It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Are male role models being eroded? Genuine question, I have no agenda.
(ps - seems to me that whoever they got for the part someone, somewhere wouldn't be at all happy! A no win situation I fear).
Well, I didn't press her on that point because I was still ranting about PC gone mad :)
I do think I will come round to the idea, I'm just sick to death of constant demands for every line to be blurred.
Hot on the heals of the train announcements to stop defining 'ladies and gentlemen' it almost feels like a crime to be male and pale.
Good points @thelivingroyale and @Lancaster007 (about someone somewhere being unhappy whatever happens).
I'll watch whatever. Probably end up fancying her - never thought I'd fancy the Doctor. Hey ho.
To be fair it wasn't all that long ago that people were complaining that girls didn't have any role models. Shouldn't boys and girls find true role models in the adults that are around them rather than fictional characters?
Yes, none of the previous 12 incarnations of Doctor Who were what I would call strong male role models - and now this - it's a total scandal! The only other strong male role models are all superheroes (with the notable exception of Wonder Woman).
The ethics of today's heroes are perhaps being eroded to make them more interesting/grey, shouldn't the primary role models be the parents?
Personally I'm glad they took a gamble just because for me it'll make it more interesting to watch imo. I'd honestly rather they took risks and end up getting cancelled again than just do a dull retread of the David Tennant era. I can't see things turning out that bad that the show does get cancelled, though.
I think the role model thing is a good point, but I'm assuming there have to be some kids shows on today on the kids channels with strong male role models, if not on prime time TV? I used to love Robin Hood with Jason Connery on ITV, surely there's some stuff like that still on. I agree the role model thing could be an issue though, simply because while there are plenty of male role models, there aren't that many in the vein of the doctor. That was one of my issues with series 8, I appreciated them trying to make the character a bit more flawed and complex but the anti war/soldier stuff was really troubling when kids look up to him imo.
But then are there really that many female role models on prime time family TV preaching hope/acceptance/etc either? Boys watching have over ten years of the doctor as a positive male role model that they can look back on (the whole of the new series is on Netflix). Might be time to let little girls identify with the character in the same way for a bit?
I think the only reason we (adults) are seeing a lack of strong role models for boys on TV is because we don't see any role models for younger viewers in general, simply because there aren't really many shows the whole family watch any more. Doctor Who is pretty much the only drama I can think of at the minute that's supposed to be for kids and grown ups alike. Apart from that it'll all be kids shows we're not familiar with so for all we know there could be plenty of strong role models for both on those channels? But to be fair you have kids and I don't so you and your wife will have a much better idea of what they watch and what sort of role models there are for them to identify with than I do.
As a parent of 2, Dr Who should be fun and scary to a degree. I think having to explain certain things regarding sexuality to a young child really is pushing it to say the least. Just let them enjoy growing up as once it is taken away? That's it. Let them learn about this through education at school as well as parent contribution.
From the character changing sex? I think it is pure opportunistic laziness on the BBC's part. If you want assistants who are openly gay or whatever then so be it and we move with the times however I do stand by my point above. But the main character should not be messed with.
I ask myself now that are we say in 10 or 20 years time going to have a Trans-Gender DR because the BBC would like to tick that box too? It just really annoys me when PC nutters decide to mess around with what was originally intended.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=XkCBhKs4faI
I do love me some white, male persecution. If only white men could be represented equally...one day. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a white, straight males will get to the Promised Land...
Stewart Lee is as funny as Amy Schumer.
Wait til you see his wife do stand up. :(
Your comedic opinion vs my comedic opinion. Exciting.
I was quoting him for relevancy on NicNac's post - pretty comparable I'd say.
This isn't even a comment on the actress, but I think it's a near guarantee that this creative choice will kill the viewing figures of the past series to dangerous lows. This isn't to call the viewers sexist, but the series has been going so long and the doctor hasn't changed in the way he views the world (ie, through a masculine lens) that this sudden change will turn a lot of people off, especially those who grew up with it and were young during Baker's time or before it. There are other outside factors, including the overt aims of the BBC, that will show people that this may not be for the right reasons, but to instead tick another box off for their company and its projects.
I think at this point people will be begging for Moffat to come back, but I guess they'll just have to see what the execution is. I predict that low viewing figures will end this incarnation of the Doctor in less time or about the same time as Eccleston's, especially if the writers make the cringe-worthy choice of having the Doctor's new gender frequently made light of in overt ways. Social justice crowds will call the viewers sexist pigs who were regressing the world's values, but those well informed will see the figures as the result of what happens when you gender-bend a character who was defined as a male.
By the way, that will never happen with Bond. It says a lot about how over-sensitive this world has got that fans of Bond now worry that the same changes will be made with that character. I think EON deserve a lot more credit than that.
And unless you too are a Time Lord, a woman gave birth to you.
True, but you also don't see any other group being derided as "privileged oppressors" like white hetero-males, where our concerns, thoughts and opinions are written off as uninformed or not worth considering by certain radical sects of the world population.
Ludicrous. White males (and I am one) are and have been in the most privileged position possible, in life and otherwise, throughout the world, for centuries and really millennia. And some white males, yes, have oppressed other groups, far more than we white males have been oppressed. See the US Civil War. See the election of Obama. And then the election of Trump. Repeat ad nauseum.
Who can blame other groups for wanting--shudder!--a little more representation in media! The horror!
White, heterosexual males - if only we could catch a break. No one knows our struggle.
