Dr… Who? Or the Revenge of the Feminazi

Months ago I received my first official accusation of being a feminazi, right here in the pages of Amazing Stories, because of the article I wrote about the stupid comment regarding the new Ghostbusters.

And because as a good Peruvian (and Woman on top of that) I like to piss off stupid people, I cannot resist writing a post concerning the latest scandal: A female Dr. Who.

Honestly, I don’t get who can be so childish and pathetic as to say “You have ruined my childhood” or “Is nothing sacred?” (real comments, published on the Dr. Who and the Tardis facebook page).

I can understand that fans don’t like change, but to use as an argument against it racist or sexist “facts” is very sad, because it shows the lack of real arguments.

That is why I made a Little survey among the fandom.

1. Which actor is your favorite Dr. Who?

2. Do you consider, important/relevant/interesting the fact that the new Dr. is a woman?

I have to start by saying that my favorite is Christopher Eccleston. With my young daughter, we were running out of wherever we were just to arrive on time to see the season. Of course I was disappointed when the Doctor changed, so I stop watching the show, without making comments about the appearance, sexual orientation or whatever of the new doctor. I suppose that is a normal way of acting…and because I have a real life, I did not feel it ruined anything.
So here are the English language answers.

Steve Davidson (aka: Big Boss)

1. Tom Baker is pretty much the only Who I’ve watched and liked; the few episodes of the new iteration(s) I’ve seen have been too hand-wavy/squishy for me, so I have disengaged.

2. That being said; I think it very important that they brought in a female lead for two reasons: 1. there is no reason not to, it’s about time, what self-respecting Time Lord wouldn’t regenerate as the other sex from time to time; they’re aliens and what sex/gender/regeneration means to them/what functions it serves in our society are not ours to really question; there are plenty of creatures on our own planet that “switch sexes”; what does it fucking matter? And 2: to poke the assholes who get all bent out of shape over this shit in the eye. They think western civilization is under assault from bad influences? Just wait, things are just getting started!

Magdalena Hai 

1. Ooh, I’m a huge fan of the show, so this is right up my alley. Of the Doctors I think Nine has some of the best episodes of the new series (especially The Empty Child & The Doctor Dances) but my all time favorite is beyond doubt Tennant’s Tenth Doctor. He has the most beautiful story arc, growing from an easy going funny man to anger and madness after losing so many companions. He didn’t want to go, I didn’t want him to go, but it was beautiful and heart breaking (in a good way) when he did.

2. Yes. Like so many others, I didn’t believe they had the guts to bring in a female Doctor, and that feeling in itself is enough to convince anyone that there absolutely was a need to do just that. I loved Missy, and the show has had a reputation for breaking barriers, which I think is one of the main reasons why people love it so much. Doctor Who is a show about discovery, adventure, future, love, childlike curiosity towards worlds unknown and our own, and it all culminates in the character of The Doctor. It was starting to get actually silly, that there hadn’t been a female Doctor. I’m very happy, so excited and I think Jodie Whittaker will do a great job as The Doctor! It was necessary and it was about time! (…and space. Timey wimey pun intended.)

Anne Leinonen

1.  My favorite Doctor so far has been number 9, because Ecclestone was so…misbehaving, I likes his rebel smile and also the vibe between him and Rose. Dr Who was also new to me then, so I was very enthusiastic about the lore and the world of Dr Who in general.

2.  I did not believe they would have a female Doctor and I was so glad and full of wonder to see Jodie Whittaker there! Her smile was “pure Doctor”, I would say, and I believe she will fill the boots or use them again better than her predecessors. And the choice is so logical: why attach to a certain gender when you have all the universe to explore? Dr Who has such a big audience that it can make a difference and uplift the rights of those whose voice is not heard. Science fiction has and should have its share of education; the power to talk about human rights and make a difference. I hope that the screenwriters make the difference and do a good job. Good epic stories, full characters.

Cheryl Morgan

1. Sorry, I have not watched the new Dr. Who and little of the old.

2. Thus far I am very pleased with Whittaker. My supplies of man tears are overflowing. The party at my Secret Volcano Lair on Sunday was epic.

Pasi Ilmari Jäskeläinen

1. David Tennant. I think he was the least irritating Doctor, maybe also the best actor. Serious enough for my taste but not too gloomy.

2. Well, I think it’s very good idea to make the new doctor a woman. It’s quite logical regarding the style and world of that series and it’s a little bit strange that it didn’t happen sooner. And Jodie Whittaker is a good and pleasant actor, so I’m really looking forward to see her in the Tardis. A fanboy in me just might fall in love with this female Doctor. Also it’s important to make it clear that things like gender don’t matter when it comes to things you can or cannot do. So I welcome the new, female Doctor.

 

An Spanish version of this,WITH OTHER ANSWERS, can be found here

 

Related Posts

An Homage To Feminine Male Characters (And The Women Who Voice Them)

An Homage To Feminine Male Characters (And The Women Who Voice Them)

A DOCTOR FOR THE ENTERPRISE: New Art, New Pages

A DOCTOR FOR THE ENTERPRISE: New Art, New Pages

DR… WHO? O la Feminazi vuelve a atacar

DR… WHO? O la Feminazi vuelve a atacar

9 thoughts on "Dr… Who? Or the Revenge of the Feminazi"

  1. Callum says:

    Well, as I see it, there are two major points.

