people will probably be tuning in, just to see how this change works!
At its core, “Dr. Who” is all about human decency and a “live and let live” attitude towards differences of all kinds. (There were some pretty weird aliens, cultures, and individuals on Dr. Who. One of my favorites: the Face of Boe, who is, basically, a giant face who is billions of years old.) And, though I hate to take a lot of the fun out of the show by getting really serious, “Dr. Who” is about having a moral compass and always doing the right thing, even though it could cost you.
Not surprisingly, I think that trolling a show and its producers just because a woman is cast to play an enigmatic thousand-year-old alien is NOT true to the spirit of “Dr. Who.” Live and let live! Let’s see how the new Doctor works out!
At its core, “Dr. Who” is all about human decency and a “live and let live” attitude towards differences of all kinds. (There were some pretty weird aliens, cultures, and individuals on Dr. Who. One of my favorites: the Face of Boe, who is, basically, a giant face who is billions of years old.) And, though I hate to take a lot of the fun out of the show by getting really serious, “Dr. Who” is about having a moral compass and always doing the right thing, even though it could cost you.
Not surprisingly, I think that trolling a show and its producers just because a woman is cast to play an enigmatic thousand-year-old alien is NOT true to the spirit of “Dr. Who.” Live and let live! Let’s see how the new Doctor works out!
78
Define "way back." I suppose everyone has their favorites but for me the only characters from New Who who deserve that title are The Weeping Angels, along with the episode "Blink." I suggest you watch the first two episodes from the early 70's with The Autons. Some of the stuff they shot back then wouldn't be permitted on modern TV. Plastic chairs swallowing people whole? A plastic toy that strangles a man?
1
"One of my favorites: the Face of Boe, who is, basically, a giant face who is billions of years old."
And was Captain John Harkness to boot!
And was Captain John Harkness to boot!
2
As a guy, I have to say I don't understand the furor.
4
If you scour through reddit you can find any viewpoint, no matter how horrible.
3
I bring you good news from the masculine side of the issue! Like all things on the internet, the vocal minority are every bit as minor as they are vocal. The vast– and I mean VAST– majority of men on this or any other planet do not care one tiny whit about who is cast to play this or any role. We have real things in life about which to worry and cannot afford to give such pop culture piffle any care.
Having said that, I can tell you that we are happy when such traditionally white male roles succumb to the tidal forces of progress. All people of all genders and backgrounds should be considered for all roles that are within their capacity to fill. We wish Ms. Whittaker well on her new journey and hope she sees the cranky comments for what they are: the vapid whinings of maladjusted man-children who would rather maintain a death grip on their insecurities and inadequacies than face the realities of growing up.
Having said that, I can tell you that we are happy when such traditionally white male roles succumb to the tidal forces of progress. All people of all genders and backgrounds should be considered for all roles that are within their capacity to fill. We wish Ms. Whittaker well on her new journey and hope she sees the cranky comments for what they are: the vapid whinings of maladjusted man-children who would rather maintain a death grip on their insecurities and inadequacies than face the realities of growing up.
2
Misogyny may be alive and well in the real world but in the world of fantasy, art, literature, etc., those walls are crumbling.
2
The argument made by another commenter that male characters dominate sci fi because the genre's core audience is male and needs heroes they identify with in order to be interested is ridiculous. Women are asked to identify with male heroes a vast majority of the time and we do just fine. Isn't that what stories are for? To get us to imagine the world from a perspective not our own?
Also, FYI, most women I know LOVE sci fi. Just like we love a good car chase and a good sex scene.
Also, FYI, most women I know LOVE sci fi. Just like we love a good car chase and a good sex scene.
7
It's unfortunate that if a white man has questions or concerns about such issues, he is immediately labeled. I, a white man, also think that some of these casting changes are simply for the sake of jumping on the current "shake everything up" train. I agree with other commenters that, for some people, such changes aren't welcome because it IS a change, not because of any gender or race change. But accusing someone of being a misogynist or racist simply because he doesn't like the change is the worst way to help people accept change.
That being said, this character is an alien that can take many different shapes, so a female human doesn't seem so far fetched (though Dr. Who will always be Tom Baker to me!)
Oh the other hand, taking a long established (human) character and changing the race or gender simply because "it's about time that character not be a white man anymore!"-I think that's nonsense. What that tells me is that movie producers think a black or female character in, say, the role of a super spy, can't cut it unless it's slipped into an already successful franchise.
That being said, this character is an alien that can take many different shapes, so a female human doesn't seem so far fetched (though Dr. Who will always be Tom Baker to me!)
Oh the other hand, taking a long established (human) character and changing the race or gender simply because "it's about time that character not be a white man anymore!"-I think that's nonsense. What that tells me is that movie producers think a black or female character in, say, the role of a super spy, can't cut it unless it's slipped into an already successful franchise.
3
Grow up, guys. It's just a TV show.
2
Slight edit:
The notion of a “black and transgender” female Doctor is only absurd if you believe that white men are legitimate. (full stop)
The past six months have provided me with daily, even hourly, opportunities that make me embarrassed to be male.
The notion of a “black and transgender” female Doctor is only absurd if you believe that white men are legitimate. (full stop)
The past six months have provided me with daily, even hourly, opportunities that make me embarrassed to be male.
5
I've never watched Dr. Who, but this sentence stuck out to me "the Doctor is an alien ... who is hundreds of years old, ... can regenerate into a new body (any body) if wounded or killed."
If the Doctor can have ANY body and has been around for HUNDREDS of years, it seems awfully silly that he has only ever occupied white, male, cisgender bodies. In fact, it seems like a flaw in the show's plot. How is it possible that the Doctor has never been female, when over half of the world's population is? Seems like it's about time.
If the Doctor can have ANY body and has been around for HUNDREDS of years, it seems awfully silly that he has only ever occupied white, male, cisgender bodies. In fact, it seems like a flaw in the show's plot. How is it possible that the Doctor has never been female, when over half of the world's population is? Seems like it's about time.
240
Boom.
Why would anyone who could regenerate into whatever they want, need to be transgender? Or is the Doctor regnerating as a woman the definition of transgender?
1
You can't ask for logic, or you'd be asking why, with the whole universe at his disposal, he's always turning up in London (especially at Christmas).
Doctor Who is fiction and the fictional character is an alien, not human. So why are some people upset that a fictional character who isn't human will be played by a woman? If Dr. Who can regenerate any body out of anything, why wouldn't he, she, the alien try something new for a change?
3
The hallmark of good Science Fiction, I have a library of around 800 books from Verne through all the ages, is a consistent cosmology. Work from men and women show this. Kurtz and the Deryni, McCaffery and Pern, Martin and Westeros etc. Even Star Wars and the EU. So the fact that people used to a specific cosmology are annoyed is hardly surprising. Here is the thing they are entitled to be annoyed. Others are entitled to happy. Those who are annoyed can tune out and rating will show one way or another. I disagree with the casting and once I am done catching up with Smith and Capaldi I will tune out. As I did with Colin Baker. It is called personal choice. Funny how that works.
1
There is absolutely nothing about this cosmology that dictates that the Doctor must be a white male.
2
I simply think of this as an idea who's time has come. Dr Who always requires new blood. As a fan from the 70s (and in my 70s) it seems perfect. I also do not necessarily see this as a political or social statement, when the show went from Matt Smith to Peter Capaldi the regeneration was from relatively younger to considerably older, big deal. The more interesting reality is that we went from one wonderful portrayal to another and my expectation is that this will be the same. I am thrilled that we have an excellent new Doctor, my only complaint, I want longer seasons with more episodes.
12
The problem isn't what gender the Doctor is, it's the fact that the show itself has long since outlived its usefulness and become rather trite. Without an overall story arc to connect the episodes to each other, there is no plot or character growth, and each episode becomes just another stand-alone adventure.
I stopped watching about 4-5 seasons ago...
I stopped watching about 4-5 seasons ago...
4
This piece assumes, by its very selective and simplistic stats (only 7% Dr. Who's are women) that women have not existed on TV except for when they replace traditionally male characters. The statistic regarding the presidents is true, but a little off point (Obama was not a woman).
People including me often react to replacing traditionally male roles with women, not because they don't think women should be in lead roles on TV, but on a gut understanding that its a statement of supplanting identities, as much as it is one of creating equality in the media. It comes across as disingenuous. The suspension of belief of the narrative required to make such a transformation is huge.
To put it more plainly, making traditionally male characters into females characters, as a way to create equality, is not unlike replacing Bullwinkle with a doe and saying it's about time. Okay, so the overall show is pretty much the same, but unless we can argue that there is absolutely no difference between men and women except for a couple of superficial physical ones, then no one can claim it's Dr. Who. Give me the science, not the vague notions of identity, that women and men inside are the same on the inside, and I'm on board.
Daddy Dare Care with female leads? Mark Tyler Moore? Absurd, but that's my point. But moreso...tell me why. I mean, really why? Women have had lead roles and will continue to, without replacing ones occupied by men. Focus on equality, not identity substitution.
People including me often react to replacing traditionally male roles with women, not because they don't think women should be in lead roles on TV, but on a gut understanding that its a statement of supplanting identities, as much as it is one of creating equality in the media. It comes across as disingenuous. The suspension of belief of the narrative required to make such a transformation is huge.
To put it more plainly, making traditionally male characters into females characters, as a way to create equality, is not unlike replacing Bullwinkle with a doe and saying it's about time. Okay, so the overall show is pretty much the same, but unless we can argue that there is absolutely no difference between men and women except for a couple of superficial physical ones, then no one can claim it's Dr. Who. Give me the science, not the vague notions of identity, that women and men inside are the same on the inside, and I'm on board.
Daddy Dare Care with female leads? Mark Tyler Moore? Absurd, but that's my point. But moreso...tell me why. I mean, really why? Women have had lead roles and will continue to, without replacing ones occupied by men. Focus on equality, not identity substitution.
2
I see what you mean but I feel Dr. Who is different. I recently saw a play where Sherlock Holmes was played by a woman. My feelings were, "Why not write great detective characters for women instead of having women play male characters?" The reason I think Dr. Who is different is because Who is not human, therefore it's not mandatory that Who is always played by a man. Who is an alien who can regenerate any kind of body. Unlike Holmes, Who can change into something or someone else.
3
Yes...but we're talking about fictional narrative where they had to use the plot device, which you describe, to explain the differences in appearance and personality that the producers could not avoid. Let's see, perhaps the writers are brilliant and will make it work. But this article alone points out how this is more about replacing a leader male character with a female one as a statement, not a clever plot twist. The jury will be in after a few episodes. But eventually people will say, regardless of how well this show does, that supplanting women with men as a form of equality was a silly fad that is not in line with creating great stories.
1
Frank, if I had my druthers, Michael Keaton would still be playing Batman. Goodbye, Val Kilmer and Christian Bale! If I can deal with non-Michael Keatons in what I view as a traditionally Michael Keaton role, then you can deal with women in traditionally male roles like Dr. Who.
As a person of color, I've spent my entire life enthusiastically cheering for white male heroes. I thrilled to the adventures of Luke Skywalker, Superman, Indiana Jones, Neo, Rocky Balboa, Spider-Man, ad infinitum. I empathized with their struggles, cheered for their victories, imagined myself in their shoes, and tried to live up to their admirable qualities. That is to say: my imagination was large and healthy enough to encompass characters who did not look like me.
What does it say about the impoverished, shriveled state of white men's imaginations, if they can't do the same?
What does it say about the impoverished, shriveled state of white men's imaginations, if they can't do the same?
359
Just out of curiosity, how do you know that the quoted comments represent the "state of white men's imaginations"?
I would caution you not to blame an entire group of people simply on the actions of a small minority. "White men's imaginations" are not the issue. A vocal minority of Doctor Who fans are the issue, and not all of them are white and male.
1
It says they've become too lazy and comfortable in their dominance and need to have their imaginations woken up by change.
