• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Dr Who - 2017 series

Status
Not open for further replies.

chris11256

Member
Joined
27 Dec 2012
Messages
734
Yes and especially so when she was cast to fit the BBC's stated goal of "increasing diversity". Allegations of tokenism are going to make it harder for her.

That's my gripe with them. Rather than going into it thinking 'right lets find the best person for the role' the BBC thought 'Right lets find the best women for the job'.

So she'll have to go through the whole things with the baggage of only getting the job because shes a women.

I don't have a problem with the doctor being female. I'm annoyed at roles being filled just to meet diversity quotas. It's a bit like how every episode of this series we needed to be reminded that Bill was both black and gay.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

TheNewNo2

Member
Joined
31 Mar 2015
Messages
1,008
Location
Canary Wharf
Yes and especially so when she was cast to fit the BBC's stated goal of "increasing diversity". Allegations of tokenism are going to make it harder for her.

Allegations of tokenism will always haunt the first people to break white male hegemony of something. To be a woman is to have to do twice as well to be taken half as seriously.

To quote Si Stringer on social media, "People who accept a shape-shifting, time-travelling immortal character unable to accept female lead in a television show."
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,522
Location
The home of the concrete cow
There's been plenty of comment on social media from people who cannot and will not accept the Doctor as a woman.
I wonder how many of them are of an age where they accepted the Three Musketeers as dogs?
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
We will only know if she is fit for purpose as Dr. Who when we have seen her first few episodes. Being a good actress / female actor depends on a lot more than the size of t*ts.

Based on Broadchurch she's good at acting but being good in one role doesn't mean you're suited to any role.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
The i are running a different headline - BBC casts first ever Yorkshire Doctor Who.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,743
Honestly I'm sick of Doctor Who, I think it probably needs to be put out to pasture and only do a feature-length christmas special every year or two.

Rather than continuous production line of mediocre stuff.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,163
Location
SE London
The i are running a different headline - BBC casts first ever Yorkshire Doctor Who.

Y'see. Pure quota-filling. We had Chris Ecclestone from the Lancashire side of the Pennines, therefore we have to get someone from Yorkshire. The BBC should've been looking for the best actor to play the Doctor, not just looking for the best actor-from-Yorkshire to play her... And now Jody's going to spend her entire time in the role dogged by accusations that she only got it because she's from Yorkshire

:D
 
Last edited:

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,163
Location
SE London
from the BBC...

BBC said:
Chibnall said the 13th Doctor was always going to be a woman.
He said: "I always knew I wanted the 13th Doctor to be a woman and we're thrilled to have secured our number one choice.

Is that any different in principle from how previous doctors have presumably all been selected based on the in-built assumption that they would be men (because until a couple of years ago no one questioned otherwise)?

Realistically, no acting role is open to everyone. All acting roles come with restrictions because it needs to be an actor of the appropriate characteristics to play that role - which may mean a certain gender/age/ethnic background/build/level of fitness/level of obesity/height/etc. Is choosing an actor for the Doctor any different?
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
from the BBC...

The BBC's policy can have a negative effect at times. I attended one of the heats for the BBC New Comedy Award the other week and one of the acts was a blind man. As he was being guided to the stage there was a lot of audience murmuring of "Typical BBC. Have to make sure there's at least one disabled person on the bill" when if the BBC had a different policy it would have been "Wow, a blind man has made his this far despite it being more difficult for him to reach this stage." It turned out the blind man was very good and had definitely earned his place on the bill and wasn't just there to show the BBC welcomed disabled comedians to take part, as many initially thought.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Is that any different in principle from how previous doctors have presumably all been selected based on the in-built assumption that they would be men (because until a couple of years ago no one questioned otherwise)?

Realistically, no acting role is open to everyone. All acting roles come with restrictions because it needs to be an actor of the appropriate characteristics to play that role - which may mean a certain gender/age/ethnic background/build/level of fitness/level of obesity/height/etc. Is choosing an actor for the Doctor any different?

