SFP wrote:Sorry, I'm a bit baffled here. I post a comment stating that I quite like the idea that there's a woman playing the doctor and suddenly there's a load of huffing and puffing about excess liberalism and the EU - which is another topic altogether so, if you really feel the need to wax lyrical, please do it somewhere else.
Political correctness is a very pertinent issue here, as (as Loonboyx proves repeatedly), owing to political extremists, if you say anything that can be deliberately twisted by virtue signalling idiots then there's a good possibility that you'll be accused of basing your opinions purely on your own innate hatred of anyone who isn't a straight white male.
This topic started off as a reasonable discussion about the series, until people only concerned with making themselves look good decided that those of us who spoke out about the Doctor's change of gender were motivated by sexism and a general fear of women.
You said "
But I do agree that the series fell flat", and that alone, despite being utterly true and borne out by all the facts, could cause any idiot who ignores facts and tries to look morally superior to attack your words and to label you as some misogynistic neanderthal who's blind hatred of women causes him to wrongly believe that the last season of Doctor Who wasn't a huge success. That's why I warned you, to not be surprised if your words were deliberately misconstrued.
On topic, I remember watching the very first doctor as a child so I can claim to have watched quite a few iterations of the character. I don't have to like a woman as the doctor just because she's a woman although I'm perfectly entitled to do that if I wish to without suffering insults as a result.
Yes, but if you dislike a woman as the Doctor, just because you believed that the Doctor wouldn't work as a female, as you'd also be entitled to, then you'd potentially receive all sorts of insults. Being insulted for your views (especially since the last season of Doctor Who does tend to support this view) is neither fair nor intelligent, but that is the modern day for you, as far as 'freedom of speech' goes.
I wouldn't mind having a black character or an alien - although I don't think I'd like an American and, I admit, that may well be a personal prejudice on my part. I like the idea that stepping outside the traditional male role could provide some interesting challenges and changes and I'm entitled to feel that without being insulted. You're also entitled to disagree. However, I do believe that trying to make yourself look big by making someone else look small is a worrying trait in anyone. Our preferences are our preferences and we're entitled to have them without being insulted or categorized.
I'm sorry, but who are you addressing here? I assumed at first that it was aimed at me, but I am not the one acting as you describe. If you think I am, then please go back and read from the beginning, and see who it is who lies, who tries to silence anyone who dares post facts that disagree with his lies, and who it is who makes utterly false claims and then refuses to provide proof. And who it is who posts insulting things like "
You're [mentally] ill, you should see a doctor". The same bigot who says "
LOL at all the people who are trying to justify their sexism and bigotry with "it's always been this way!" instead of actually reading what people wrote and trying to understand the truth in it.
And who it is who insists that, for example, the TV ratings are accurate, despite (a) the BBC being well known for manipulating figures (they even lied about the results of the Blue Peter (a British children's TV program) poll for naming a new cat), and (b) it not actually being possible to know exactly how many people are watching a TV set and what channel and for how long. Even the organisation that creates the viewing figures admits that it's just an estimate (
https://www.barb.co.uk/about-us/how-we-do-what-we-do/) but the troll in question knows better and believes the figures are somehow much more accurate, yet he never posts a link to explain how they get really accurate figures, let alone proof that the BBC no longer lie about figures. He's not interesting in discussions, or even the truth, just in getting attention and trying (though failing miserably) to look good on the internet.
Anyway, I'm done trying to reason with him, so I won't be addressing his posts any more.
So let's bring this thread back on topic, and stick to discussing Doctor Who. Speaking of which, I wish a good Doctor Who video game would be made. There's so much potential, not least because of all the back story and the Doctor Who universe and allies and enemies, but every DW game I've ever seen was well below average, gameplay-wise. Often they even felt like the game's authors either didn't watch the TV program, or were just very half-hearted when making the game.
So, I reiterate. Regardless of whether or not we wish (or do not wish) to see a woman, alien, black, Asian, aquatic mammal or last year's Crufts winner playing the Doctor, I feel the scripts and the characters could do with some work... for instance, more 'bite' in the Doctor's character and overall dialogue?
And I wouldn't mind the Doctor being of a different ethnicity or race, as that wouldn't change the character. But changing the gender does change the character, I believe. The scripts mostly needed a lot more work and focus too, and there were too many companions, as they often felt sidelined and little more than background scenery. A good over-arcing story for the season would really have helped to improve the quality and interest of the season too, I felt. But as it was, I (and a great many other people) feel that the season was mostly very bad, the worst season ever (even including Colin Baker's time, or the first two Sylvester McCoy seasons).
Bad scripts, a dearth of good ideas, a very amateur feel over much of the season, and so many other flaws, such as in the Rosa Parks episode, for example, which was so badly done. It should have covered much more of the (then) history and the future (after Parks' act of defiance had led to the triggering of the equal rights movements), which is not only part of our history (by virtue of it being mankind's history), but it could have made the episode much more interesting and educational (without being preachy). Instead they chose to add a time traveller criminal to fight, when they should have just concentrated on Rosa Parks and the attitudes against blacks/minorities, and had no other enemy (I mean no aliens, no villain from the future, etc). One occasional episode where the Doctor and co. visit a time and place on Earth where interesting history happens and they don't face a traditional science-fiction threat could really work if done well., I think.
I genuinely mean that and am not saying it to be an arsehole.
I give you links and you invent reasons why those links don't count so I won't waste my time. That is not "reason". 
