Doctor Who's 13th Time Lord Announced: Actress Jodie Whittaker (bbc.co.uk)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Doctor Who's 13th Time Lord Announced: Actress Jodie Whittaker (bbc.co.uk)

Posted by EditorDavid on Sunday July 16, 2017 @06:24AM from the Inspector-Spacetime dept.

Peter Capaldi, the 12th Doctor Who, had said that he wanted to see a woman replace him in the Tardis, and so did former Doctor Who stars Billie Piper and Karen Gillan. And today it's official: "the 13th incarnation of Doctor Who will be portrayed by an actress," writes Slashdot reader Coisiche -- specifically Jodie Whittaker, who American viewers may remember from her performance as CIA officer Sandra Grimes in the 2014 mini-series "The Assets." The BBC reports: She was revealed in a trailer that was broadcast on BBC One at the end of the Wimbledon men's singles final... She will make her debut on the sci-fi show when the Doctor regenerates in the Christmas Day show... Whittaker said: "I'm beyond excited to begin this epic journey...with every Whovian on this planet. It's more than an honour to play the Doctor. It means remembering everyone I used to be, while stepping forward to embrace everything the Doctor stands for: hope... Doctor Who represents everything that's exciting about change."
Doctor Who's new showrunner said the 13th Doctor was always going to be a woman -- and that Whittaker was their first choice. "Jodie is an in-demand, funny, inspiring, super-smart force of nature and will bring loads of wit, strength and warmth to the role." Doctor Who #12 added that Whittaker "has above all the huge heart to play this most special part. She's going to be a fantastic Doctor." And Will Howells, who writes for the Doctor Who magazine, said "I don't think it's a risky choice at all but if a show that can go anywhere and do anything can't take risks, what can?"

50 of 508 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

This is great news... now... give me more shows! by ka9dgx · 2017-07-16 06:28 · Score: 3, Insightful

When do we get new episodes? Why isn't there a daily episode? MORE MORE MORE!!!!
Jodie Whittaker by slashnik · 2017-07-16 06:29 · Score: 4, Interesting

Well she's a fine actress, an inspired choice. We can only wait to see what she does with it
1. Re:Jodie Whittaker by elrous0 · 2017-07-16 06:47 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I just hope Dr. Who treats her as an actual Doctor, not just use her to virtue-signal for SJW cred. Dr. Who's increasing politicization is really getting annoying. It's starting to feel like that guy who brings out his one black friend at every party and points to him to let you know that he's a proper non-racist liberal.
  When characters are naturally gay or black or whatever, that's great. When they're one-dimensional non-entities who just appear from stage-left in every episode just to remind everyone of their gayness and blackness, that's just virtue-signalling. And it's an insult to real gays, minorities, women etc. who are actual real human beings.
  I hope she's a real character. I hope that every episode doesn't revolve around some stereotypical "women's issues" just to trumpet for the thousandth time that this Dr. Who is A WOMAN.
  
  --
  SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
2. Re:Jodie Whittaker by Truekaiser · 2017-07-16 06:52 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Well they seem to be also repainting the police box color to pink, so what do you think will happen?
3. Re:Jodie Whittaker by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 07:00 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Missy was a exceptional incarnation of The Master as an evil Mary Poppins. Michelle Gomez proved the character can be gender flipped and still retain credibility.
4. Re:Jodie Whittaker by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 07:09 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Go rewatch some of the older episodes with the Master and see if you can still say that. Missy was a poor approximation of the Master and the stupid "Master/Doctor" romance thing they tried to shove into that relationship ruined the character.
5. Re:Jodie Whittaker by jellomizer · 2017-07-16 07:16 · Score: 2
  
  I am guessing you haven't been watching Dr. Who or the BBC for the last decade?
  For the most part BBC has been good writing characters who may be against the normal stereotype without being preachy about it. There may be some episodes say where the Doctor is in the past and the men in charge will not listen to her, just because the Doctor is a woman. But I expect for the most part I trust that the BBC will make the New Doctor believable like the other ones.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
6. Re:Jodie Whittaker by AmiMoJo · 2017-07-16 07:19 · Score: 2
  