I'd say choosing Doctor Who is different. Peter Capaldi is almost 60, while Matt Smith was under 30 when he played the doctor. In a normal series if you replace an actor you wouldn't double the age of the character in doing so.

Incidentally for Doctor Who aren't they casting for 'The Doctor' which is gender neutral whereas when they are casting for 'James Bond' the name James indicates the character is a man?
 

Darandio

Established Member
Joined
24 Feb 2007
Messages
10,678
Location
Redcar
Is that any different in principle from how previous doctors have presumably all been selected based on the in-built assumption that they would be men (because until a couple of years ago no one questioned otherwise)?

I'm not sure it's just a couple of years. I seem to recall a clamour for a woman doctor and in particular for Billie Piper a while ago, possibly even after David Tennant left?

However, does it mean it's now a timelady and not timelord?
 

Essan

Member
Joined
22 Feb 2017
Messages
530
Location
Evesham / Lochailort
I don't have a problem with the doctor being female. I'm annoyed at roles being filled just to meet diversity quotas. It's a bit like how every episode of this series we needed to be reminded that Bill was both black and gay.

Exactly!

IMO a female Doctor will work best if there is no reference to the fact he is a woman. Just get on the with fighting monsters and saving the world. But we know that's not going to be the case since various individuals' sex/gender/relationship issues have a main plotline of the past few series. And I wouldn't at all be surprised if they bring back River Song just to have them kiss ..... I do sometimes get the feeling the script writers would rather be writing for Hollyoaks or Eastenders than some silly sci-fi rubbish .....
 

Essan

Member
Joined
22 Feb 2017
Messages
530
Location
Evesham / Lochailort
Incidentally for Doctor Who aren't they casting for 'The Doctor' which is gender neutral whereas when they are casting for 'James Bond' the name James indicates the character is a man?

The name used by Agent 007 is James because so far that agent has always been a man. I look forward to the next Agent 007 being a Chinese girl :)
 

Drogba11CFC

Member
Joined
15 Sep 2009
Messages
868
I don't watch Doctor Who, but I suppose that there was going to be a female Doctor in the USS Enterprise at some point. May the force be with her.
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,522
Location
The home of the concrete cow

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,252
Location
No longer here
There's been plenty of comment on social media from people who cannot and will not accept the Doctor as a woman.
I wonder how many of them are of an age where they accepted the Three Musketeers as dogs?

Was that because the producers had a dog quota to increase diversity?

I'm sure the new doctor will be superb but my point is her job is made more difficult by the fact she was appointed on the basis of her gender.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
The name used by Agent 007 is James because so far that agent has always been a man. I look forward to the next Agent 007 being a Chinese girl :)

So the name James didn't come from the books written by Ian Fleming which the films are based on? ;) Doctor Who is written as a TV series not adapted from a book for TV or the cinema.

Although, maybe if they write a whole new Bond script (not derived from a book) they can claim James is no more and has been replaced by Chanhua but whether that would be popular is a different question.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,522
Location
The home of the concrete cow
Was that because the producers had a dog quota to increase diversity?
Again, is there any evidence of these quotas?
I'm sure the new doctor will be superb but my point is her job is made more difficult by the fact she was appointed on the basis of her gender.
The director decided that they wanted a woman to play the role, and she was the actor that they wanted.
 

STEVIEBOY1

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2010
Messages
4,001
I have not heard of the actress who will be playing the Doctor, but I do recall a few years ago Dawn French being suggested and infact I can picture her in that role. I liked Jon Pertwee and All the recent doctors since from Christopher Eccleston. I used to like the Brigadier and some of the other assistants Sarah Jane & Jo plus Captain Jack, oh & K9.
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
4,568
Incidentally for Doctor Who aren't they casting for 'The Doctor' which is gender neutral whereas when they are casting for 'James Bond' the name James indicates the character is a man?
The name used by Agent 007 is James because so far that agent has always been a man. I look forward to the next Agent 007 being a Chinese girl :)
The character of James Bond is very much a man and a woman playing 'James Bond' would just be silly, but the introduction of a completely new character into the franchise, who is a woman and takes Bond's 007 tag after he retires, might work.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,252
Location
No longer here
Again, is there any evidence of these quotas?