It's not about representation, it's about how you are viewed as having no problems worth reporting or discussing if you fit a certain gender or race backdrop, which is a form of racism you see made such a hoopla about by the other sides. That we are still held responsible for what our ancestors did generations ago is what is actually ludicrous.
I'm all for egalitarian representation, but this over-sensitive and warped view of the world has given us entire waves of politically motivated groups, including a modern sect of feminism, who've created bullsh*t words like "mansplaining" and have lied about their sacred wage gap to make it seem like the whole system is against them. Part of the black community do the same, where the idea is that every white officer is just another bullet aimed at them.
I don't think women need to be complaining about under representation in media, since we are seeing more female representation than ever before, and in franchises high and low, including Star Wars, which is actually being attacked for having too many women if you can believe it!
I just predict that this is a move that won't work out for the BBC, as it will come off as pandering to some viewers, regardless of what was really intended. It will all come down to execution, and how a female Doctor story can be told. If the writers and directors make it an overt thing in the scripts and constantly make light of the Doctor's vagina, we'll get a cringe-worthy series on the level of the new Ghostbusters that can't do female representation right without regressing it to embarrassing new lows. If they do it right and simply tell interesting stories with the new doctor without such an overdone focus on gender and, "I can do this, even if I'm a woman" moments, we'll end up with something like what Mad Max: Fury Road or Wonder Woman have done, which have a female viewpoint and heavy feminine perspective without having that impact used to make an over-politicized statement that overwhelmed their great stories.
Gender shouldn't matter that much, and so when a heavily female story is told in the same way (in broad strokes) that a male story would be, that's where you hit on some magic. It's only when you make it very obvious that it's a woman story, and load down the narrative with overly done female tropes and jokes that it comes off horribly. Strong characters are strong characters, and all you need to do is create ones that give off a deep, human and relatable feeling that has no connection to gender. The audiences that would be put off by the new change and called sexists for not liking it would probably support the move or at least accept it more if it wasn't beaten over their head that the Doctor is now a woman. If BBC screw it up and do it the wrong way, by lingering on gender to obscene degrees, it'll only be down to their failures to realize a truth in narrative storytelling.
Just to be clear, all sorts of different groups including men have created bullsh*t words. Some men say, "Wow, they really raped us in that negotiation." No, they didn't rape you. Don't you think women who were actually raped might feel belittled by that use of the word?
What about the Doctor screams "The Doctor must be a man!" other than "That's the way it's always been done"? That's, unfortunately, the same bogus argument that for decades kept women out of law firms (or lead roles in films), blacks out of social clubs, etc.
I've never heard rape used in that way, so I can't comment on that. Beyond that, I don't see the term fitting a strict masculine perspective, whereas you can tell that the term "mansplaining" is specifically created for a woman to use against a man.
I don't want to get this thread off topic, though, to avoid further derailing.
If you found that exciting, then you need to get out more. It was just an observation of mine. As someone who voted for Brexit, I am, according to the likes of Lee, a racist, bigoted, see you next tuesday. So with that "tar with the same brush attitude", I am never going to be an ardent fan of his.
It's perfectly fine to start a story this way, but it can become a little boring if every story starts the same way.
Changing just one aspect of 'Straight White Male' suddenly gives your story a fresh angle and gives your audience a new perspective on whatever story you choose to tell.
Some people won't ever be convinced the BBC weren't 'pandering to the PC brigade' (and perhaps there's a sliver of truth to this) but I think the benefit of a fresh start outweighs the alternative, which would have been 3+ years of same-old, same-old.
Watching the new series.
A fair system would have been to cast the right person for the job? . But this is a new age. And no way can a head writer make the statement that he has every intention of casting a man in a particular role without every Liberal Leftie Lesbian coming out of the woodwork.
Michelle Gomez has been superb as Missy, can't deny it. She would have been a terrific female Doctor, but the new boss went for his pretty blonde. I watched two series of Broadchurch and she hardly resonated with me. I had to explain to my wife who she played. And yet I'm hearing that she is a 'brilliant' actress and a great choice.
So I will bow to the masses, and hope for the best. And I trust that the throngs and masses who have screamed 'great choice BBC' will be there to watch and support the show next year.
Most of them of course won't, because that isn't the point, and they will have long since moved on to their next victim.
To be fair though with that last part, it goes both ways, as there's a lot of people in this thread complaining about it or expressing discontent at the reasons behind it who don't watch the show either.
I think more than anything else it was to do with ratings than box ticking but still, we should give her a chance as Chibnall should be allowed to have a specific vision in mind. After all Moffat wanted an older actor last time and Capaldi was apparently the only person he auditioned and noone complained about the casting proccess being unfairly exclusive then. If he had a vision for the character that best suited a woman there shouldn't be anything wrong with that, but I genuinely don't think we'll be able to judge the reasons until we see her in action. If she does well and really fits the script I think it's fair to say creative reasons. If it seems forced then we can say it was box ticking or ratings chasing.
In truth though, you are quite right. In fact the idea of a female Doctor goes back to 1981 when Tom Baker quit the show and famously joked about the idea, causing a media frenzy. Then Joanna Lumley played a female Doctor in a sketch, and still it didn't gather sufficient momentum. Now this brave soul Chibnall is making it happen.
It still smacks of PC of course but if it was Chibnall's decision alone, with no pressure from the BBC, then we have to accept it's his vision for the show, and his head on the block. It will make or break him I guess, so he had better get his scripts spot on. No actor looks good with a poor script.
I'm afraid that some here have ticked all the boxes.