  Judging by his they handled Bill, I can't see it being an issue. Davies did tend to make too much of those kinds of issues for them to seem natural, but Moffat is pretty good at it.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
7. Re:Jodie Whittaker by iamgnat · 2017-07-16 07:23 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Missy was a exceptional incarnation of The Master as an evil Mary Poppins. Michelle Gomez proved the character can be gender flipped and still retain credibility.
  Exactly, but they never made a big deal of it so it worked well.
  This last companion, however, was an abomination of SJW-ness. Not a single episode went by without them putting some focus on her liking girls and/or (mostly and) some slavery reference. It was tedious, annoying, helped nothing, and damaged the story lines.
  Cpt Jack's homosexuality was never an issue and it was never focused on. Martha didn't go around constantly commenting about slavery. Bill was also the first female companion (at least since the reboot) that I would not classify as a "strong woman" (mostly due to her being on about slavery and being gay so much). Seemed she needed more rescuing by the Dr than she did rescuing of the Dr like all her predecessors did.
  Hopefully the story will just be "poof, the Dr is a woman" and then it is never mentioned again. If so, it will work well. Based on how they are publicizing it, however, I suspect they are going to work some form of "wait! you're a woman now???" into each episode. That will be a damn shame if that is indeed what happens.
  I agree that there should be a female Dr and by all accounts it looks like she is a good choice. I just hope that the writers and producers don't turn it into disgusting political circus to try to make a point that doesn't need making.
8. Re:Jodie Whittaker by jellomizer · 2017-07-16 07:40 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  For the most part I expect the BBC is just trying to get rid of the gender debate. No matter when they would replace the Doctor with a female version there will be controversy. So if they do it now, then they can get rid of the hurdle. If they found a talented actor and have good writers and directors, then things should be fine.
  Being that Capaldi wasn't that popular Doctor (I actually started to warm up with him this season) People are up for a change, back to a more vibrant Doctor.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
9. Re:Jodie Whittaker by hairyfeet · 2017-07-16 07:45 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Exactly! there is a BIG fricking difference than having a character who simply happens to be "x" than one whose entire reason for being is to be "x". A perfect example of doing it right? Heimdall in the Thor movies. Nobody gives a shit that he is black because he is a well written character who just so happens to be black. He is brave, loyal to his friends, willing to charge in despite extreme danger, one tough SOB. Nobody cares about his skin color because it simply isn't relevant to the story or the character it is simply a trait like being tall or strong which frankly is how it should be if we actually care about people being treated as equals and not objects.
  Contrast this with how Hollywood portrays gay people which is still so cringe its pathetic, they always seem to go full Will & Grace stereotype gay. They can't just let a person be a person who just so happens to be gay, nope its "hey did you know I'm gay? Because i'm totally gay, yup as gay as gay can be uh huh that is me" which I have no doubt we'll look back in 20 years and see this virtue signaling for what it is...as racist as anything Amos and Andy did back in the day because they aren't allowed to just be people,normal folks with thoughts and fears and anxieties like everybody else, nope they have to go "magical negro" only its "super happy gay friend".
  So if its a case of the Doctor simply ending up with a gender swap this regen, looking down saying something snarky and then moving on like "Oh well at least I'm not white haired anymore, it was making me feel dreadfully old" then it will be great....but considering how many times I've seen the word "diversity" thrown in there which in left wing speak always translates to "hey we're gonna be racist/sexist now, gotta fly the flag and show we are loyal to the cause"? I have a feeling we are gonna be in for some serious cringe.
  lets just hope they don't end up killing the show because as we have seen people are REALLY getting fucking sick of being preached at and if the show becomes nothing but left wing politics and virtue signaling? I don't even see hardcore Dr Who fans wanting to tune in for their weekly dose of Who if it becomes nothing but propaganda.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
10. Re:Jodie Whittaker by mhkohne · 2017-07-16 08:00 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Being that Capaldi wasn't that popular Doctor (I actually started to warm up with him this season) People are up for a change, back to a more vibrant Doctor.
  Interesting. I have to say I loved Capaldi, and I thought his portrayal was great. Some of the scripts, on the other hand, could have used another go or two round the editor's desk before being OK'd. I'm hopeful the writers will do better by Whittaker.
  