1
I live with my daughter and her friend, and both women were disappointed that the new doctor was a woman. I suspect a great many of those who complain are women, just as a great many of those who voted for Trump are women. I plan to watch just as I have done since the new series debuted.
3
First ,cite studies on any of your personal "suspicions" about women.
Yes, women are individuals,with individual thoughts, strengths, abilities, weaknesses and so forth. News break.
Pointing out that in general more older, white, less educated people of both genders voted for Trump suggests nothing about women, but does about education, generations and race.
Yes, women are individuals,with individual thoughts, strengths, abilities, weaknesses and so forth. News break.
Pointing out that in general more older, white, less educated people of both genders voted for Trump suggests nothing about women, but does about education, generations and race.
4
News flash: women can be sexist.
1
We get it. Ms. West is a misandrist who is selective in directing her misandry toward white men only - and, of course, she's an ageist, and racially selective about that, too. Maybe she'll grow out if it someday?
2
What did you draw that conclusion from. Nothing in the piece suggests misandry, though your comment suggests more than a little misogyny.
7
What a stunning display of reaching and making absurd assumption where the text nor the subtext offer no support. Congrats.
Pretty clear from her comments singling out white men for her little digs: the male lead in the show was a "white mans birthright" or white men are the last to need a "hero" (like Trump). So, I guess she's at least as much of a racist as a misandrist, as well as an ageist. Defend her, if you wish, but her brand of feminism will only justify charges that feminists are a bunch of man haters, racially selective because they fear losing support among men of color.
Face it: if she had made the same exact comments about black men as he did about white men, you would have been first in line denouncing her as a racist.
Face it: if she had made the same exact comments about black men as he did about white men, you would have been first in line denouncing her as a racist.
"Giant farting lizard babies, evil fire hydrants and occasionally Satan."
As ever, the Axis of Evil.
As ever, the Axis of Evil.
16
That's, as far as I can tell, a non-fan describing Slitheen, Daleks, and yes, Satan, which the Tenth Doctor fought. Blanking on the name of the episode, though.
Are you describing villains on Dr. Who or the folks in charge in Washington, D.C.?
Doctor Who villains, since Doctor Who is the topic of discussion.
It works for any sex:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhEUBgu9j5Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhEUBgu9j5Y
1
There is a comedy sketch with Rowan Atkins as the Doctor which also includes multiple regenerations until there is a female Doctor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do-wDPoC6GM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do-wDPoC6GM
I've been a Dr Who fan since forever and I am disappointed that we are to presented with a female doctor. Oh! I know, I'm an old fart stuck in his ways, polite folks would say traditional, but I'll accept 'old fart'. When we get older, we tend to drop the pretenses, and know what (if not always, who) we are.
It's not the fact that Dr Who is to be female that bothers, it's all the PC nonsense that comes with the fact- that's just so boring. Much of the feminism stuff (societally in general) strikes me as lightly veiled misandry (at best), and the constant emasculation of men in advertising (and media in general) under the guise of humor has become silly.
I guess I am just getting older, I'll give Jodie Whittaker a chance (like she cares!), she seems ok, and she comes highly recommended. But I warn you, if she uses her sonic screwdriver (just once) for personal pursuit (or pleasure), rather than using it only to help keep our world safe against evil, I'll drop her like a used rag.
Anyway, Dr Who will always be a man, even when in a woman's body, just like the New Mexico Whiptail lizard.
It's not the fact that Dr Who is to be female that bothers, it's all the PC nonsense that comes with the fact- that's just so boring. Much of the feminism stuff (societally in general) strikes me as lightly veiled misandry (at best), and the constant emasculation of men in advertising (and media in general) under the guise of humor has become silly.
I guess I am just getting older, I'll give Jodie Whittaker a chance (like she cares!), she seems ok, and she comes highly recommended. But I warn you, if she uses her sonic screwdriver (just once) for personal pursuit (or pleasure), rather than using it only to help keep our world safe against evil, I'll drop her like a used rag.
Anyway, Dr Who will always be a man, even when in a woman's body, just like the New Mexico Whiptail lizard.
All the PC nonsense? It's nonsense that we get a woman Doctor after how many decades?? Also, I really don't care how old you are. That's not an excuse for your misogyny (where on earth does this idea of misandry come from???). If you really want to talk about age and being a fan since forever, I'd probably consider what Sydney Newman said in 1986. He said, the Doctor "should be metamorphosed into a woman” even that far back. But no, I'm just seeing supposed fans whining about "PC" casting just because one character out of hundreds of male characters is now a woman. Yawn.
1
Someone has lost their sense of humor. What the heck does it matter who plays the role, it's a show. Some women really do need to remember their place.
1
Not a Dr. Who fan, but I can understand why fans of this show would be upset. There is a trend to take entertainment that fans have relegated over long periods of time into tradition and use it as a political statement to benefit specific segments of society.
For true fans, long running forms of entertainment become an escape from the vagaries of real life and continuity of the characters and sometimes even plot lines can come to represent a small element of security in one's ever-changing existence. Then, some well meaning executives decide that the show is somehow discriminatory in its content and casting and throw out the continuity to suit these preceptions. It is disturbing that every form of entertainment has to be scrutinized and then reformatted to fit this cookie-cutter view of the world, fans be damned. I believe it's possible to exult in multiculturalism and feminism without scouring every existing tradition and form of entertainment of white-male casting. If fans of this show decry the loss of a traditionally white-male character, it does not mean that they are sexist; it just means that to change this casting just to suit the perceptions of a segment of society is ignoring the reasons that they continue to enjoy the show.
For true fans, long running forms of entertainment become an escape from the vagaries of real life and continuity of the characters and sometimes even plot lines can come to represent a small element of security in one's ever-changing existence. Then, some well meaning executives decide that the show is somehow discriminatory in its content and casting and throw out the continuity to suit these preceptions. It is disturbing that every form of entertainment has to be scrutinized and then reformatted to fit this cookie-cutter view of the world, fans be damned. I believe it's possible to exult in multiculturalism and feminism without scouring every existing tradition and form of entertainment of white-male casting. If fans of this show decry the loss of a traditionally white-male character, it does not mean that they are sexist; it just means that to change this casting just to suit the perceptions of a segment of society is ignoring the reasons that they continue to enjoy the show.
33
Dr Who being white, or a man isn't the defining feature of the character.
5
I think something you are inherently neglecting in your argument is the fact that women have also been fans of this show from the very beginning...
108
A long-winded post that assumes the executives chose Ms. Whittaker for gender equality. Maybe they did it just to mix things up a bit? Why over-analyze it?
4
She will blow everyone away and they will al be singing her praises, just you wait.
22
“As the Trump administration ramps up” its war on the majority, way many liberal Democrats are joining up. The House of Representatives just voted to increase the miliitary budget even beyond Trump’s $54 billion, money that will inevitably be taken from all the programs - seniors, children, labor, environment, medical research - that liberals champion. And a lot of those liberal Democrats voted with the Trumpublicans.
2
As a middle age white male who appreciates and celebrates the wonderment and bafflement of the female of our species. About damn time we had a female Doctor Who!
20
Women are no more and no less wonderful or baffling than men. We are people, plain and simple.
1
I've only seen Ms. Whitaker in Broadchurch (so now that amazing series boasts Dr. 13 as well as Dr. 10!), but she certainly has the chops, so why gripe about whether 13 is male or female? Those who will: just wait till she gets her male +1. We'll really hear some screaming, then. Rock on, whovians, and quit worrying about age or gender. Take a lesson from the Doctor. Be adaptable.
26
Unless Bill comes back. That'll be interesting...although Bill said she went for people her own age.
My favorite internet comment so far:
"So DISGUSTED by this TERRIBLE CASTING DECISION! How can a pathetic, Earthly human portray a TIME LORD from the planet GALLIFREY!!!????!!"
"So DISGUSTED by this TERRIBLE CASTING DECISION! How can a pathetic, Earthly human portray a TIME LORD from the planet GALLIFREY!!!????!!"
35
Im continually appalled by men and their sexist comments on whatever medium. I dont even consider them "my fellow men", as they are not men, no matter how old.
Id love to get these jerks in an interrogation room...have them crying like...well the little boys they really are.
Bunch of dopey fan boys who do nothing but whine about nonsense.
Id love to get these jerks in an interrogation room...have them crying like...well the little boys they really are.
Bunch of dopey fan boys who do nothing but whine about nonsense.
10
Peter Capaldi, who plays the current Doctor, is awful. Anyone - female, male, transgender, gender neutral - would be better. Then again, I was a huge fan of the previous Doctor played by Matt Smith. For those us who have watched Doctor Who for decades, we know that the show has lasted for so long because it reinvents itself every few years with the main characters regularly rotating out - we have our favorite companions and ones who don't make the grade for us and our favorite Doctors and ones we don't like. The companions, who represent the viewer, have always been a more diverse crowd. The Doctor has always been a white male, because white males are always in charge - because that's the world most white males grew up in. A world that is changing. A female Doctor is long overdue. The Doctor's fellow Time Lord and nemesis, the Master, has already been played by a woman as Missy. A female Doctor will be refreshing. We will judge her and the new head writer in how they recreate and reinterpret the Doctor character one more time - it's what makes Doctor Who timeless. How will she and her companions take on Cybermen, Master/Missy, the Daleks, and many other old and new adversaries? Who will be her companions? How will she interact with River, the Doctor's wife? Now, we just have to figure out why a Time Lord, who is centuries old and can traverse time and space and regenerate into any form, is always British?
As far as morons on social media - there's nothing new there, ever.
As far as morons on social media - there's nothing new there, ever.
24
Bring back K-9
Matt Smith was an actor desperately trying to play at being an older man, and never succeeded. The new actress is 34 to his 27. Remember how Moffat was constantly telling everyone how great Smith played "at being old." Methinks he doth protest too much. Since the show's return the two actors who have best represented the Doctor, based on the constant characteristics of the Doctor from 1963-1989, are Ecclestone and Capaldi. And Capaldi has suffered from very poor writing. Who was meant to be a family show (Sidney Newman) but equally he didn't want BEMs. Moffit himself has said the Doctor should be a sort of gruff grandfatherly figure with a twinkle in his eye. The new actress playing who is highly capable and can portray empathy and love better than most. But can she play a cold hearted Aspy self-important intellectual. If you radically change the DNA of the show, it's not Dr. Who any more (and as a Brit, I consider this show to be a national institution).
"Why can't a woman be more like a man?" - H. Higgins.
4
Rather than glass, Whittaker's detractors seem to hope the ceiling's made of Corbomite.
6
....which can be shattered by setting 5 on a sonic screwdriver. :) :)
1
Love the switch up! It's great for the series and story line!
4
I am a longtime fan of Doctor Who (I am 70) and I welcome a female doctor, her adventures must be somewhat different from the male doctors but The Doctor has always been a pacifist, so what better start for Ms Doctor, go, go,go.
11
You can have your female Dr. Who and I can turn the show off.
10
It is worth noting that Marvel Comics made a huge effort to "recast" established characters as female and black and latino and gay -- with the result of driving off half of their fans, and sales plummeting.
Just saying. I have no dog in this fight. I'm a Trekkie, not a Doctor Who fan.
Just saying. I have no dog in this fight. I'm a Trekkie, not a Doctor Who fan.
1
And good riddance.
2
Of course you can. It's your loss.
I remember when David Tennant first appeared as The Doctor - and was so disappointed that he "wasn't ginger" (red hair). Wouldn't it be great if The Doctor's first reaction is not about gender, but about still not having red hair?
17
I said the same exact thing to my husband. I think even Matt Smith even said "still not Ginger". I really thought if they got a female doctor she would have been a redhead. Maybe her companion will be a Ginger like Donna and Amy and she can say that even her companions get the right hair color.