    First, we have seen a LOT of ‘diversity’ shows, comic books, etc. Having a gender or race-bent character is no longer edgy or hip, if it ever was. If that’s your only selling point – the female Ghostbusters, for example – you’re in trouble. Apart from Ms Marvel (who is a well-written character in her own right) all of Marvel’s ‘diversity’ comics have neither drawn in new readers nor kept old fans.

    The only question that matters is this – will this new Doctor have good scripts and the acting chops to get around holes in the scripts? If the answer is no to both of them – a case can be made that Twelve’s first season was pretty bad – then the fans will have reason to complain … and it will all be blamed on sexism.

    Sigh.

    Second, we have also seen a number of shows where the female characters are boosted at the expense of the male. The Harry Potter movies, the live-action Beauty and the Beast, even some of the Buffy episodes. Ron got turned into a jerk just so Hermione could shine; Bella became an inventor/swordswoman who always had to take the lead; etc. Is that going to happen to Doctor Who?

    I don’t think the female companions of Nine-Twelve ever really got treated as disposables, at least by the Doctor. Mickey, however, did get treated with a certain level of contempt, at least at first. That was pretty bad when the Doctor was a man. It is going to look worse when the Doctor is a woman. And, again, the complaints will be blamed on sexism.

    I’ll watch the first episode, at least. But many of the problems with the new series have persisted through three (male, white) doctors. They won’t go away just because the Doctor is now a woman.

    C

    1. Your initial contention – “diversity comics” being to blame – have been shot down: https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/05/the-real-reasons-for-marvel-comics-woes/527127/

      The rest, haven’t seen the Potter films nor read the Potter books, so can’t really comment on that directly, but I think you have to ask yourself why you seem to have an issue with female leads and/or females getting better representation.

      1. Callum says:

        I think you’re missing my point.

        The issue is not that female characters are getting (or not getting) better representation. It is that they are being deliberately boosted at the expense of the male characters.

        In the Harry Potter books, for example, Ron and Hermione are roughly equal in terms of exposure. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. In the movies, Hermione is super-woman and Ron is a cowardly jerk. His moments of glory are largely erased or given to Hermione.

        Take Book III, as perhaps the most wretched example.

        The scene is in the Shrieking Shack. The Trio – Harry, Ron and Hermione – are confronted by Sirius Black, who everyone thinks betrayed Harry’s parents and is now here to wring Harry’s neck.

        In the books, Ron tells Sirius that he’ll have to go through the other two kids to get to Harry. Maybe not the brightest thing in the world, as Ron has every reason to believe that Black murdered eleven people, but perhaps one of the bravest.

        In the movies, it’s Hermione who stands up to Black … while Ron cowers. Yes, cowers.

        If you don’t believe me, you can read about it here – http://www.tor.com/2014/01/15/erased-by-time-and-blockbusters-the-cautionary-tale-of-ron-weasley/

        Is it wrong to think that there is something wrong here?

        But you, like so many others, prefer to blame my feelings on sexism rather than considering that I might be right.

        You are entitled to your opinion. But I am entitled to mine.

        C

        1. the problem comes in when you state “deliberately boosted at the expense of”; I could say, for example, that a stuffed bunny was deliberately boosted over humans in Mimzy.

          Further, the article you site has this to say up-front: “But to suggest that her strengths negate Harry’s—and Ron’s—is a grave mistake.”

          It’s NOT a “one over the other” kind of thing, which is the point I think you are missing. Finding it so suggests you’re not comfortable with it.

          1. You are right Steve. If somebody start saying “we have to focus on good script and good acting” I can believe it. BUT when you start saying something like “Having a gender or race-bent character is no longer edgy or hip, if it ever was”, I am sorry, you can try to disguise as much as you can your sexist mind, but the truth is YOUR POINT is that the presence of women in the gender bother you. At least be honest.

          2. Callum says:

            The point is that Ron’s heroism is erased from the movie – not cut, because the scene couldn’t be fitted in, but replaced by Hermione taking his role and his lines. Ron’s character moment wasn’t wiped – it was literally given to Hermione. And I think the vast number of ‘Ron the Jerk’ fan fictions owes a great deal to this literacy character assassination.

            You are making the same basic mistake as everyone on both sides of the Hugo Debate – you are assigning motives to people who disagree with you that do not have much (if any) relationship to reality. That’s stupid. Someone who doesn’t like ‘X’ may not be motivated by any form of ‘ism,’ And going on about it just makes them think you have a closed mind.

            Like I said in my OP, Ms Marvel did well. So do Simon Baz and Jessica Cruz. And the reason they did well is because they are well-written characters. She is NOT a single-issue gimmick like Female-Thor or Fem-Busters. The film adaptions of Harry Potter did poorly in that regard. So did Fem-Busters.

          3. the only motives I’m questioning is your making a point of this; so, the script writers made some changes…for whatever reason…yet you call it “erasure”….

  2. stevefah says:

    A female Doctor? Ooh, terrible! What’s next, a female starship captain? Oh, wait… hmm. Methinks the protesters need to seriously GAL! (Get A Life!)

    1. Indeed. That was exactly my repose to my first Feminazi: GET A LIFE

Leave a Reply