  --
  A thousand pounds of wood moving at 300 feet per minute. Don't get in the way.
11. Re:Jodie Whittaker by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 08:41 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  It would be worth doing just to watch the heads explode. All the right wing comment sections are going nuts.
  How dare human beings not be racist and sexist in the way I prefer. They are worse than scum. They must be, shudder, republicans! /s
  Or maybe people want to be treated and viewed as people instead of labeled, classified, and pre-judged based on neo-marxist oppression structures specifically designed 30 years ago to favor the people that created it.
12. Re:Jodie Whittaker by yuriklastalov · 2017-07-16 10:37 · Score: 2
  
  Or maybe people want to be treated and viewed as people instead of labeled, classified, and pre-judged based on neo-marxist oppression structures specifically designed 30 years ago to favor the people that created it.
  Now you're just talking crazy talk.
13. Re:Jodie Whittaker by iamgnat · 2017-07-16 13:03 · Score: 2
  
  Your memory is faulty. Captain Jack did make a big thing of being gay
  I'll grant you that may be as I don't think I ever went back and watched the 10th in order, so that could have skewed my view.
  
  especially in he spin off Torchwood
  Never seen an episode and not directly the subject.
  
  By comparison, Bill has been very subtle and matter of fact.
  Subtle doesn't mean what you think it means. I'm not willing to say "every" without rewatching them all (which I will never do), but most they made at least one jarring and out of place scene where she had to tell someone she was into girls. While it may have been "matter of fact", it served no purpose in the story other than "hey! look! I'm a lesbian character!".
  If they had simply made her a competent female character like Clara, Amy, Martha, Donna, and Rose (at least with 11, she was rather needy with 10) that just had a female love interest when she wasn't traveling, big deal. So what. They chose, however, to make it one of her two most defining characteristics.
  There was nothing subtle about that character.
  
  If anything they avoided bringing it up by refraining from her having a love interest in any situations where it might be an issue, like the past (where her being black at a time when black people were property was something they couldn't avoid).
  No, instead, in the past, present, and future they had her bring up slavery and/or discrimination. Her whole interaction with the blue guy in that episode about the killer space suits was just painful and disgusting. I'm pretty sure that everyone in 1st and 2nd world countries are well aware that there was a period of time where people were abused and enslaved primarily based on their skin color. I'm also equally sure that they are aware that even after those peoples were given equal rights in the 1st & 2nd world, discrimination still persisted.
  If they wanted to make an episode where they went back in time and she ran into problems specifically because of it, fine. If they want to do an episode on a different planet where she does something to quash slavery, fine. Having her bring it up in many/most episodes where that is the only reference to such, just obnoxious and pointless.
  The original Star Trek and earlier Dr Who pulled off the ability to normalize such things specifically because they didn't make a deal out of it. The simply inserted the character and moved on.
  Contrary to the popular belief today, the way to fix these issues is not to constantly rub people's noses in it. Constantly getting in people's faces tends to have the opposite of the desired effect.
14. Re:Jodie Whittaker by iamgnat · 2017-07-16 13:20 · Score: 2
  
  So please, tell us what your reason is.
  The Dr undergoes a complete physical change periodically and they've long made it part of the cannon that Timelords can change sexes in a regeneration. Missy was the first direct image of such.
  Just seems that if they can manage it decently (e.g. not make a deal out of it), it makes sense. It's not a "omg they have to do this!!!" thing, just something that seems like it should happen sooner or later based on what they've been setting up for ages.
  The way they are handling it so far, however, feels very much "News at 11: Talented actress gets acting job!". That kind of stuff just seems incredibly patronizing to me which is kinda the opposite of what is supposedly being projected. We'll see if they pull it off, but my hopes aren't high.
15. Re:Jodie Whittaker by iamgnat · 2017-07-16 13:35 · Score: 2
  
  So you think it should be ignored, huh? What if every time you saw someone they were a man and then suddenly, they became a woman.
  First of all there is a difference between ignored and not making a deal over it. In the 10-11 regeneration Rose freaked out in an entirely understandable way, but then she accepted it and moved on.
  Secondly, there have been few interactions with characters that knew the Dr in his prior incarnations. They could easily go her whole run without bringing old characters back. If they do, again, there is a history of them dealing with it reasonably and I would argue that for someone that knows who the Dr is is going to have little additional surprise over him being a her now (e.g. they already know weird shit happens around the Dr).
  Specifically in the context of this coming regeneration, Clara has been gone awhile, River is gone, Bill (thankfully) is gone, so all we potentially have left is Nardole and he is well aware of Missy/Master.
  So beyond a "well that was unexpected" and maybe an "ooh! I have breasts!", they don't need to focus on it for more than a few minutes.
16. Re:Jodie Whittaker by gravewax · 2017-07-16 17:45 · Score: 2
  
  Loved Capaldi as the Doctor. Just a shame the scripts he had to work with were steaming dog turds.
17. Re:Jodie Whittaker by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2017-07-16 19:33 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  For god's sake, she intercepted peoples' souls going to the afterlife just for the evil lols.
  Who are these dorks thinking she isn't up to snuff?
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
18. Re:Jodie Whittaker by AmiMoJo · 2017-07-16 20:06 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  While it may have been "matter of fact", it served no purpose in the story other than "hey! look! I'm a lesbian character!".
  Can you cite specific examples? It just seems like if a gay character mentions that they have a same-sex love interest, it's somehow an overt "hey! look! I'm a lesbian character!" move.
  