An editorial was published in the New York Times that quotes a selection of reddit comments with no corroboration to indicate that those comments are remotely widespread. This is a sad day for the New York Times.
8
Op-eds are not the same as Editorials. One, the Op-Ed (which this is), is the opinion of a writer who may or may not be a staff member and whose POV doesn't necessarily represent that of the publication. An Editorial represents the official stance/position of the publication. Two very different things. That aside, your criticism about the inclusion of reddit comments is valid, just not applicable to an editorial piece.
4
Just reading through some of these comments there is still push back on the idea. That fact that it can be seen across multiple forums, with varying audiences, shows the problem she is highlighting. And I read through the comments first to see if there was any validation to her claims.
1
If you look at the header it says "Opinion."
This is an opinion piece from a writer independent of the paper and representing the writer's own view.
This is an opinion piece from a writer independent of the paper and representing the writer's own view.
"Wonder Woman's" success at the box office was no doubt a factor in this decision. Nobody ( meaning men) in Hollywood thought it would attract such large audiences -- but it did! I watched Dr. Who a million years ago- I am definitely interested in watching again.
8
She was a class act in ATTACK THE BLOCK (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1478964/ , https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/attack_the_block/) one of the best ski-fi horror films that didn't shy away from race, class and gender.
I think the unfavorable reaction to this decision has been relatively muted. The vast majority of fans are happy with the casting of a female Doctor.
9
Perhaps what some men object to, is not that Dr. Who has transformed into a woman. But rather the sense that this choice was made, not in the interests of telling a great story, but out of political correctness. Personally, I think having a female Dr. Who is a great plot device.
46
I don't think it was a snap decision based on today's political reality. A female Doctor Who has been discussed for about 5 years now. I remember a con discussion years ago about how they should approach Helen Mirren after 11 was done.
7
It seems awfully impolitic to me. Isn't it just interesting?
How is it "political correctness" to cast an actor whose gender represents over half the human population on the planet, who will be performing a character who, as has been canonically established, can regenerate into any appearance and gender with no limitations whatsoever? If anything, insisting on casting only white men the previous twelve times was the blatant political choice.
Casting a female Doctor serves BOTH interests: telling a great story, and correcting an unfair and unjustifiable imbalance in representation. If anything, this will allow the show to tell MORE interesting stories, in areas heretofore unexplored.
Casting a female Doctor serves BOTH interests: telling a great story, and correcting an unfair and unjustifiable imbalance in representation. If anything, this will allow the show to tell MORE interesting stories, in areas heretofore unexplored.
3
Why is it that so many men believe that if a woman achieves something or has something it diminishes men? It's infantile. It's based on the idea of scarcity that has no basis in fact. It's selfish in the extreme. It's fear-based. Why do men all over the world believe they must take from women, hold them down, use rage to control, use violence to control, and on and on and on. Why?
It's a world. There are people in it. If we have scientists and some are women who make discoveries and advance a field, why is that somehow a diminishment of male scientists? If we have artists and engineers and writers and executives and teachers, why should gender create problems for men? It makes no sense at all.
It's like a toddler grabbing a toy from another, not having learned yet to share. We have raised our men wrong. We've raised them to believe they are entitled over women, when we could raise them to believe all people have something to contribute and that's worth supporting, even celebrating.
Maybe the next generation will have a better chance with the normalizing of women in more roles. It's been ten thousand years of sexism, but one can always hope.
It's a world. There are people in it. If we have scientists and some are women who make discoveries and advance a field, why is that somehow a diminishment of male scientists? If we have artists and engineers and writers and executives and teachers, why should gender create problems for men? It makes no sense at all.
It's like a toddler grabbing a toy from another, not having learned yet to share. We have raised our men wrong. We've raised them to believe they are entitled over women, when we could raise them to believe all people have something to contribute and that's worth supporting, even celebrating.
Maybe the next generation will have a better chance with the normalizing of women in more roles. It's been ten thousand years of sexism, but one can always hope.
97
Here there is wisdom.
1
Why do women feel it matters that there be equal representation? Just because men are represented more in prominent fields does that detract from women somehow?
1
Who's Dr. Who?
5
I suspect Lindy has never even watched the show. But the attempt to wring some political significance from a now-failing series by selectively trolling the internet for cherry-picked comments is a new journalistic low even for the Times. This is a columnist uniformed about the genre. When Starbuck was recast as a woman in BSG it was widely acclaimed, even by "fanboys." Here, the producers are clearly trying to expand the viewer demographic and it won't work. Inferior writing and a character long-written as a man will doom this ploy. There is nothing political here save for the silly maundering of a stilted columnist.
5
I imagine writers write about shows they are not regular viewers or fans of quite often; I am not sure what you base her being "uninformed about the genre" on based on this piece. I would love to hear your support for this statement.
There is definitely a significant presence on the internet grumbling about this casting (even if not the majority) and it is a valid topic for an op-ed piece. If Doctor Who fails I agree that it will be because of lack of quality of the storytelling, not because of the Doctor's gender. Honestly, I am not loving Capaldi at the moment so fresh blood (independent of gender) I think will be a good change.
There is definitely a significant presence on the internet grumbling about this casting (even if not the majority) and it is a valid topic for an op-ed piece. If Doctor Who fails I agree that it will be because of lack of quality of the storytelling, not because of the Doctor's gender. Honestly, I am not loving Capaldi at the moment so fresh blood (independent of gender) I think will be a good change.
2
You don't remember the Starbuck recasting the way that I do. There was a huge uproar on the expected parts of the internet, similar to this one. But it went away after the first couple of episodes aired.
As far as failing, many people don't care for Moffatt's take, but the ratings which take in the first week after broadcast aren't a huge dip. I think things could go back up with a new show runner.
As far as failing, many people don't care for Moffatt's take, but the ratings which take in the first week after broadcast aren't a huge dip. I think things could go back up with a new show runner.
1
James Bond should be next.
9
Gillian Anderson for James Bond!
Doctor Who YEAH! Woo Who!
As the Trump administration goes into overdrive to roll back the clock on gender equality, I don't really see the urgency of turning a marketing decision by an entertainment franchise into a battleground.
Don't feed the trolls.
Don't feed the trolls.
2
Having watched the show since 1970, let me make a couple of points.
(a) The Doctor is old, very old. When a younger actor is put into the role they desperately try to play "at being old." It usually doesn't work. e.g. Matt Smith
(b) The Doctor is a cross between Mr. Chips and the prophet Job. There is a very cold "Aspy" side to the Doctor. The actress who has been chosen is very good, and plays a heart broken mother brilliantly (Broadchurch). However, I think there are few female actors who will be capable of playing the Doctor as the Doctor should be portrayed. e.g. Tilda Swinton; Olivia Colman. That Chibnall chose the younger "prettier" actress from Broadchurch over the more experienced and capable but less "pretty" actress shows that a portion of this decision was purely sexist.
This decision was based on pure PC, and nothing more. I'll keep watching to see how she does, but at the first sign of cuddly fuzzy female empathy / kindness from the Doctor, I'm switching off. Because then it isn't Doctor Who anymore.
(a) The Doctor is old, very old. When a younger actor is put into the role they desperately try to play "at being old." It usually doesn't work. e.g. Matt Smith
(b) The Doctor is a cross between Mr. Chips and the prophet Job. There is a very cold "Aspy" side to the Doctor. The actress who has been chosen is very good, and plays a heart broken mother brilliantly (Broadchurch). However, I think there are few female actors who will be capable of playing the Doctor as the Doctor should be portrayed. e.g. Tilda Swinton; Olivia Colman. That Chibnall chose the younger "prettier" actress from Broadchurch over the more experienced and capable but less "pretty" actress shows that a portion of this decision was purely sexist.
This decision was based on pure PC, and nothing more. I'll keep watching to see how she does, but at the first sign of cuddly fuzzy female empathy / kindness from the Doctor, I'm switching off. Because then it isn't Doctor Who anymore.
37
I think the ability to be cold and calculating and to portray that was also a distinction between Christopher Eccleston and David Tennant. Eccleston was beautiful at portraying the Dr. as clever and sweet and funny, but he couldn't do terrifying and vengeful like Tennant, so the portrayal of the Dr. became broader with Tennant in the role. We'll see what range this actor is capable of, but there's no obvious reason it has to relate to her gender.
"based on pure PC" - or based on not limiting themselves to the one option they've used continuously. It's make believe. Any human can play it.
Why do you assume that "this decision was based on pure PC"?? That statement says more about you than it does about the creators of the show. The moment someone is cast that challenges your sense of what is or isn't acceptable in a fictional character - you decide it's a conspiracy of some sort? That is all about you, Farby! It should be a big 'so what?' If we lived in a world where men, women and people of color were seen and treated as equals - you would not have bothered to post a comment. But we don't. The decision bothered you, and you've projected your discomfort onto the creative team of this show, assigning suspect motives to their completely legitimate decisions. Pretty obvious to everyone but you, and people like you suffering from the same biases.
2
When I was young, all the doctors I encountered were white male. The medical profession is now far more diverse. I don't care about a doctor's gender or ethnic background, I care about their competence. The same is true for the Doctor. Matt Smith was very different from David Tennant, and Peter Capaldi is different from both. New Doctors are always different. So what? Give us good stories, and the 13th Doctor will be fine.
22
If a female is a better fit for the plot of a story, all well and good. The problem that I have is this compulsion to "correct" any perceived imbalance by remaking movies and recasting TV shows with female protagonists, just to satisfy this political urge. If anyone still has doubts about why the "rust belt" voted for Trump and gave him the election, they need only look to this type of social engineering that smacks of mindless obeisance to political correctness, the main platform of the democratic party.
10
The rust belt voted for Trump because they are uneducated people easily manipulated into voting against their own interest as long as you appeal to their most basic emotions, primarily racism and bigotry and giving them an easy excuse for their own failure. According to them the so famous "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" only applies to non-whites. When it comes to them, it everybody else's fault. So diversification of TV characters is going to alienate them further? Please. They have to look at themselves as to why they are being left behind and not the government, TV, the others.
24
Please. What utter garbage. That you see it as an attempt by [ghasp!!!!] others to "correct" things demonstrates how ignorant you are. No one set out to correct it, it just happens to be that having someone other than a white man play the part is a correction.
12
The rust belt voted for Trump because they felt abandoned by the democratic party and found solace in Trump's anti-Nafta rhetoric. They also perceived their exclusion from the political platform of the democrats in deference to identity politics. the "PC policing" of popular media appears to be a symptom of this ideology.
1
I thought my Doctor Who days were done. But I am really looking forward to this new incarnation.
11
Jodie Whittaker did not get the role of Time Lord because she was the best qualified actor/actress. She got it because she was the best available qualified woman. The decision was made that the role should go to a woman, and she won the BBC’s competition.
In the case of a character in a TV show this is reasonable. There are roles for men and roles for women. Unlike casting in Elizabethan times, casting today is usually gender specific. The BBC’s decision that it was time to provide a female role model as Time Lord was appropriate, and, if anything, past due.
But there are many times when the goal should be to choose the most qualified individual for a job, not the most qualified woman. The pages of the Times, for example, argued that the job of Chair of the Federal Reserve should go to the most qualified woman, and that the job of Secretary General of the UN should be a woman. Wrong – these positions should have gone to the most qualified individuals, and gender should not have been a consideration one way or the other.
Not everything is about gender, and the concluding rant in this column is off the mark. Hillary Clinton did not lose the election because she is a woman, she lost because she is Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump is not a suboptimal president because he is a white male; his issue is that he is Donald Trump.
One further note: not everything that appears somewhere in social media on the Internet should be taken seriously.
In the case of a character in a TV show this is reasonable. There are roles for men and roles for women. Unlike casting in Elizabethan times, casting today is usually gender specific. The BBC’s decision that it was time to provide a female role model as Time Lord was appropriate, and, if anything, past due.
