Link: Copy link
All great points. I'm just fed up with the rampant political correctness in the series. I think back to John Barrowman's really fun LGBT character Captain Jack Harkness and it makes me think at how pathetic the production decisions and writing have become. With Barrowman, the fact that he was bisexual was just one piece of his character. It wasn't the only focus and he was such a likable, fun and interesting character. Now we get Pearl Mackey's Bill character, where we literally know nothing about her other than the fact that she is a lesbian. And they have to make sure to remind everyone in every single episode this season. It makes me laugh at some of the things I read online about how she's the greatest companion ever. She was the absolute worst, and not because Mackey wasn't a good actress or likable, but because the writing was so bad and seemed to only focus on her sexuality. Did anyone feel "touched" with the last episode when she finally got to kiss and leave with the wet girl she knew for literally 10 minutes at the beginning of the season? It's really just silly stuff. Now the Doctor as a girl. I'm really wishing I had bailed out a while ago as well. Honestly, it hasn't been really interesting since David Tennant. I see Moffett as mainly to blame for all of this, but boo to the BBC as well.Jago Turner wrote: The saddest aspect of this is that all opposition to the casting has been seized upon to represent some kind of sad old geezer mentality instead of simply misconceived and pandering to a growing need for diversity at the expense of sane decisions. I think we knew it was coming as soon as The Master was reincarnated as Missy. I shouldn't really care about this kind of thing as I am definitely living in the past now. I am old and I probably am a sad old geezer but I don't think this is why I feel a gnawing sense of sadness at this. If I believed that there was a solidly good reason for this decision, one that somehow fit into the continuity of the series as a whole I would buy it completely. I kind of wish that instead of doing his they had given Romana a role in the series or brought back the Doctor's daughter (or his grand-daughter) and created a spin off based upon this that would have been as refreshing as the Mary Jane Adventures. But that it suddenly became a thing that to appease a particular demographic none of these would be enough. Dr Who had to have a sex change.
But this is the world we are living in. My son is grown up now. He already stopped watching the series about two seasons ago. I should have stopped watching as soon as he did. Not because we are watching a female timelord (there have been others). Neither do I mind sex changing characters. I always loved Orlando and last year's Your Name played on this idea beautifully. But I guess some people don't get how a character that has been there for fifty years can't change so easily. It's similar to the way some suggest a female James Bond as if there haven't already been female variations on James Bond from Modesty Blaise to Sydney Bristow. Instead of making a female Captain of the Enterprise they make James Kirk female or that instead of making a great female detective (and they've done many) they make Sherlock Holmes female. There's nothing to stop them making another character who has similar qualities. It's the idea that a character could be so amorphous that it simply doesn't matter what sex they are.
Ironically, while paying this lip-service to feminism, the BBC, who produce Dr Who, have been rocked with controversy over the bizarre pay gap between male and female talent. They have been routinely paying women less than men and this emerges one week after Dr Who is announced to be a woman. Some cynical folk might draw a conclusion from this that shows the BBC in a slightly less progressive light.