  The original Star Trek and earlier Dr Who pulled off the ability to normalize such things specifically because they didn't make a deal out of it.
  The original Star Trek made a huge deal out of it constantly. They did entire episodes about racism, were constantly pushing the boundaries with things like the first on-screen interracial kiss, and often it just got silly like the "planet of the Nazis" episode or the space hippies.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
19. Re:Jodie Whittaker by voss · 2017-07-16 21:27 · Score: 2
  
  One dimensional characters are bad because they are poorly written not because they are one dimensional in a way you do not like. When you start dropping buzzwords like "SJW" and "Virtue Signalling" you are using them in place of rational argument. Bill Potts was just not a very interesting character , on the other hand I loved the characters of Madame Vastra and Jenny. Im sure some consider the character of Madame Vastra to be virtue signalling but they were in 1893 where women couldnt be "naturally gay" and had to live in secret.
I'm excited about this! Now make more than 10 epis by MikeDataLink · 2017-07-16 06:31 · Score: 3, Interesting

I am excited about this! They needed to do something new and fresh. This should work well and Jodie is a fantastic choice.
My only complaint about Doctor Who (all BBC shows actually) is they don't make enough episodes per season.

--
Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
Re:You can't have a female James T. Kirk by jfdavis668 · 2017-07-16 06:37 · Score: 2

Every new Doctor seems strange. Yes, a woman will take time to get used to. As long as the keep the plots true to the show, it should be good.
Re:You can't have a female James T. Kirk by NEDHead · 2017-07-16 06:41 · Score: 5, Insightful

Well, Kirk doesn't regenerate periodically, so that is an issue.
You can, however, have Janeway.
Re: You can't have a female James T. Kirk by teslar · 2017-07-16 06:43 · Score: 4, Informative

Actually, in case of the doctor, you quite explicitly can have a female one. Nothing says Timelords are restricted to one gender and there are canon precedents even before Missy. So there.
Re:You can't have a female James T. Kirk by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 06:46 · Score: 2, Insightful

They've already ditched keeping the plots true to the show by adding a woman doctor. The Doctor is a mad man in a box. That's who the character is. You can't gender-swap the character without fundamentally altering the dynamic. It breaks the formula and they're only doing it to try and placate the SJW crowd.
Unfortunately they'll soon realize that while the SJW crowd is loud, they do not represent the fanbase. SJWs are not fans of the things they complain about. They're trolls looking to complain. Now that the Doctor is a woman, they'll start complaining about how she isn't a minority. Just wait.
Re:I'm excited about this! Now make more than 10 e by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 06:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

My only complaint about Doctor Who (all BBC shows actually) is they don't make enough episodes per season.
Because, unlike Americans, they know it will turn to shit if they make too many.
Re:You can't have a female James T. Kirk by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 06:58 · Score: 2, Funny

and you can't have a female Dr. Who. This is another example of PC bullshit taken too far.
It's Nurse Who, now.
Re:Gender issue narrative in the announcement. by wonkey_monkey · 2017-07-16 07:06 · Score: 3, Insightful

...what?

the people doing the announcing have pushed a gender issue narrative.
Citation needed. The announcement showed her face and her name. How is that a gender issue narrative?

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Re:I feel a disturbance in the time vortex. by wonkey_monkey · 2017-07-16 07:12 · Score: 2, Insightful

If you could the Doctor a Social Justice Warrior he'd take it as the ultimate compliment.

