LeMarchand Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 Syfy - Doctor Who's Thirteenth Doctor Is Not a Representation Win She's too white and too hetero. Not sure how they know the second bit, unless they mean that the actress.
mavhc Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 Syfy - Doctor Who's Thirteenth Doctor Is Not a Representation Win She's too white and too hetero. Not sure how they know the second bit, unless they mean that the actress. Didn't see a mention of the Doctor's sexuality in that post. I see the point though, having to wait in a queue, making sure everyone's fine with each tiny step must be annoying.
LeMarchand Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 Didn't see a mention of the Doctor's sexuality in that post. I see the point though, having to wait in a queue, making sure everyone's fine with each tiny step must be annoying. Sorry, misinterpreted the below. Probably should have put "too cisgender". (Though in theory 13 isn't - having previously been male). If the first gender equality move for franchises always goes to a White woman, then what happens to the WOC, other POC, and people who fall in various areas on the gender spectrum if no more progress is made? Though thinking about it, all this "representation" stuff is a bit odd to me. I watched 7 seasons of Buffy and never once thought "if only Buffy was a guy, this show would appeal to me so much more" and millions of white people watched "Fresh Prince". 1
mikeprice Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 Sorry, misinterpreted the below. Probably should have put "too cisgender". (Though in theory 13 isn't - having previously been male). Though thinking about it, all this "representation" stuff is a bit odd to me. I watched 7 seasons of Buffy and never once thought "if only Buffy was a guy, this show would appeal to me so much more" and millions of white people watched "Fresh Prince". I think things get a bit silly sometimes If the new doctor was non-white, female and played by a Gay person as an LBGTQ+ Doc. someone would complain that she wasn't in a wheelchair (add other disabilities as required) People need to realise that not everyone can be represented all the time in every show Although Dr Who has been trying - the last companion was black and gay (or the character was - dunno (or care) about the actress) - other companions have been of various colours (including green) and I suppose you could count Davros as being disabled anyway - lets wait and see what the writing and acting and direction is like before we judge anyone
GrumbleDook Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 I think things get a bit silly sometimes If the new doctor was non-white, female and played by a Gay person as an LBGTQ+ Doc. someone would complain that she wasn't in a wheelchair (add other disabilities as required) The Doctor has a history on mental health issues ... so we should forget the hidden disabilities.
mavhc Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 Sorry, misinterpreted the below. Probably should have put "too cisgender". (Though in theory 13 isn't - having previously been male). Though thinking about it, all this "representation" stuff is a bit odd to me. I watched 7 seasons of Buffy and never once thought "if only Buffy was a guy, this show would appeal to me so much more" and millions of white people watched "Fresh Prince". Isn't that because you're a white male though? If you're a black female say, you've watched 100s of shows where you weren't represented, so one where you are means a lot.
LeMarchand Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 Isn't that because you're a white male though? If you're a black female say, you've watched 100s of shows where you weren't represented, so one where you are means a lot. No. Because you're only 1/2 right in your assumption. In fact, if I was a black female there'd be far more shows that I could watch with a person "like me" in them. One could argue that very few main characters in genre TV reflect anyone real anyway. They tend to be unrealistically cool/moral/attractive/intelligent/skilled/witty* - people you might want to be, but definitely aren't. (Obviously not the villains and there are no doubt exceptions). I'd go as far to say that if the lead characters in genre TV actually were "people like us" they'd not have the following they do. *I'm obviously all of these, just not in a white male package, but I'm talking about most people .
6Foot2 Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 (edited) Peter Davison is quitting Twitter following hostile 'toxic' responses to his comments about the upcoming gender change for the Doctor: Peter Davison's tweets can be found here (link below) before their, likely, deletion: Link: Edited July 24, 2017 by 6Foot2
DJ-1701 Posted July 24, 2017 Author Posted July 24, 2017 Peter Davison is quitting Twitter following hostile 'toxic' responses to his comments about the upcoming gender change for the Doctor: [ATTACH=CONFIG]44689[/ATTACH] Peter Davison's tweets can be found here (link below) before their, likely, deletion: Link: One thing is for sure, a lot of people are taking the this way too far. As 'The Be Five' once sang 'It's just a TV show.'... It is unfortunate that there is such a long break until the regeneration, and then again untill 13th's series airs.
Garacesh Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 Peter Davison is quitting Twitter following hostile 'toxic' responses to his comments about the upcoming gender change for the Doctor: [ATTACH=CONFIG]44689[/ATTACH] For those who get confused like me.. Read bottom to top 1
LeMarchand Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 Peter Davison, Ed Sheeran... yet we still have Katie Hopkins and Donald Trump. Meant to touch on this earlier, but forgot (and it's a bit off topic) but it's a shame that so many people with "liberal" views find it necessary to be so caustic towards others in their rush to affirm their liberal credentials.