But there are many times when the goal should be to choose the most qualified individual for a job, not the most qualified woman. The pages of the Times, for example, argued that the job of Chair of the Federal Reserve should go to the most qualified woman, and that the job of Secretary General of the UN should be a woman. Wrong – these positions should have gone to the most qualified individuals, and gender should not have been a consideration one way or the other.
Not everything is about gender, and the concluding rant in this column is off the mark. Hillary Clinton did not lose the election because she is a woman, she lost because she is Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump is not a suboptimal president because he is a white male; his issue is that he is Donald Trump.
One further note: not everything that appears somewhere in social media on the Internet should be taken seriously.
7
Spoken as a true male. There is plenty of sociological and economical studies that have shown time and time again how racial and gender bias, explicit or implicit, benefits white males. Then again, unless you are willing to read, do research and look beyond your own group, it is only natural you do not "think" it is as pervasive as those of us on the losing end the equation do.
31
Rosie: how do you know "alex" is a male? Just because he disagrees with your "political correctness"?
I am a woman and I agree with "alex" -- AND I know several "alex's" who are females!!! short for Alexandra!!!
I also have known a "Rosie" who was a guy, and it was short for Roosevelt -- he was named for FDR.
I am a woman and I agree with "alex" -- AND I know several "alex's" who are females!!! short for Alexandra!!!
I also have known a "Rosie" who was a guy, and it was short for Roosevelt -- he was named for FDR.
The most powerful way to effect change - just make the new thing, whatever it is, normal. Because it is, actually, normal.
15
The Doctor's gender expression has always been male before, and now the Doctor's gender expression is female. The Doctor's biological gender is unknown and we don't yet know this incarnation's preferred pronouns.
4
Here in UK, the Labour-supporting daily, The Mirror, had a great headline -
"About Time, Lord".
"About Time, Lord".
54
The first person to share their views to me was a teenage girl upset that it wasn't a man. Personally I think Whittaker'll be great. Anyway, my limited understanding was the Doctor is an alien without gender really so Who cares?
3
The fact that a teenage girl has been so brainwashed into internalizing the bias against herself is so worrisome. As a middle age woman, I am really saddened to see we are still failing at educating and empowering the next generation of females.
Why would people assume that a teenage girl upset that a show long dominated by faux geeky male eye candy would be upset by brainwashing? It's like if NSync had switched Justin Timberlake out for a girl. Would girls everywhere have been sobbing into their pillows because of the patriarchy or because they have to tear their posters down?
I do not watch kiddie shows like Dr Who and didn't when I was a kid. However I see the fingerprints of the same lame thinking that brings us trigger warnings, micro aggressions, safe spaces and such.
It smells of the same PC gone wild nonsense that brings us the following:
1-Ads where they say I went to my Doctor about my ____ and SHE said____ (any random woman of color).
2-Little Orphan Annie becomes a young African Girl.
3-Female Ghostbusters.
4-Ads were the clueless or inept are always a white male.
So when do we get the Hollywood Movie where Harriet Tubman is cast as a White Guy or MLK a Transgender Latino?
I have no problem with programs that project positive images of any group and want to see positive role models, but this stuff does not follow reason. A CBS News executive recently made a comment regarding the next Anchor of the CBS Evening News along the lines of it being time for a "woman of color" instead of maybe the best qualified candidate regardless of gender, race or ethnicity. I guess he forgot that Connie Chung anchored the program to a resounding thud back in the day and Katie Couric stayed in Third Place for the duration of her tenure.
In the end, this is a kerfuffle over a BBC show originally targeted toward children but has since been adopted by the same crowd of adults that read Comic Books, go to Trekkie Conventions, dress up like people from Star Wars and and were famously lampooned by Triumph the Comic Insult Dog.
It smells of the same PC gone wild nonsense that brings us the following:
1-Ads where they say I went to my Doctor about my ____ and SHE said____ (any random woman of color).
2-Little Orphan Annie becomes a young African Girl.
3-Female Ghostbusters.
4-Ads were the clueless or inept are always a white male.
So when do we get the Hollywood Movie where Harriet Tubman is cast as a White Guy or MLK a Transgender Latino?
I have no problem with programs that project positive images of any group and want to see positive role models, but this stuff does not follow reason. A CBS News executive recently made a comment regarding the next Anchor of the CBS Evening News along the lines of it being time for a "woman of color" instead of maybe the best qualified candidate regardless of gender, race or ethnicity. I guess he forgot that Connie Chung anchored the program to a resounding thud back in the day and Katie Couric stayed in Third Place for the duration of her tenure.
In the end, this is a kerfuffle over a BBC show originally targeted toward children but has since been adopted by the same crowd of adults that read Comic Books, go to Trekkie Conventions, dress up like people from Star Wars and and were famously lampooned by Triumph the Comic Insult Dog.
7
I'll bite. Why is it "PC gone wild" for "I went to my doctor and she said..."? I've had a mix of male and female doctors my whole life. I was an army brat, so, yes, I'm including the late 60s/early 70s as a time when I went to active duty military doctors and got women as well as men. At the moment, I have four doctors for various complaints, two are male and two are female. So, again, why is this PC gone wild.
As far as Little Orphan Annie goes, how do you know she wasn't mixed race back when she started? Red hair isn't confined to pale people.
I'll give you the female ghostbusters.
I've seen plenty of ads where the clueless or inept are people of color or women. For instance, I don't think I've ever seen a clueless man in a Summer's Eve commercial.
As far as Little Orphan Annie goes, how do you know she wasn't mixed race back when she started? Red hair isn't confined to pale people.
I'll give you the female ghostbusters.
I've seen plenty of ads where the clueless or inept are people of color or women. For instance, I don't think I've ever seen a clueless man in a Summer's Eve commercial.
5
So, you start by admitting that you don't watch the show, and never have. And yet, knowing absolutely nothing about it, you nevertheless feel qualified to comment on why this this actor has been cast in the role, and whether or not she is qualified for it.
How about just saying "I've never watched the show, I'm not going to start now, so it has no effect on me either way." And leave it at that?
How about just saying "I've never watched the show, I'm not going to start now, so it has no effect on me either way." And leave it at that?
2
I recently read an article about a new version of the wonderful classic children's book "A Wrinkle In Time" (Madeline L'Engle) that is being directed by Ava DuVernay....and they have made the PROTAGONIST, Meg Murray, into a black child.
I am not particularly against this, but back in the 60s...."A Wrinkle In Time" was one of the somewhat rare examples of a sci fi book that had a female protagonist AT ALL. But now that isn't enough: she also has to be black. (Note: the director herself is black.)
I do wonder where it all ends. Sci fi with a black teenage heroine? I'm all good for that -- but write NEW stories. Don't just do race casting for OLD stories.
I am not particularly against this, but back in the 60s...."A Wrinkle In Time" was one of the somewhat rare examples of a sci fi book that had a female protagonist AT ALL. But now that isn't enough: she also has to be black. (Note: the director herself is black.)
I do wonder where it all ends. Sci fi with a black teenage heroine? I'm all good for that -- but write NEW stories. Don't just do race casting for OLD stories.
1
The great Scottish author Iain Banks' Culture Novels portrayed distant future (or was it distant past?) characters that could decide that say their next 25 years would be that of a woman, maybe have some kids,. People and their alien associates lived as long as they wanted and could change their genre (and a lot of other physical attributes) the way we change our socks.
1
Other than a few trolls in the depths of the Internet, nobody cares if Dr Who is to be played by a woman. Indeed, few care at all about this weary, superannuated TV show. This controversy seems entirely manufactured to fuel feminist claims of victimisation.
6
I'm sorry Lindy, but Reddit is not emblematic of ANYTHING. Spend more time in the real world and less time in seedy parts of the internet and you'll realise that the vast majority of people either 'don't care' or are broadly in favour of the new Doctor.
Talk about anonymous trolls on the internet and you do nothing more than give them fuel to grow and spread. You legitimise them by calling them out.
Let the trolls shout under the bridge all they want. They're best ignored.
Talk about anonymous trolls on the internet and you do nothing more than give them fuel to grow and spread. You legitimise them by calling them out.
Let the trolls shout under the bridge all they want. They're best ignored.
5
Actually, Reddit is emblematic of the sorry state of our collective intellect. If anything, Reddit is like a "CAT scan" of our society where we can see the ugly cancers of racist, bias, misogynist and pure hateful people still very much present and alive among us.
What's next? K-9 played by a cat?! (Just kidding.)
3
Ghost Busters, Wonder Women, and now Dr Who.... how many more times does a women need to be cast in a male dominated movie genre before the shock value is lost and the decision is just considered routine?
Personally, I think promoting diversity is already normal, and I think this article is just an attempt by Ms West to "stir the pot" and create controversy where there is none.
Personally, I think promoting diversity is already normal, and I think this article is just an attempt by Ms West to "stir the pot" and create controversy where there is none.
4
I am reminded of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's perspective when asked how many women on the Supreme Court would be "enough" -- and this is in my own words from hearing her speak last year --- When they are all women. When it was all men noone blinked an eye.
Dr. Who doesn't even need to have a name change to be played by a man or a woman. Terrific twist!
Dr. Who doesn't even need to have a name change to be played by a man or a woman. Terrific twist!
36
The cherry picked comments are discouraging, but seeing that they are culled from Reddit gives me hope.
Let's just hope the writers for the new Doctor Who are good. Every DW fan I know loves the idea of a female Doctor. What took it so long?
Let's just hope the writers for the new Doctor Who are good. Every DW fan I know loves the idea of a female Doctor. What took it so long?
2
why is this good? the series has been getting worse and worse for years and has zero vision. it used to be awesome - best plots on tv even though you could even see the strings holding the 'alien spacecraft' because there was zero budget. Now we get no plot - but sure the glass ceiling is broken... culture warriors won the last round with a zero-personality black girl with a stupid smile too! This article reflects the standard tripe by culture warriors who cheer about a 'woman in the role' AND WHO WILL NOT WATCH THE SHOW. Perhaps she will be better than capaldi - hard to be much worse - but unless the doctor who plots and characters stop being so mundane, boring, and non-kid-friendly, i will probably not be watching much. Fingers crossed though - perhaps she will be great - its not about glass ceilings - its about making the show fun to watch. But there is a good chance this will just kill a dying tv show. So i hope...
19
I admit that I didn't enjoy the Moffat years as much as the Davies years, but I'm still looking forward to the Chibnall years.
As someone who's watched since she was a child -- Patrick Troughton was my Doctor -- I have to say that I found Capaldi refreshing in many ways. He was somewhat anti-social, which was a hallmark of several early incarnations. I liked Bill as his companion, and enjoyed more Clara episodes than I thought I would (I had a difficult time with her "impossible" status, but it was worse with Eleven.).
I loved Tennant's tenure, but each Doctor is unique. Some will appeal to a different base than others, and that's all to the good. It's what gets millions of people worldwide to watch a simulcast for the 50th anniversary.
Here's the thing. Some people watch theater, movies, television for the character development and beats. Some people watch for plot. Most people like a fair sprinkling of both. But don't denigrate one type of development just because you prefer the other type.
As someone who's watched since she was a child -- Patrick Troughton was my Doctor -- I have to say that I found Capaldi refreshing in many ways. He was somewhat anti-social, which was a hallmark of several early incarnations. I liked Bill as his companion, and enjoyed more Clara episodes than I thought I would (I had a difficult time with her "impossible" status, but it was worse with Eleven.).
I loved Tennant's tenure, but each Doctor is unique. Some will appeal to a different base than others, and that's all to the good. It's what gets millions of people worldwide to watch a simulcast for the 50th anniversary.
Here's the thing. Some people watch theater, movies, television for the character development and beats. Some people watch for plot. Most people like a fair sprinkling of both. But don't denigrate one type of development just because you prefer the other type.