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Not sure... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 07:24 · Score: 3, Insightful

I'm a gay man who hates seeing gay characters hammered in to a show just so they have a gay character -- Sulu in the last Star Trek movie being an obvious case in point.
So I'm not sure about changing the Doctor to a woman just because the BBC need more diversity. To me, the Doctor is a male character, and I think should remain so. It's seems like feminism going to far (again?). (Jodie even said herself that she is a feminist).
With Missy, they introduced the idea of a male Time Lord regenerating as a woman, so it's been obvious for some time that this was coming. I'm just not sure I like it.
It happened to Thor too, so.I'm guess James Bond will be next.... Sigh.
I've nothing against woman and strong lead woman characters, it's just changing something because it's the "in thing" or because they feel they have to that does my head in. Like, should Wonder Woman become Wonder Man? Should Aunt Beru become Uncle Stew in the next version of A New Hope just so Star Wars can have a gay parent couple?
We'll see once we see her as the Doctor. I may change my mind. But for now, I'm not sure...
Re:Because it worked so well for Ghostbusters by MightyMartian · 2017-07-16 07:26 · Score: 2

What was the body of work of Tom Baker (who I still consider the best Doctor)? It's a sci-fi/fantasy show that historically (though not since the 2000s reboot) ran on a pretty low budget. Capaldi and Smith probably are the best actors if you're judging by resume, but I didn't find Capaldi all that good, though Smith did seem to fit better.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Re:You can't have a female James T. Kirk by jellomizer · 2017-07-16 07:30 · Score: 4, Insightful

Voyager had a lot of problems, Janeway as a woman Capitan, isn't that much of a big deal compared to the other problems.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Excited, if they do it right by grasshoppa · 2017-07-16 07:30 · Score: 4, Informative

The Doctor was never about his gender, so switching it up shouldn't be cause for alarm.
However, as another poster mentioned, let's just hope this doesn't result in the writers going on a full "Patriarchy" writing binge, where the Doctor saves women from the evils of men in every episode.
There's so much potential for fun with the gender switch, I just hope they exploit that instead of going all "WOMENZ RULEZ THE WORLDSS!@!!!!1".

--
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Re:We didn't need a female Doctor by mhkohne · 2017-07-16 08:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

Re-imagining the Doctor has been kinda the point ever since the first re-generation. The whole idea of the show for N years now has been 'OK, now we've got a new primary, how's this one different'. If that doesn't work for you, I can't see why you'd have watched Eccleston, let alone be commenting on the subject.

--
A thousand pounds of wood moving at 300 feet per minute. Don't get in the way.
Re:You can't have a female James T. Kirk by AmiMoJo · 2017-07-16 08:26 · Score: 4, Insightful

Time Lords changing gender when regenerating is canon, and not just The Master / Missy. And the Doctor's personality changes with every regeneration, as well as his age and apparent nationality (English / Scottish). Becoming female breaks nothing, it's certainly no bigger change than going from a very young English man to a mid 50s Scottish man.
The Doctor has never really been interested in his male gender anyway - he doesn't really form romantic attachments and seems positively afraid of sex. There isn't really anything about his personality that is particularly masculine so becoming female is unlikely to alter his basic motivations or philosophy, or even the way he interacts with his companions.
Much more likely to bring a big change is the departure of Moffat as show runner. But hay, the anti-SJWs have gotta complain about something, and no point waiting to see how it actually turns out before writing it off as trolling and predicting it's failure.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
still not what the doctor wanted by John+Bodin · 2017-07-16 08:31 · Score: 5, Funny

A GINGER!

--
John
1. Re:still not what the doctor wanted by Gravis+Zero · 2017-07-17 01:26 · Score: 3
  
  still not what the doctor wanted... A GINGER!
  There's a reason for that. You see, the energy contained within a Time Lord is their soul and as we all know gingers have no souls which is why you never see a ginger Time Lord. ;)
  
  --
  Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Re: You can't have a female James T. Kirk by UnknowingFool · 2017-07-16 08:53 · Score: 3, Informative

There have been three examples in the last several seasons that explicitly show/state that a Time Lord can be regenerate into a female.
1) In the prequel The Night of the Doctor The Sisterhood of Karn could control the regeneration: "Time Lord science is elevated here on Karn. The change doesn't have to be random. Fat or thin, young or old. Man or woman?"
2) Missy
3) In Season 9, in the Episode "Hell Bent", the General regenerates from an older white man to an older black woman.