The director decided that they wanted a woman to play the role, and she was the actor that they wanted.

The BBC has a diversity and inclusion strategy which ensures that discussions about diversity occur at the start of the creative process. This ensures that content is more reflective of the population. That's a good thing, but it does make the actor's job harder in the face of allegations of tokenism.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,252
Location
No longer here
So no actual quota, then?
The writer has said 'I want Jodie Whittaker to be The Doctor' and the BBC said 'OK then'. What's the problem?

I'm not sure if they have an actual number but their publicly stated goal is to be as reflective of the general population as possible, so one imagines they have an eventual 50/50 split in mind when it comes to male and female characters across their entire production base.

To be clear, when commissioning series, the BBC have early discussions about inclusivity and diversity with the supplier - they are quite open about this.

It could well be that the writer just so wanted a woman this time, and frankly there's no issue with that - I don't even watch the show much. The point is the existence of that policy of positive discrimination makes it much harder for the female actor to prove herself.
 

TheNewNo2

Member
Joined
31 Mar 2015
Messages
1,008
Location
Canary Wharf
The point is the existence of that policy of positive discrimination makes it much harder for the female actor to prove herself.

The problem is that without positive discrimination, you don't get equality.

Don't get me wrong, discrimination is not good in and of itself. But it sometimes serves a useful purpose. In the past, there was explicit discrimination in favour of white male cisgender heterosexuals. People of colour, women, LGBT folks, were considered not suitable for one reason or another. Then the rules changed, and it became verboten to say it out loud, but there was still a lot of discrimination in favour of the aforementioned white men. Such things lead to the vast overrepresentation of white men in films, so the point where having a major movie which has either a woman with her own story or twonamed female characters talking about something other than a man is sadly infrequent (I'm not arguing that every movie needs to pass the Bechdel test, but a similar number should fail a reverse-Bechdel test aimed at male characters).

All of this leads to comparatively few women putting themselves forwards for positions of authority or prestige, because it is seen as something for men. We take racism, sexism and homophobia from our society, and it limits us. We see fewer males in "caring" professions because it's seen as unmanly. Actors refuse to play gay characters because they may end up typecast as such.

So we need to make discrimination work for us, rather than against us. Use it as a tool to ensure that there are voices from a variety of backgrounds in discussions, because that helps get a better end result. You use discrimination to shoehorn in people from differing backgrounds until such time as those differing backgrounds start appearing regularly in the non-mandatory positions. Once we achieve equality, there won't be any need for discrimination. But there's more to equality than just having the same rights - you need the same opportunities too. And right now we don't have that.

I wish that Whittaker's gender was not a story. It's a sad indictment of our society that it is, and I long for the day when such stories are unnecessary. But casting another white man is not the way to fix that.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,252
Location
No longer here
The problem is that without positive discrimination, you don't get equality.

Actual equality or just equality of opportunity?

While there's no doubt that equality of opportunity will arise from positive discrimination, that isn't the same as actual equality, as you note later - her sex is a story in and of itself, which doesn't seem terribly equal to me. And that fits my argument too, in that having that policy makes it more difficult for her as an actor as she has to work harder to win over some people.

There is also the huge contradiction that, according to the liberal left, markers like gender, race, class and so on should not matter in the slightest - except when you fill in the application form where it matters enormously. You're not going to get true, pure equality by discrimination (incidentally, this often means negatively discriminating against a straight white man who didn't ask to be born with his privilege).
 

IanD

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2011
Messages
2,719
Location
Newport Pagnell
Yes, he wanted the next Doctor to be a woman. Not the BBC, the director.

The director decided that they wanted a woman to play the role, and she was the actor that they wanted.

There are plenty of female actors out there. Good to see that the casting process was done with an open mind to make sure the best candidate was secured rather than just asking one of his mates if she wanted the job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top