6
Personally I'm disappointed that the news of a female Doctor has overshadowed the more important (from a quality of the show perspective) news that there's a new head writer. Anyone who's actually been watching Doctor Who in the last few years should have known a female Doctor was coming.
And anyone who's actually been watching Doctor Who in the last few years should know that there's only so much any actor can do to make a show good. Peter Capaldi is a wonderful actor, but even he couldn't overcome the poor writing.
And anyone who's actually been watching Doctor Who in the last few years should know that there's only so much any actor can do to make a show good. Peter Capaldi is a wonderful actor, but even he couldn't overcome the poor writing.
13
One thing that no amount of empowerment can change is the fact that this Doctor will be 7 inches shorter than the recent actors in the part. It's going to be interesting to see how they block out the shots when she goes toe to toe with the villains. Still, if they could do it with the diminutive Sylvester McCoy, maybe they can pull it off here. The Doctor is basically all chutzpah anyway.
1
She's the same height as Sylvester McCoy and only three inches shorter than Paul McGann. I blame Jon Pertwee for the height thing. Neither Troughton nor Hartnell hit 5'9".
Disclaimer: I am a woman who is very much in favor of gender equality in all of its forms.
Okay, I hate this. I like this actress very much. And I think there is a great place for a female Time Lord, but this just feels like a gimmick to me. Or even worse, maybe a sop. Dr. Who has always been male. It's part of what and who he is. It would have made more sense to make this incarnation Transgender than making it a woman.
I will try to watch this. But if they decided to make James Bond Jane Bond tomorrow, I would have some serious misgivings about that as well.
Would it be possible for women to have their own iconography rather than using someone elses?
Okay, I hate this. I like this actress very much. And I think there is a great place for a female Time Lord, but this just feels like a gimmick to me. Or even worse, maybe a sop. Dr. Who has always been male. It's part of what and who he is. It would have made more sense to make this incarnation Transgender than making it a woman.
I will try to watch this. But if they decided to make James Bond Jane Bond tomorrow, I would have some serious misgivings about that as well.
Would it be possible for women to have their own iconography rather than using someone elses?
10
Separate but equal? No.
1
I don't actually care much, since I never watched the show -- a few times here or there, but not a fan.
But really: why can't they come up with an ORIGINAL story, and create a show FOR Ms. Whittaker? I have no doubt she is a talented, intelligent and attractive actress who would be wonderful in a sci fi show -- but make it something ORIGINAL. If you want a female protagonist....go write some TV shows or movies or books ABOUT A FEMALE PROTAGONIST.
It can't all be about retrofitting females into formerly male roles. That's just unimaginative.
But really: why can't they come up with an ORIGINAL story, and create a show FOR Ms. Whittaker? I have no doubt she is a talented, intelligent and attractive actress who would be wonderful in a sci fi show -- but make it something ORIGINAL. If you want a female protagonist....go write some TV shows or movies or books ABOUT A FEMALE PROTAGONIST.
It can't all be about retrofitting females into formerly male roles. That's just unimaginative.
1
I am delighted to hear this news, but I haven't heard who her companions will be. I was 13 when the first series came out and, although my friends and I were absolutely enthralled by it, we were always more than a little disturbed by these old men travelling around with those nubile young women. In fact those days I think we watched it more for the female companion than for the "doctor" (or perhaps we just loved the original Daleks, the ones with a sink plunger and covered in half tennis balls). I gave up watching it once Sarah Jane had left.
2
I'm hoping there will be a couple of companions, whether married involved like Ian and Barbara or Amy and Rory, or completely separate cultures and times like Zoe and Captain Jack.
Doctor Who is now a woman, DC has Wonder Woman and Star Wars has Rey. Now, if Marvel will just make that Black Widow movie....
TV on the other hand has had some strong female hero leads: Xena Warrior Princess, Jessica Jones and Buffy the Vampire Slayer but they weren't on the main networks.
TV on the other hand has had some strong female hero leads: Xena Warrior Princess, Jessica Jones and Buffy the Vampire Slayer but they weren't on the main networks.
2
I only found the "new" Dr. Who in June on Amazon Prime. I have obsessively watched all of the episodes since. I have to admit that each time the Doctor changed I said to myself he cannot possibly be as good as the actor who came before him. To be honest at the end of each new Doctor's first episode they were the Doctor. I have no doubt that Jodie Whittaker, will be wonderful! And in answer to another comment on this opinion, I can only hope that they switch up the companions a little bit. An all female Doctor Who should really send the internet trolls into a tizzy!
12
I watch many representations of women in movies and TV now where the character might as well be a man, just played by a woman. For instance, last night I watched "Ghost in the Shell". Nothing Scarlett Johansson did struck me as something a man wouldn't do -- she fought physically with men and won, there was no love story, no softness. She even visited a female prostitute! I don't find this realistic, interesting or capable of illuminating any truths about humanity. Hopefully Dr. Who is willing to have the character actually be feminine (because, you know, women tend to be that way).
Luc Besson recently noted that good characterizations begin with weakness. He said something to the effect of a man in tights gives me ten minutes (aka action stars) but have Arnold Schwarzenegger cry, then you have something interesting. I concur. I want to see interesting characters!
Also, I'm not sure women are really as underrepresented as feminist writers assume. I think it might even be that feminists have sometimes sneered at where the women are -- romance novels (have you seen the size of the romance section at your local bookstore?), fashion mags, those old soap operas, and so on. For a long time, as a literary reader, I would hesitate to read books by male authors (I know, stereotyping) because I wanted to read about women, love, motherhood and the bits of my own life. It's only as I've gotten older and more curious that I've branched out. Maybe men are the same.
Luc Besson recently noted that good characterizations begin with weakness. He said something to the effect of a man in tights gives me ten minutes (aka action stars) but have Arnold Schwarzenegger cry, then you have something interesting. I concur. I want to see interesting characters!
Also, I'm not sure women are really as underrepresented as feminist writers assume. I think it might even be that feminists have sometimes sneered at where the women are -- romance novels (have you seen the size of the romance section at your local bookstore?), fashion mags, those old soap operas, and so on. For a long time, as a literary reader, I would hesitate to read books by male authors (I know, stereotyping) because I wanted to read about women, love, motherhood and the bits of my own life. It's only as I've gotten older and more curious that I've branched out. Maybe men are the same.
3
Just two minor notes. First, studies that analyze the number of roles given to women and actors of color have proven that, based on pure numbers, amount of screen time, and speaking roles, white men are widely over-represented. It's not an imagined problem.
Second, though I have no desire to defend "Ghost in the Shell", which is a prime example of Hollywood's whitewashing and white feminists' decision to ignore racism, I would point out that having Scarlett Johansson's character visit a female prostitute is not necessarily un-feminine - I would remind you that lesbians exist. I won't argue that this is good representation, but I would argue that a woman having a relationship with another woman is not necessarily "masculine".
Second, though I have no desire to defend "Ghost in the Shell", which is a prime example of Hollywood's whitewashing and white feminists' decision to ignore racism, I would point out that having Scarlett Johansson's character visit a female prostitute is not necessarily un-feminine - I would remind you that lesbians exist. I won't argue that this is good representation, but I would argue that a woman having a relationship with another woman is not necessarily "masculine".
2
Reply to Em,
Those are all good points. At the same time, it just seems it would be really unusual for a lesbian to causally visit a prostitute. I mean you could say she was looking mostly for connection with another person but it just didn't work for me. Maybe it simply wasn't well done. At the same time, just personally, I wanted her to get together with her friend played by Asbaek ;) In the end my 12 year old son (who loves action) walked away half way through and my daughter and I were totally bored and disappointed!
Sometimes in the name of equality movie makers are now making movies which don't appeal to either the "average" woman or "average" man now!
I agree that in a kind of gender free mainstream men are over represented, statistically speaking. My husband would see female driven movies with me, but what I would be motivated to ask him to watch with me doesn't seem to be being made -- things like the old Merchant Ivory, or a character driven romance with some depth, or things like The Professional. I will be seeing Valerian, and apparently that has a both realistic and interesting staring woman.
Those are all good points. At the same time, it just seems it would be really unusual for a lesbian to causally visit a prostitute. I mean you could say she was looking mostly for connection with another person but it just didn't work for me. Maybe it simply wasn't well done. At the same time, just personally, I wanted her to get together with her friend played by Asbaek ;) In the end my 12 year old son (who loves action) walked away half way through and my daughter and I were totally bored and disappointed!
Sometimes in the name of equality movie makers are now making movies which don't appeal to either the "average" woman or "average" man now!
I agree that in a kind of gender free mainstream men are over represented, statistically speaking. My husband would see female driven movies with me, but what I would be motivated to ask him to watch with me doesn't seem to be being made -- things like the old Merchant Ivory, or a character driven romance with some depth, or things like The Professional. I will be seeing Valerian, and apparently that has a both realistic and interesting staring woman.
1
There was a study years ago, by Carol Gilligan I believe, which looked at boys and girls in the classroom at about age 11. The usual pattern was that the boys were louder and more visible about raising their hands to be called on, and girls hung back a bit, so the boys were called on much more than the girls.
When the teachers scrupulously called on the genders equally, the boys experienced this as unfair and as having something taken away from them.
When the teachers scrupulously called on the genders equally, the boys experienced this as unfair and as having something taken away from them.
22
That's odd, given that the vast majority of elementary and middle school teachers are, themselves women -- and that school itself is very much designed BY women for the strengths of female students -- sitting still, being quiet, little physical activity, passive behaviors, etc.
It is our boys and young men who are shortchanged badly by public education and literally "second class citizens" -- as measured by their failure to achieve, graduate, go on to college, etc.
It is our boys and young men who are shortchanged badly by public education and literally "second class citizens" -- as measured by their failure to achieve, graduate, go on to college, etc.
1
"In case you're unfamiliar with the series", this change doesn't bloody matter at all. It is about other worlds, an alien hero. No fan would ever have doubted that a Time Lady was just as powerful as a Time Lord - these petty differences on Earth make no differences when you are saving the Universe or even a London suburb from ... everything. This is the attitude you want, and in Dr Who devotees you have the foundation for gender irrelevance - so shut up and get on with the story.
5
Doctor Who is now a woman and men are complaining, want Doctor Who to be a man?
The modern world is apparently a nightmare to many people, not much of a reality to live in. Apparently overpopulation, every possible hoop that must be jumped through (a child is watched, regulated, educated, squeezed, and as an adult is boxed into home and employment with the rest of adults) has led to rat race in rat cage, except unlike rats we desperately dream, and now with arguments over representation in film and television (should it be a man? woman? minority? who, what?) we argue over the forms our dreams will take in a barren, unexciting reality.
Television, film, is cruel--it is anything but our lives. We dream of a middle ages fantasyland or science fiction dream or being a super cop killing people or a criminal wasting opposition. We apparently can't stand the lives we lead, and men and women have contempt for each other, argue about parcelling out who gets what job or whatever in empty reality and the shape each other takes in dreamworld of television and film.
The U.S. and Mexico need to combine into one country. That way Mexico can turn entirely into a drug supply manufacturer/chain pumping drugs into the overpopulated climate change/environment destroyed box home/work lifestyle and the U.S. can ramp up television/film so we live perpetually in fantasyland.
Jack Nicholson in the Wild Ride: "Next thing you know you'll be on a sofa watching TV. You might as well be dead".
The modern world is apparently a nightmare to many people, not much of a reality to live in. Apparently overpopulation, every possible hoop that must be jumped through (a child is watched, regulated, educated, squeezed, and as an adult is boxed into home and employment with the rest of adults) has led to rat race in rat cage, except unlike rats we desperately dream, and now with arguments over representation in film and television (should it be a man? woman? minority? who, what?) we argue over the forms our dreams will take in a barren, unexciting reality.
Television, film, is cruel--it is anything but our lives. We dream of a middle ages fantasyland or science fiction dream or being a super cop killing people or a criminal wasting opposition. We apparently can't stand the lives we lead, and men and women have contempt for each other, argue about parcelling out who gets what job or whatever in empty reality and the shape each other takes in dreamworld of television and film.