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
not surprised tbh by gph1972 · 2017-07-16 09:54 · Score: 2

This show has been going downhill for sometime, no surprise that they are trying a female doctor now. I mean it worked so well for the Ghostbusters reboot, surely it will be a smashing success for Dr. Who. I have my serious doubts that any actor, male or female could rescue this show.
Re:You can't have a female James T. Kirk by ChunderDownunder · 2017-07-16 11:40 · Score: 3, Insightful

Does Ben Sisko not still refer to Ezri as 'old man', some 2 hosts after she was a male, Curzon Dax?
Re:Called it 2 doctors ago... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-07-16 12:39 · Score: 2, Insightful

Called it 2 doctors ago...
...And I'll call this one for the record: next will be a minority, the following one will be transgender.
There will never again be a white, male Dr Who.
You called it two Doctors ago and have been wrong twice, so now that it's eventually a woman you take credit? Do you write horoscopes for a living?
Re:This is great news... now... give me more shows by TapeCutter · 2017-07-16 13:56 · Score: 4, Insightful

Nope, Doctor is an alien, not a man.

--
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Re:We didn't need a female Doctor by Baron_Yam · 2017-07-16 14:20 · Score: 2

Doctor Who was 'silly sci-fi' until Moffat decided it was fantasy with mere sci-fi trappings. That the sonic screwdriver was a magic wand instead of an actual sonic screwdriver as in the original series. That's what first made me regret I ever hoped he'd take over from Davies (who did a great job of capturing the feel of the original show as I recalled it through a thick haze of nostalgia).
Then he showed he didn't understand the Tardis by making it an actual living, intelligent, free-willed being. Which makes no sense at all. He totally misunderstood the mariner tradition of referring to a ship as 'she'. Then the Doctor became an expert pilot who always left the brakes on. Moffat will shit on anything for a quick gag.
Then there was the issue of pushing his "good people are pansexual" like there's no hardwiring there. Idiot. Good people don't care if OTHERS are pansexual, but that doesn't make them switch sexual orientation. That was him pushing his sexual political agenda.
50 years in, I'm out. Thanks, Moffat.
Re:I feel a disturbance in the time vortex. by ProfBooty · 2017-07-16 14:41 · Score: 4, Interesting

Eh, I think for a fair amount of the male (nerd) demographic, they wanted to be the Doctor, a man who doesn't win through force, but through wits and snark rather than action.
For the female demographic, they wanted to travel with a sexy, powerful man who takes them on dangerous adventures. Look how many fangirls fawn over David Teninch and Matt Smith's portrayal of the Doctor.
I don't think the female demographic was looking to be the Doctor.

--
Bring back the old version of slashdot.
Re:Social justice warriors... by Boronx · 2017-07-16 16:17 · Score: 2

A lot of people genuinely do not like bigotry and think badly of bigots. They believe bigotry is stupid and leads to unnecessary harm.
This is an alien concepts for bigots, so they make accusations of parroting. It's reminiscent of the difficulties the Germans had in 1914 in understanding French "terrorists." They could not believe the resistance was spontaneous and self-organized.

--
Play Command HQ online
Re:This is great news... now... give me more shows by arglebargle_xiv · 2017-07-16 16:37 · Score: 3, Funny

Given that the Master has already appeared as a part-female character, it's just a small step for the Doctor to go all the way... "they're not breasts, they're Dalek bumps!".
Re:You can't have a female James T. Kirk by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2017-07-16 19:17 · Score: 2

LEAVE STAR TREK ALONE!!! You know nothing about it!!! They will NEVER do SJW shit like a black and a white kissing just to push SJW boundaries into culture!!

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Re:You can't have a female James T. Kirk by Ashe+Tyrael · 2017-07-16 21:11 · Score: 3, Interesting

Janeway worked as a character when she was allowed to be one character.. She suffered horribly from Writer of the Week syndrome deciding what she should be and how she should act. She flip-flopped from episode to episode between Team Mum, Hypocritical Martinet and "Professional Ubercaptain." When she was good, she was very very good indeed. She was just so inconsistent.

--
"How fine you look when dressed in rage."
Re:Pandering at it's worst... by Baron_Yam · 2017-07-17 03:08 · Score: 2

> In an incredible WTF moment, the writers decide to do a gender bender
This was not an isolated decision, it was a workup to sex-swapping the title character. Along with introducing the Corsair. And having the Doctor flirt with Harkness.
In the future, everybody's pansexual and gender fluid because they're better than us.
Weird how the oppressed sexual minority fought so long to you know, NOT be oppressed for their nature only to turn around and start telling everyone it's actually a choice and the straight majority is wrong for not being just like them. Its like people are stupid and never learn.