That's spliting hairs to me. Its pretty obverous than if a character can transform into anything within reason than that includes a woman. Maybe that side has only been played up recently, but its in the genre and the DNA of the show.
Any knowledge as to how and why the idea of 'regeneration' was borne about would disabuse you of the notion that it was 'always possible' but whatever. Gender change is a topic of 'now', not any time up until now. The Doctor was characterized as male with a few strongly masculine attributes as well as some quirkier, more alien ones.
One of the problems with Jodie's Doctor is that she is written out-of-character as the Doctor by being portrayed as a bad stereotype of female; she's not self-confident or assured in social situations like the Doctor usually is; she's often full of self-doubt about her ability, she's often depicted as scared for little reason (for the Doctor at any rate), she is shown as unintentionally morally dubious and for the most part lacking in compassion.
Who is this timid, 'socially awkward', incompetent, dispassionate woman and why does she have the Doctor's Tardis?
Even if it wasn't that would still be no excuse not to move with the times.
Way to contradict yourself within two sentences; 'its this way so of course it can do this, and even if it isn't this way then the should still do it because 'progressiveism'.
If they stopped watching it then why do they keep moaning about it? If your going to quit something then quit it.
1) Many people did exactly that; they stopped watching because of the poor writing and characterization.
2) Have you ever really been a big fan of some long-running show and had it change in a way you thought was fundamentally wrong? Be honest, did you just go 'oh well, I guess this isn't for me anymore', quietly switch it off and go on your merry way? Or, this being the age of internet, did you go online to discuss why this thing you loved is no longer as good as it used to be with other disgruntled fans?
3) There is not
one thing wrong with the idea of a passionate, engaged fan-base for any kind of show because it is born of
love of that show. Reading the above is actually breath-taking in its ignorance, especially given that
we're actually on a discussion board for a long-departed TV show.
4) You're not even a fan of the show, why are you banging on about it and whinging on about people complaining about it? See how that works? By talking about the outliers and making them bigger than they are about a show you don't watch or care about. Baffling.
5) Being so dismissive of others feelings isn't really progressive now, is it?
Sadly not because we live political times where extreme right groups are giving voices to these losers and with the internet they have more power than before. It may well be a minority, but still way too many considing its 2021.
Ah yes, the ever present yet often elusive forces of the monolithic far-right; all big fans of a left-leaning family show on BBC. *eyeroll*
I don't think you should assume things you have no way of backing up. How do you know they don't watch the show? At the time I approved of the casting, and didn't watch any of her episodes, but that's because I'm not a Doctor Who fan anyway.
Just...drinking in the irony of this statement. Not a shred of self-awareness.
The problem is its the people who are being anti-female doctor who are making it political.
You just pointed a finger at but-hurt fans and said they're all far-right because gender-change lol.
And no, the show has always been political especially in its current run; its 'in the shows DNA' so to speak. The recent run has had a few 'message episodes' just like it always has had'; the difference now is that that these episodes are obvious political messages masquerading as poorly written sci-fi. i.e bad entertainment.
And finally no, the shows marketing was expressly political 'its about time', smashing a literal glass ceiling, etc. Expressly feminist messaging and therefor political.
Whihc is again, weird because within a season it will turn out that this version Doctor wasn't even the first female one (males Jodie much less of a big deal), in fact once upon a time she was a little girl of colour who fell and died and regenerated.
Unfortunately the messaging of the episode seems to be that she kept on dying until she evolved into an old white man who finally had the sense to get the hell out of Gallifrey lol.
The rest of us see it as being the way it should be. Also you can argue that the choice to make the Doctor female was because of the culture?
There is no 'the rest of us'; unless you're including the 'people who don't care about or watch the show but comment on it anyway because left-wing politics'. The rest of us will actually carry on with debate and discussion thanks.
As for the cultural aspect; because many progressives want more female presentation anywhere and everywhere and that's all they care about, not good writing, art or entertainment.
They also claim that there is no so thing as biological sex; so let's make a 'trans Doctor' or whatever (the Timeless child thing makes this explicit by the way). It suits their world view but no, progressives are not 'culture' by any stretch. In fact they are the loudest screeching haters on the internet.
My response to that would be, And that's a bad thing why?
Because the obsession with progressiveism is harming art in general and film/television in particular? That the need to make political points with a TV show has resulted in a well below average show? That more 'diversity' had let to more low quality writers and actors onto the show.
TV and culture should respond to what's happening in the world. Again its called moving with the times.
No it isn't not even remotely. We do not change for the sake of change or for the nebulous idea of 'moving with the times'; we change the things that don't work and make them
better.
This has not happened here which is the reason for all the disappointment, exasperation and yes, anger to a degree.
Why are there 3 companions? Seems like you could save money on actor salary by getting rid of two of them.
Historically the use of companions has been a good way to ease fans into excepting a Doctor character-change; bridging the gap between the different eras as it were. People forget that well before Jodie-era that Doctor changes were always a gamble for the show because fans got used to 'their' Doctor and didn't want that to change into somebody they might not like.
Tom Baker's Doctor was saddled with three companions by the time he regenerated precisely because he was the longest running version up until that point, so the writers wanted familiar faces around him to soften the change to Davison's Doctor (my personal favorite).
In the modern era? No clue why they crammed the show so full. Some say 'forced diversity' and there is an element of that; Tosin Cole's character is seemingly given a disability (dyspraxia) because representation, given that its rarely if ever brought up, and sometimes even contradicted.
But- to be generous tot he writers- I think they wanted the focus to be off the Doctor for a while and on 'small stories' with the companions. There would be no large seasons-long character arcs about timewars or the Doctor getting a wife or shadowy forces targeting the Doctor or whatever.
And many could appreciate that if the small stories were competently told or engaging in any way but they amount to: 1st episode 'you're not my real dad', last episode 'I love you, Dad' or 1st episode 'my wife is dead' and last episode 'I will avenge my dead wife...actually no I won't because the Doctor says killing is bad, so I'll just trap my enemy in eternal torment because morally correct!'
But the next season was nothing but 'the timeless child' mystery and the writers couldn't do that either...