The U.S. and Mexico need to combine into one country. That way Mexico can turn entirely into a drug supply manufacturer/chain pumping drugs into the overpopulated climate change/environment destroyed box home/work lifestyle and the U.S. can ramp up television/film so we live perpetually in fantasyland.
Jack Nicholson in the Wild Ride: "Next thing you know you'll be on a sofa watching TV. You might as well be dead".
I'm very pleased the Doctor is a woman now, after all the hints in the last few episodes it's hardly a surprise. To all those spewing bile over it you can sit down and grow up. To everyone referring to her as Dr Who, Doctor Who or Dr. Shut up, you have clearly never watched the show. She is the Doctor. That is her (chosen) name. The show is called Doctor Who but there is no character by that name. Additionally, she is an alien, gender is irrelevant to Time Lords as has been demonstrated multiple times. Get over yourselves. I for one have no doubt that Jodie Whittaker will do a great job. She's an excellent actress joining an excellent show.
8
Bug off. If a male likes something with a male lead then leave it alone.
I'm not interested in watching all-female baseball for example, or even mixed sex baseball or transbaseball. And can't make me do that either.
I'm not interested in watching all-female baseball for example, or even mixed sex baseball or transbaseball. And can't make me do that either.
2
All for the change. Can we get Idris Elba next?
4
"We are not even asking for equality, and it’s too much." That perfectly summarizes the situation.
20
One lesson from this story is that it's time to stop using the term 'politically correct'.
Equality and fairness are bedrock principles that stem from the Equal Protection Clause of our constitution. They are fundamental values, not government imposed ornaments.
These twin values of liberty AND equality that are part of our national heritage and uniqueness in the world. Our effort to live by these values is certainly not perfect, but they are bacons and touchstones to keep us on course.
We don't think of the establishment clause preserving our right to free exercise of religion as 'politically correct.' So it's time to put this phrase away.
Equality in all its forms is a foundational American value and those that think otherwise are simply 'politically ignorant.'
Equality and fairness are bedrock principles that stem from the Equal Protection Clause of our constitution. They are fundamental values, not government imposed ornaments.
These twin values of liberty AND equality that are part of our national heritage and uniqueness in the world. Our effort to live by these values is certainly not perfect, but they are bacons and touchstones to keep us on course.
We don't think of the establishment clause preserving our right to free exercise of religion as 'politically correct.' So it's time to put this phrase away.
Equality in all its forms is a foundational American value and those that think otherwise are simply 'politically ignorant.'
14
LOL -- "political correctness" has nothing to do with our civic virtues of equality and fairness -- just the opposite really.
PC is all about censoring SPEECH -- telling people "you can't say certain things!" or getting horribly offended at the merest slight.
PC is all about censoring SPEECH -- telling people "you can't say certain things!" or getting horribly offended at the merest slight.
1
a top .01% pf the first world issue!
Not really. Doctor Who is very popular in Nigeria, for instance. The simulcast for the 50th anniversary hit 75 countries.
3
Will there be a Caitlyn Jenner-ish backstory on how the transformation took place?
1
I am not a regular viewer, but I am pretty certain that the Doctor is an alien -- not male nor female -- and can regenerate his body, ergo thats why there is no explanation of why there have been over 10 different "Who's".
2
The Doctor is an alien, and has regenerated repeatedly (mostly on screen) some dozen times now, starting in 1966 with the transition from Hartnell to Troughton.
Perhaps you could familiarize yourself with the topic at hand and get back to us.
Kate Mulgrew broke some ceiling when she appeared at Capt. Janeway in Star Trek's "Voyager" series. Strong, confident and not romantically connected to her other players.
Not so much a symbol of white male privilege, to have the Doctor regenerate as a woman changes decades of narrative canon. There have been other female Time Lords, like Mary Tamm as "Romana" and the Master's regeneration as "Missy" proves it can be done. I am just glad someone had the courage to do it.
Not so much a symbol of white male privilege, to have the Doctor regenerate as a woman changes decades of narrative canon. There have been other female Time Lords, like Mary Tamm as "Romana" and the Master's regeneration as "Missy" proves it can be done. I am just glad someone had the courage to do it.
138
I am saddened you think it's courageous to do this.
"Kate Mulgrew broke some ceiling when she appeared at Capt. Janeway". That particular ceiling was broken long before Voyager. Like, oh, Diana Rigg's Emma Peel in the 1960s Avengers TV show, or Barbara Bain's Helena Russell in Space: 1999, or even Lindsay Wagner's Jamie Summers.
Mulgrew's Janeway was the worst of feminist stereotypes, a woman behaving like a man, because commanders behave like men! Go women!
Mulgrew's Janeway was the worst of feminist stereotypes, a woman behaving like a man, because commanders behave like men! Go women!
1
Not quite true. I believe that in the past Captain Janeway and Chikotei(excuse spelling mistake please) were romantically involved when he was a rebel leader.
1
What's frustrating about the discussion around anything to do with gender inequities is the chill it creates around one's ability to be critical for reasons that have nothing to do with gender or sexual identity. We saw this when Hilary Clinton ran for president -- anyone who derided her as the Dem's ticket choice was derided as a misogynist, despite the myriad reasons many of us felt she was not the right choice. Those are the same reasons we'd have criticized any candidate. Welcome to equality -- where everyone is free to refute and critique everything you do. With Dr. Who, I see the new casting as a weak creative idea, meant to stoke headlines and therefore promote a show that has floundered creatively over the past few seasons. And, I think some adherence to the concept of characters we love is fair in all things fiction. Han Solo ought not to be played in the future by Betty White any more than Ripley from the Alien franchise should be recast as an African American man. They are/were who they are/were, who their authors wanted them to be, even more so for iconic characters who have won our hearts and minds. Whittaker is a great actress; woman can do anything men can do. So why not create new, fresh stories with powerful women instead of this act of desperation by a new show runner who has inherited a lagging legacy?
8
You bring up an excellent point -- I am all for women in science fiction -- as stars of TV shows and films -- as writers and directors! -- being a woman myself, who loves science fiction and cut her teeth on original Star Trek!
But why just revamp old stories about men with women in the male roles? Where are the NEW stories? the NEW series?
Written science fiction -- novels -- have long had lots of female heroines and female-driven plotlines. Many of the greatest sci fi writers of all time are female -- Ursula Le Guin and Octavia Butler, to name two off the top of my head.
SImply dumping a female actor into a formerly male role is not necessarily a "liberated" thing -- it just shows that there is no imaginative, female-driven sci fi on television today.
But why just revamp old stories about men with women in the male roles? Where are the NEW stories? the NEW series?
Written science fiction -- novels -- have long had lots of female heroines and female-driven plotlines. Many of the greatest sci fi writers of all time are female -- Ursula Le Guin and Octavia Butler, to name two off the top of my head.
SImply dumping a female actor into a formerly male role is not necessarily a "liberated" thing -- it just shows that there is no imaginative, female-driven sci fi on television today.
1
Since you mention Ripley from the Alien franchise, I'll point out that Dan O'Bannon's original proposal for Alien had the "Ripley" character as male, with a side note indicating that all characters could be cast as male or female at the director's preference.
Returning to the Dr. Who franchise, anyone familiar with the fifty year history of this story will have noticed that it's changed freely, almost improvisationally, over the year, as different writers and producers have taken it up and played with it and passed it on. Apart from the Daleks' voice, just about everything is up for grabs. And really, when we're talking about an alien being with two hearts and a life span measured in centuries and across multiple bodies, it hardly seems critical that this character be played by an actor with a penis.
Returning to the Dr. Who franchise, anyone familiar with the fifty year history of this story will have noticed that it's changed freely, almost improvisationally, over the year, as different writers and producers have taken it up and played with it and passed it on. Apart from the Daleks' voice, just about everything is up for grabs. And really, when we're talking about an alien being with two hearts and a life span measured in centuries and across multiple bodies, it hardly seems critical that this character be played by an actor with a penis.
Yep, I will give you that Dr. Who is perhaps the easiest show on telly to which one could make major changes, but that's part of why I think this casting is a weak/obvious/uninspired idea. It's rather like if Die Hard 3 had taken place on a cruise ship -- everyone and their mother thought of that scenario as the next logical step. In my opinion (and full disclosure, I have only watched the show from David Tenant to present) Dr. Who was getting a little tired over the last few seasons. For me, it's Matt Smith or nothing, and that has nothing to do with sexism, misogyny, glass ceilings etc. -- acknowledging these things are a serious issue.
Whenever you don't like the casting choice for the new Doctor, just wait a few seasons. Problem solved.
13
I think this column veers all over the place. I mean, "What's 44 out of 45 presidencies?". Look at how women were treated in the Old Testament. Ms. West conflates issues which affect the entire population with issues which affect only a small part. No one forces women to watch Dr. Who. As a male, I have watched it, though I have not seen it for some time. I actually do not care who Who is. But what I don't like is the idea the every gender has to have the same access to certain gender places as the gender for which they were intended. So to make a human rights argument out of a commercial choice is "shrill".
8
Even Dr Who becomes a Teaching Moment.
If the social media (not the "internet", which consists in large part of such sites as General Motors and the New York Times) is so packed with deplorable opinions, why do we have to devote so much attention to tracking it? Do the major media feel the need, as a matter of priority, to respond to the dubious ideas of every anonymous poster who may well be an emotionally disturbed 13-year-old?
If the social media (not the "internet", which consists in large part of such sites as General Motors and the New York Times) is so packed with deplorable opinions, why do we have to devote so much attention to tracking it? Do the major media feel the need, as a matter of priority, to respond to the dubious ideas of every anonymous poster who may well be an emotionally disturbed 13-year-old?
8
Don't for a moment think that Donald Trump has caused people to have a change of heart, for instance, the Tech industry is not the most welcoming for women, people may feel emboldened but the views expressed have always been there.
2
What I want to know is, will her Companion be male? Imagine, a man playing second fiddle. The horror!
66
The Doctor Who series began with male companions. William Hartnell had Chesterton and Patrick Troughton had Jamie.
3
But the male Doctors have had a few male companions over the years.
1
I forgot Ben and Stephen.
Shouldn't we all wait and see the stories performed by the new Doctor before going crazy?
23
Why?, the fans never hav before, with the announcement of previous Doctors.
Your point is valid, but I have noticed that many people only suddenly discover their high-standards and critical faculties when someone who is not a white male takes a role. Women CEOs get criticized for mistakes that was indulged in the male predecessors; Mr. Obama is castigated for behavior that was excused, defended, and even praised in his white predecessors..
The cry of rigorous evaluation is a common response to professional gains by people from disadvantaged population categories. Call it: "the soft bigotry of HIGH expectations."
Your point is valid, but I have noticed that many people only suddenly discover their high-standards and critical faculties when someone who is not a white male takes a role. Women CEOs get criticized for mistakes that was indulged in the male predecessors; Mr. Obama is castigated for behavior that was excused, defended, and even praised in his white predecessors..
The cry of rigorous evaluation is a common response to professional gains by people from disadvantaged population categories. Call it: "the soft bigotry of HIGH expectations."
57
I saw a headline today that read "Poll Shows Clinton Less Popular Than Trump!" - and to torture my heart read the same old bile that white men still don't like Hillary Clinton (both dems and repubs) and the article quickly dismissed the 51% people of color that responded that they like her - because nevermind them - white, male American overwhelmingly dislike her - and that is the opinion that counts. And worse still - these articles fail to challenge the respondents as to WHY they do not like her - as if a given not to like a powerful, ambitious woman. This historical moment is very dark for women. White male America sees any additional seats being added to the table as taking something from them - and they are reacting savagely to it. As a woman and a mother to daughters, I worry we are moving more towards Handmaids in our culture than a female President. I never realized so many men, particularly men who identify as liberals had such a similar world outlook toward women, as conservative men. All we can do is keep demanding equality, representation and opportunity and normalize it so our sons find their fathers to be dinosaurs
170
Never fear. As a white liberal male, I sense inside the panic of my invaded privilege. But it's just a symptom of change. At 61, I'm slowly coming to be at ease with passing the cultural baton. It is the fading of generations that will move everything forward.