GrumbleDook Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 Peter Davison, Ed Sheeran... yet we still have Katie Hopkins and Donald Trump. Meant to touch on this earlier, but forgot (and it's a bit off topic) but it's a shame that so many people with "liberal" views find it necessary to be so caustic towards others in their rush to affirm their liberal credentials. How dare you! Do you know how much effort it takes to get up at 4.30 in the morning so that the light is just right to take a picture of the focaccia I am baking, nor the cost of the summer rowing holiday I had to set up, just so we could row to Sicily to hand pick the olives! And it is people like you who portray us liberals as SJWs ... well, I'm taking this to my latest post in Medium and you'll soon be sorry! 3
mikeprice Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 There are too many people of Twitter that take things FAR to seriously (and FAR too many people I am glad I do not know!) 1
mavhc Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 The problem is the platform, when a bot/idiot with 0 influence looks almost the same as someone with a history of not being insane. They just need to be shadowbanned so they don't even realise no one can see their stupidity. If someone is constantly attacking, downvote their account. And finally ban every news article that "reports" on 4 twitter users complaining about something.
X-13 Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 They just need to be shadowbanned Shadowbans solve nothing. They're the equivalent of sticking your fingers in you ears and shouting "I can't hear you".
mavhc Posted July 25, 2017 Posted July 25, 2017 No, they're sticking tape over someone's mouth without them noticing, the idea is their posts never show up except on the account that posted them, they're just screaming into the wind
6Foot2 Posted July 25, 2017 Posted July 25, 2017 ...they're just screaming into the wind And staring into the untempered schism?: [To bring it back to Doctor Who] 1
Garacesh Posted July 25, 2017 Posted July 25, 2017 Shadowbans solve nothing. They're the equivalent of sticking your fingers in you ears and shouting "I can't hear you". No, they're sticking tape over someone's mouth without them noticing, the idea is their posts never show up except on the account that posted them, they're just screaming into the wind I'm with X on this one. Shadowbans are a terrible way of handling things. Censoring opinions is always a difficult route to go down. Just because their opinion is different, even vile in some cases, doesn't warrant blanket 100% censorship.
LeMarchand Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 I'm assuming/hoping that this is Capaldi on a wind-up mission, but The Sun reports he's trying to interest Moffat in a new "On the Buses": https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/4134410/peter-capaldi-wants-to-star-in-on-the-buses-remake/ For those too mercifully young to remember, "On the Buses" followed a driver and his conductor (they used to have people who issued and checked for bus tickets ) who spent a lot of their time somehow (despite their "unique" looks) "getting off with dolly birds" and winding up Inspector Blakey (who Capaldi claims to be interested in playing).
6Foot2 Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 ...For those too mercifully young to remember, "On the Buses" followed a driver and his conductor (they used to have people who issued and checked for bus tickets ) who spent a lot of their time somehow (despite their "unique" looks) "getting off with dolly birds" and winding up Inspector Blakey (who Capaldi claims to be interested in playing). For those who are too young, some typical On The Buses content involving Stan, Jack, and Blakey:
sparkeh Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 For those who are too young, some typical On The Buses content involving Stan, Jack, and Blakey:] Here's a good summary of the show 1
6Foot2 Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 Link: Why Doctor Who fans are mad at the wrong person: the actress This post is not about the male vs female Doctor 'issue' but something else that appeared in the linked article: ...It is not her fault for being Chibnall’s top choice for the new Doctor. On the day that Whittaker was announced, Chibnall told the Guardian that Whittaker had been his top choice for the new Doctor. She is not part of some scheme to ruin Doctor Who for future generations. Actually, she’s here to try to rejuvenate it, because as it currently stands, it’s going to die. It needs something new. She is not a conspiracy. No one picked Whittaker so that it would ruin the show. I’m sorry if you don’t like the changes that have been made, but more are coming... Sounds like the next series will be interesting.
sted Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 well yes it needs to change as someone who has watched it whenever its been on I diddnt watch the last series at all and the previous one was relegated to the pvr will catch it and I will watch it if bored. I don't know if it capaldi or the writing (or both) but I just diddnt enjoy it
DJ-1701 Posted August 4, 2017 Author Posted August 4, 2017 well yes it needs to change as someone who has watched it whenever its been on I diddnt watch the last series at all and the previous one was relegated to the pvr will catch it and I will watch it if bored. I don't know if it capaldi or the writing (or both) but I just diddnt enjoy it For me it was the writing... not been much of a Moffat fan, it will be interesting to see how things go with Chibnall as show runner.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now