11
Actually, I live in a thoroughly integrated neighborhood. Several of my black neighbors (all relatively liberal, and all definitely Dems) that I spoke to after the election confessed their ballots. All of the women voted for Clinton; many of the men voted for Trump. We need to recognize that sexism is a problem that cuts across races and creeds.
2
Dana: you are just tanking your own case, when you admit that almost half -- 49%!!! -- of people of COLOR loathe and detest Hillary Clinton!
She does not even have respect of black, hispanic and other minorities -- the usual lefty Democratic "base". No wonder she lost!
Why are you -- and the Democrats -- so tied to Hillary and the Clinton name? Why can't you move on? She's a 69 year old woman -- 70 this year -- who has lost TWICE nationally and is much hated, and her husband disgraced the Oval Office by taking advantage of a naive young intern.
Why can't you let her go? Where is your "bench"? Where are the next generation of smart, young, energetic Democrats? WHERE?
BTW: nothing is more tiresome -- factually incorrect -- or pathetic than the constant allusions to Margaret Atwood's "Handmaid's Tale" -- published in 1985! -- and more about Reagan than Trump obviously -- and modeled on the Iranian Revolution, and not modern day America.
She does not even have respect of black, hispanic and other minorities -- the usual lefty Democratic "base". No wonder she lost!
Why are you -- and the Democrats -- so tied to Hillary and the Clinton name? Why can't you move on? She's a 69 year old woman -- 70 this year -- who has lost TWICE nationally and is much hated, and her husband disgraced the Oval Office by taking advantage of a naive young intern.
Why can't you let her go? Where is your "bench"? Where are the next generation of smart, young, energetic Democrats? WHERE?
BTW: nothing is more tiresome -- factually incorrect -- or pathetic than the constant allusions to Margaret Atwood's "Handmaid's Tale" -- published in 1985! -- and more about Reagan than Trump obviously -- and modeled on the Iranian Revolution, and not modern day America.
2
As long as they never ever cast an American. Dr. Who should always and forever be a Brit!
38
Do remember, though, that Dr. Who was created by a Canadian, Sydney Newman!
The last incarnation with Peter Capaldi and his little kewpie doll was the worst ever, Jodie Whittaker can only be an improvement.
And please, do not use the words Trump and hero in the same sentence.
And please, do not use the words Trump and hero in the same sentence.
30
right on dude - she cant be worse...
1
I just want to add Alex Kingston would have been a great Doctor, unfortunately she is already cast as River Song.
Thank you for your strong voice.
5
It's an exciting choice and it requires a leap of faith, something many die hard Who fans are not willing to take. If you can accept the concept of regeneration, then a female doctor is no problem. It will all depend on the quality of the script and the actor's ability to make it work. I'm looking forward to it.
BTW, Tom Baker is still my favorite doctor!
BTW, Tom Baker is still my favorite doctor!
13
I'm curious what this does to the "Companion" theme. Up to now it's been a male Dr. Who with female companions. So will the new Dr. Who have male companions, or female, or both?
2
There have been both male and female companions, just less of the former than the latter. Dr. # 11 had a couple - Amy and Rory - as an example, and Doctor #2 had Jamie - the Highlander. What will be more interesting is will the new Doctor get a chance to interact with her "wife" River Song or "daughter" (the female clone created in a show a few years back)? That would certainly be something different.
22
There certainly have been male companions. On a regular basis even.
What does it say that people don't see males traveling with the Dr. as companions? Are these men invisible, forgotten (poor Rory!), or is "companion" a rank too low for a man?
What does it say that people don't see males traveling with the Dr. as companions? Are these men invisible, forgotten (poor Rory!), or is "companion" a rank too low for a man?
7
One of my all time favorite companions, Brigadier Alistair Gordon Lethbridge-Stewart, was a man (mainly with Doctors two and three, although he made appearances later, including the newer shows). There's no need to have the companion be a specific gender.
5
I'm sure that Capt. Janeway would approve this change.
36
Lots of pitiful bruised male egos out there! Who as black? Why not. Transgendered? Why not. Gay? Why not? As shapeshifter who can be either or all? Why not? An orange-haired octopus? Why not? For goodness sake, he is an ancient alien from, I believe, the far future. Who knows what he originally looked like?
I'll bet Who has even forgotten!
I'll bet Who has even forgotten!
45
You can find people on Reddit denouncing anything. Why do you make the assumption that your biased sample is representative of some broad reaction among men? You have no evidence that most or even many men object to this casting decision.
20
Look at any article on any website and you'll find a bunch of whining "fans" announcing the end of the world as we know it. And it's not just men. There are quite a few women in the mix, too.
5
I am THRILLED that the new Doctor is a woman! The concept of regeneration means change and growth. This is an opportunity for the DW community to grow along with the character.
16
I think he should have become one of those "immigrants" that fueled the Brexit vote, that would have helped the viewers to grow.
I am so interested in seeing how this goes!
3
As a very long time Dr. Who fan I have to say any controversy over the latest incarnation is absolutely absurd. There is NO legit reason whatever why the Dr. can't be a woman - or of an apparent race other than white - or transgendered (in fact, one might say the latest development indicates the Dr. is beyond gender in any traditional sense of the word - and why not? He/she is a magical alien who can be anything at all. Unique among TV productions in its longevity (some soaps perhaps notwithstanding), the Dr. Who series is apparently eternal and in eternity all things are not only possible, they are inevitable.
66
They see every advance for the human race as a loss for them.
40
I've heard of the show but never watched it. Sure wish we had a woman president.
24
I am excited about the new doctor
But I saw hundreds of awful letters initially
On Sunday, everywhere
Scathing and sexist denunciations
So there are apparently many Deplorables in the world of Who as well
And I find that really depressing and entirely against the spirit of the show
But I saw hundreds of awful letters initially
On Sunday, everywhere
Scathing and sexist denunciations
So there are apparently many Deplorables in the world of Who as well
And I find that really depressing and entirely against the spirit of the show
15
Oh how I dislike that word, "Deplorables!" Might we substitute "Intolerants?"
Just keep doubling down on the usage of the word "deplorables" to mean "anyone you dislike or disagree with".
So far, it is working out beautifully in terms of election losses and alienation of half of the voters.
So far, it is working out beautifully in terms of election losses and alienation of half of the voters.
3
Yes, there have been antediluvian responses to the gender of the 13th Doctor. But the general trouncing of those troglodytes in response is provides a measure of hope. You can't fix stupid, but you can contain it, at least sometimes. That those throwing tantrums appear to be far fewer in number than everyone else is an encouraging sign at a time when encouraging signs are increasingly rare.
29
Yawn. An OpEd trying to stir controversy as click bait.
8
Longtime fan of Dr. Who and female since I was born in '61. Looking forward to seeing a Dr. and companion with a nice working relationship. Keep it British; it will be great.
14
I have been watching Dr Who for years, I think this is great news. Dr Who is an alien who has taken a liking to us mere Earthlings, protecting us from threats from aliens intent on conquering the Earth and enslaving human beings.
As a long time fan I like how Dr Who has expanded its cast of characters. There have been gay characters and characters who are people of color. Since is is a BBC show it has pushed the envelope more than American TV shows, the characters happen to be Gay or Black, not Gay characters or Black characters.
I think a female Doctor is a great idea, Time Lords from the planet Gallifrey periodically regenerate and other Time Lords have regenerated into other genders before so this is part of the show's canon. By making the Doctor female the writers on that show now find their horizons expanded as far as plot devices.
Seeing people like you represented on TV shows is a good thing, it is nice to see people like you actually being the main characters instead of secondary characters supporting the actions of the main characters. Having Black Presidents on TV shows actually made many people accept the idea that someone like Barack Obama could actually become President.
But... seeing as how women have many more problems besides how there are represented on TV I think Ms West took the easy way out. It is easy to write about entertainment, it is much harder to write about how women still get paid 80% of what men do.
This is just a tempest in a teapot.
As a long time fan I like how Dr Who has expanded its cast of characters. There have been gay characters and characters who are people of color. Since is is a BBC show it has pushed the envelope more than American TV shows, the characters happen to be Gay or Black, not Gay characters or Black characters.
I think a female Doctor is a great idea, Time Lords from the planet Gallifrey periodically regenerate and other Time Lords have regenerated into other genders before so this is part of the show's canon. By making the Doctor female the writers on that show now find their horizons expanded as far as plot devices.
Seeing people like you represented on TV shows is a good thing, it is nice to see people like you actually being the main characters instead of secondary characters supporting the actions of the main characters. Having Black Presidents on TV shows actually made many people accept the idea that someone like Barack Obama could actually become President.
But... seeing as how women have many more problems besides how there are represented on TV I think Ms West took the easy way out. It is easy to write about entertainment, it is much harder to write about how women still get paid 80% of what men do.
This is just a tempest in a teapot.
13
A new Doctor! Outstanding! Female, black, transgender ... as a Doctor Who fan I will look forward to each new episode. Science fiction is a creative way to posit the future. Back in the 60s, I thought we would be beyond issues of gender and race by now, but we clearly need science fiction story lines that show us the possible.
8
Actually there really isn't a reason for the Dr. to be transgender, except for the Dr.'s quirky sense of humor, since the Dr. can morph into any shape. The Dr. can simply be a male or female.
2
Spoilers!
6
DR WHO is not human. 2 hearts! Therefore Dr Who is not a man or a woman and could be played by any actor.
15
Please not another man-hating article. The bad guys are out there, I hate them too, but your club hits all of us with the same strength.
15
Hooray for the new Doctor! Now she just needs some better scripts. The show has been getting boring lately.
6
I've enjoyed the travels, trials and travails of the Doctor since the 1970s. Every actor has brought their own unique twist to the role. This is one of the many things I have always appreciated about the character. I'm a fan of few shows, and none as long as Doctor Who.
To the men out there who cannot cope with Ms. Whittaker: if you do not like a woman as the Doctor, then you should simply stop watching. The rest of us will continue to enjoy the show as the fans we are, perhaps with some new companions of our own. Please spare the rest of us from your vitriol. If you are so worried about female empowerment in any form, incluing a regenerting alien who travels through time in a box with a broken chameleon circuit, then you never really had much faith in yourselves in the first place.
I'm simply going to wait for the new series with my wife and speculate on new companions, like we always do.
To the men out there who cannot cope with Ms. Whittaker: if you do not like a woman as the Doctor, then you should simply stop watching. The rest of us will continue to enjoy the show as the fans we are, perhaps with some new companions of our own. Please spare the rest of us from your vitriol. If you are so worried about female empowerment in any form, incluing a regenerting alien who travels through time in a box with a broken chameleon circuit, then you never really had much faith in yourselves in the first place.
I'm simply going to wait for the new series with my wife and speculate on new companions, like we always do.
346
Why should they spare anyone. The heart of the idea of free speech is a dynamism of disagreement. We actually get a lot more from that than everyone simply going along. Passion is good.
"To the men out there who cannot cope with Ms. Whittaker: if you do not like a woman as the Doctor, then you should simply stop watching."
I shall.
I shall.
The problem is (It seems to me) that most sci fi consumers are men. They identify with the hero, which is harder for them if it's a woman. Marvel Comics tried diversity with their super heroes, morphing one male super hero into a woman super hero. The diversity crowd howled with delight and sales of Marvel Comics tanked, the company went into a financial tailspin. It will be interesting to see if this Dr. Who is as popular as previous male Dr. Whos. I personally have both male and female doctors, all chosen for their skill, not their gender.
40
I read SF and I'm a woman. Don't I count?
13
It's worth noting that part of the reason Marvel sales have dropped is not necessarily because of an increase in diversity, but because of anti-Semantic story choices made by writers and executives. There was a movement to stop buying Marvel comics last year when Captain America: Steve Rogers #1 revealed that Captain America, a character created by Jewish writers in response to the Nazis during WWII, was a member of Hydra, the Marvel universe's long-time version of Nazis, and had been since his start. With the start of Secret Empire, Magneto (a Jewish character who is canonically a victim of the Holocaust) is aligned with Hydra; additionally, comic stores were asked to decorate with Hydra symbols and have employees wear Hydra shirts, prompting many to call for an outright boycott of Marvel Comics, not just titles that followed this story line. Conversely, many of Marvel's more diverse titles were actually doing better in sales before execs decided to drop them. So it's not fair to blame diversity when the issue actually lies with poor decisions made by Marvel executives.
Additionally, I wouldn't say that most sci-fi consumers are men; I'd say that men get more attention, and female fans are more likely to be ignored/discounted, but we watch sci-fi just as often as men, and we deserve representation. Why should we have to identify with male heroes if men aren't required to do the same?
Additionally, I wouldn't say that most sci-fi consumers are men; I'd say that men get more attention, and female fans are more likely to be ignored/discounted, but we watch sci-fi just as often as men, and we deserve representation. Why should we have to identify with male heroes if men aren't required to do the same?
7
In books aimed at children studies have been done showing that girls will read books with boys as heroes, but boys won't read books with girls as heroes. I'd hope that once everyone reached high school age that would change, but apparently not.
4
Curious. I always thought that "alien glass ceiling" was first broken by Matt Smith as Dr. Who.
But good for Jodie Whittaker: most of us can never get enough of blonde female action heroes, even on the BBC's still-ludicrously-low special effects budgets; and good for the producers, who have finally caved to political correctness to bring the show into the 21st century. I only wonder who will be the new Clara/Amy/Rose to provide the slight sexual tension -- unless the producers REALLY want to part with stereotypes, it will need to be a man in the role, eh wot?
I understand that Bill O'Reilly is still looking for a gig. And it would give white men that hero that some are so convinced they really don't need.
But good for Jodie Whittaker: most of us can never get enough of blonde female action heroes, even on the BBC's still-ludicrously-low special effects budgets; and good for the producers, who have finally caved to political correctness to bring the show into the 21st century. I only wonder who will be the new Clara/Amy/Rose to provide the slight sexual tension -- unless the producers REALLY want to part with stereotypes, it will need to be a man in the role, eh wot?
I understand that Bill O'Reilly is still looking for a gig. And it would give white men that hero that some are so convinced they really don't need.
1
There have been male companions. And not so terribly long ago.
And I see nothing wrong with a female duo. However Bill O'Reilly as a "hero"? I hope that is sarcasm.
And I see nothing wrong with a female duo. However Bill O'Reilly as a "hero"? I hope that is sarcasm.
3
It's "Doctor", Richard - never, ever "Dr." Try to keep up.
Oh, and O'Reilly is already cast, but he has only one line -
"Exterminate."
Oh, and O'Reilly is already cast, but he has only one line -
"Exterminate."
6
"They already have Trump." (She said wryly)
4
Representation matters enormously. Often, the people who are unrepresented often don't realize how they feel until the moment when they are represented. Consider the number of women who had powerful, emotional reactions to "Wonder Woman", who cried simply at seeing the Amazons, and were mystified by their own responses. In my life, I have had the experience of realizing how my own sense of what I could be was limited by the lack of representation of people like me in various aspects of entertainment and society. People end up absorbing the stereotypes and negative images of themselves even if they do not want to do so. It comes with the background noise of the entire society. So, yes to more diversity and more representation. Yes to many more women, people of color, various genders, etc. in popular culture. White males have had a very long run. It's time to show that there is a bit more to the world.
104
But I thought race and gender doesn't matter? So why should it be important at all who is represented? We're all interchangeable right?
Please, BBC, bring the new doctor to the swamp of Washington, DC, to challenge if not defeat the evil forces that have laid claim to our nation's government. The domestic and international repercussions are considerable.
78
I started watching Doctor Who during the Tom Baker period and have continued since.
When they became available, I caught up with as many of the older shows as I could.
I watch because the characters and stories are fun and intriguing, not because the Doctor is male or female.
When they became available, I caught up with as many of the older shows as I could.
I watch because the characters and stories are fun and intriguing, not because the Doctor is male or female.
59
Interesting to see how two of the first three comments on this article were from men who were dismissive of this moment and of the idea that women face backlash for treading on heretofore "male" territory. It took me exactly 0.0 seconds to find hostile comments on social media from outraged white men once the new Doctor was announced, and I wasn't deliberately searching for them. I'm glad these commenters live in a truly egalitarian, gender-blind society; maybe Chibnall can set an episode or two of the next series in this marvelous alternate universe.
176
It takes 0.0 seconds to find anything on the Internet; that doesn't mean what you find is an accurate representation of the physical world.
And we already do live in alternate universes. Put an MSNBC viewer and a Fox News viewer in the same room after 0.0 seconds online if you want proof of that.
And we already do live in alternate universes. Put an MSNBC viewer and a Fox News viewer in the same room after 0.0 seconds online if you want proof of that.
7
Ms. West, maybe I am just completely out of touch but I don't know anybody who cares, one way or the other, that the new Doctor is woman. It is a TV show that is science fiction. We find it entertaining or we don't, and as a result we watch it or we don't. We don't see it as revolutionary. Perhaps a bunch of folks who tweet all day do, but who else cares about this?
And by the way, speaking of real life, my primary physician, dentist and dermatologist (in real life) are all women, so I have seen this "show" about female doctors before. Maybe that is why it is not a big deal to me.
And by the way, speaking of real life, my primary physician, dentist and dermatologist (in real life) are all women, so I have seen this "show" about female doctors before. Maybe that is why it is not a big deal to me.
160
In 1967, Star Trek was also just a science fiction TV show. But many, many people cared that a black woman was cast as a bridge officer.
People who are constantly told in ways both subtle and overt that they don't matter, that they don't belong, that they can't do or be what others can do or be, care when they see people who look like them in TV shows and movies demonstrating that they *do* belong, they *do* matter, they *can* be and do what others can. While fictional characters and worlds created in TV shows and movies aren't real, those who write the characters and portray them are. The societal norms and attitudes reflected in the shows' creative decisions are.
When Star Trek expands its vision of who a starship's command crew could be, or 24 expands its vision of who a US president could be, or Doctor Who expands its vision of who a Time Lord could be, it expands our vision of who we could be. It expands our vision of what others that don't look like us could be. It expands our vision of what our society could be. And societal norms and attitudes begin to change for the better.
Many of us care about that very much.
People who are constantly told in ways both subtle and overt that they don't matter, that they don't belong, that they can't do or be what others can do or be, care when they see people who look like them in TV shows and movies demonstrating that they *do* belong, they *do* matter, they *can* be and do what others can. While fictional characters and worlds created in TV shows and movies aren't real, those who write the characters and portray them are. The societal norms and attitudes reflected in the shows' creative decisions are.
When Star Trek expands its vision of who a starship's command crew could be, or 24 expands its vision of who a US president could be, or Doctor Who expands its vision of who a Time Lord could be, it expands our vision of who we could be. It expands our vision of what others that don't look like us could be. It expands our vision of what our society could be. And societal norms and attitudes begin to change for the better.
Many of us care about that very much.
706
Good for you, but you are kidding yourself if you think if all males think like you. Far too many don't.
21
Sorry, but I have to vote for you being out of touch. It's great that a female Doctor is no big deal to you. It's great for other reasons that your primary physician, dentist, and dermatologist are also women who seem to have attained a measure of professional success. Otherwise, you're projecting your own attitudes onto the culture at large when the culture at large (or a large part of it) pretty obviously seems to disagree with you. I, too, would like the appearance of a female Doctor to be a mundane event (insofar as the appearance of a new Doctor is ever a mundane event) but in our current cultural climate that's not going to come about except through the actions of people who do care about that.
26
For The Dr to become a female can only help expand her knowledge, experience, wisdom and understanding of the beings and happenings throughout the Cosmos where and when she is called or found to "find the right way" and "do the right thing" as is the Doctor's ways and means as she continues on her many adventures through her very long and eventful life.
Bravo!
Bravo!
148
Let's make all protagonists female, non-white and scrub our entire culture of any white-male influence. It is puzzling to me that people can't see that to correct the inequality in society does not require the disenfranchisement of one of it's segments. It appears to me that we are now finding sexism, racism and intolerance everywhere, to the point now where it has become societal fanaticism. Where does this end? Perhaps once white males become oppressed the way that minorities and women have been then this fanaticism will be satisfied. What a shame that people can't see beyond their own identities to recognize inequality in all of it's forms.
61
I appreciate this line: a female Doctor is only absurd if you believe that white men are legitimate, full human beings and everyone else is a novelty.
Extreme views can always be found [thanks to the internet mouthpiece given to trolls bent on an endless proliferation of anger and nonsense--some of which you quote here], but it's amazing how much this novelty approach is used in a very normalised way by men and women alike. I hear it often in the way the the phrase 'average American' is intended to (and often does) evoke a white man when, on average, it would be more statistically appropriate for this to be a woman and/or non-white.
Extreme views can always be found [thanks to the internet mouthpiece given to trolls bent on an endless proliferation of anger and nonsense--some of which you quote here], but it's amazing how much this novelty approach is used in a very normalised way by men and women alike. I hear it often in the way the the phrase 'average American' is intended to (and often does) evoke a white man when, on average, it would be more statistically appropriate for this to be a woman and/or non-white.
28
The comment made no grandiose claims that a female doctor was in superior, only different and would add a new dimension, pardon the pun. Furthermore, you seem to have missed the most salient point-- The Doctor can be *anyone*!
16
How hard did you have to search to find these negative reactions? I have seen an almost unanimously positive reaction, both to the fact of having a woman play the role, and to the believe that she will be excellent.
Here's a reality check: pick the single most popular idea you can think of, or your favorite charity, or any other topic that you think people universally feel good about. Then comb the internet carefully - and I can promise you you will find lots of vile, negative, offensive comments about it. Some people just enjoy complaining.
Your article is right to highlight how far we need to go, but I'm not sure it's helpful to suggest that there are so many people opposing every step. A huge amount of research suggests that very few men in business, for oppose gender equality in business, even in the knowledge that it might mean that a woman might get that promotion they want. But mostly they are passive - they won't oppose it, but also they are not doing much to make it happen.
The challenge today is not to fight the out-dated mentality so much as to turn good intentions of men and women into real progress.
Here's a reality check: pick the single most popular idea you can think of, or your favorite charity, or any other topic that you think people universally feel good about. Then comb the internet carefully - and I can promise you you will find lots of vile, negative, offensive comments about it. Some people just enjoy complaining.
Your article is right to highlight how far we need to go, but I'm not sure it's helpful to suggest that there are so many people opposing every step. A huge amount of research suggests that very few men in business, for oppose gender equality in business, even in the knowledge that it might mean that a woman might get that promotion they want. But mostly they are passive - they won't oppose it, but also they are not doing much to make it happen.
The challenge today is not to fight the out-dated mentality so much as to turn good intentions of men and women into real progress.
61
I think the Times just looks for reactions that fit their obsession with "identity politics". As another example, there was the claim that Democrats lost the big 6th District election in Georgia because of "religion". I live just a mile from the District, and I work in a church, and the subject of religion never came up.
4
Check the comments on any of the BBC's announcement videos, and gasp in horror at the misogyny laid bare therein.
16
Yes, they're all athiests down there in Georgia
2
Tried watching the most recent versions, but the political correctness was overpowering.