Doctor Who News Peter Capaldi

Published on August 6th, 2013 | by James Lomond

Moffat: “Women Don’t Want A Female Doctor.”

Well. There we have it! The Moff certainly knows how to set the cat amongst the pigeons. Can open. Worms everywhere: boy worms, girl worms, and worms demanding not to be defined by their gender…

Peter Capaldi IS the Twelfth Doctor Who!

Doctor Who is a progressive show, as we all know, and the current production team has made it very clear that regeneration allows a Time Lord to change both their race (Mels to River Song in Let’s Kill Hitler) and their gender (the Corsair didn’t feel himself ‘or herself’ without his or her trademark tattoo). So as Moffat says it’s ‘narratively possible’ for our beloved hero to emerge from the orange blaze of regeneration as a 1000+ year-old Adventuress. But should he/she?

Moffat believes the time is not right:

“I didn’t feel enough people wanted it. Oddly enough, most people who said they were dead against it – and I know I’ll get into trouble for saying this – were women, saying, ‘No, no, don’t make him a woman.’”

I suspect most people (including me) who have reservations about a female actor in the role, feel somehow we wouldn’t be watching the same character. But, as a self-proclaimed feminist I discussed this with asked me, ‘what does the Doctor do that a woman can’t?’ On reflection, I think I have to agree. If the character is about adventure, intelligence, justice and being a bit bonkers, why can’t that be a woman?

Jamie - The Moonbase

Some say it would change the traditional relationship with the companion. But some of the Doctor’s best friends have been fellas, like Jamie and the Brigadier (though Jamie was in a skirt…).

Steven also said he wanted an older Doctor for the Time Lord’s next incarnation because he couldn’t see anyone replacing Matt Smith’s take:

“I think it’s good that we’ve got a different age, just because I cannot imagine what somebody in their twenties would do with the Doctor after Matt showed us all how to be a twenties Doctor. I don’t know what you would do after that because he was so perfect. You’d have to be an alternative or deliberate contradiction. It wouldn’t work, I don’t think.”

So what do you think – is the Doctor first and foremost a man, or is that sexism that should be left in the last century? And how old should that 1000-and-something-year-old look?


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

About the Author


126 Responses to Moffat: “Women Don’t Want A Female Doctor.”

  1. avatar AutumnWytch says:

    I’m a feminist myself and I didn’t want a woman. I’ve been watching this show for thirty+ years of my life and it just felt wrong – at least right now. Additionally, as a writer, I don’t think you can have your main character suddenly swap genders without some sort of natural story progression to that event, which has not happened. That’s not to say it couldn’t happen, but it’s an event that has to be led up to, I think, not just foisted on the audience out of the blue.

  2. avatar Carmenalex says:

    I bet if they changed a traditionally female character like Wonder Woman and then go ”She’s been a woman long enough, lets make her a man” the very same people who would change the Doctors sex into a woman would have a hissy fit. Could the Doctor be played by a woman? Yes. But it would be a change for just the sake of it. I find it FAR more empowering if a woman would do what Moffat does and just create her own show with a great story and a strong representation of a woman….rather than just whine and try to change an existing show. I am a woman, I consider myself a feminist…but I prefer my Doctor male, but would watch the show anyway if it where female, even if it would make less sense…as much sense as casting a man to play Xmen’s Storm.

    • avatar Taz says:

      While I see your point your analogy is is not a solid one…Wonder Women or Princess Diana is from a race of women warriors based in Greek Mythology and in some connotations she gained her status as champion of the amazons thereby getting all the spoils of the bracelets, tiara and lasso from that distinction and if there were any Amazon men they would not be allowed to compete for those items and wouldn’t have her natural Amazon abilities to go with, so he wouldn’t truly be the definition of Wonder Woman….now I would admit that someone of great strength and similar abilities (limited telepathy,, super breath, vast knowledge of languages and Amazon training they could still those items from her and use them that would change the character all together…so having that fact all ready part of her back story changes it from “Doctor Who” because they have already been statements (9) I could have no head or two heads (10) discussing how he had no very little idea how he would turn out after regeneration and (11) discussing the Corsair another Time Lord being a female on several of their regenerations “and what a bad girl she was” allows for more grey area in their casting…and Marvel Comics has a Wonder Man, but he has different origin story all together…..

  3. avatar lee moone says:

    I don’t want a woman Dr either. That doesn’t make me or Moffat sexist. Create a different character or use an old female Time lord. Its the way I feel if someone did a reboot of Marple or Zeena or DCI Jane Tennis on and turned them into a man. Kirk or either modern Sherlock could have been a woman in the reboot but these are established characters. I think they can end up being a PC gimmick, the same way that the US Watson is. These are just my opinions, but I just like my heroes of both sexes (all of the above) the way they have been created.

    • avatar zarbisupremo says:

      We had a female Kirk in the final episode of the original series, oh and there’s Janeway, Kirk with a bun on her head. Wasn’t there a male version of Xena that went by the name Hercules ? ;-)

  4. avatar rickjlundeen says:

    I get so tired of the “feminist” aspect of this. It’s bull-headed thinking and I do think it does a disservice to women in general. To make the Doctor a woman just for the sake of making the character a woman is an insult to women, I feel. Almost like we’re “doing them a favor” or they have something to prove. Next time the Doctor is headed for regeneration, throw open the gates and if women want to audition, let them. If there’s a woman who absolutely nails it during the audition, sign her up! Although don’t really see Moffat even allowing it, I’d wager the next showrunner may see things a bit differently.

    But in the meantime, let’s appreciate some of truly awesome female characters and Time Ladies we’ve sen in the past. The Romana’s, the Rani, River Song, Jenny—who’s still out there and could also regenerate once again and could be a valued addition to the show. Lots of possibilities.

    But sadly, whatever they do, there’ll be complaints.

    • avatar FrancoPabloDiablo says:

      Why would the next showrunner see things differently? Will they have a hidden agenda to sabotage the show?

      • avatar rickjlundeen says:

        The next showrunner may think differently about letting women into the audition process. At the moment, I don’t *think* Moffat was looking at women to play the role when Smith auditioned. I could be wrong but he seems dead set against the idea.

        • avatar FrancoPabloDiablo says:

          God help us when a showrunner actively seeks out or even considers a woman to play The Doctor. Moffatt hasn’t looked for a female lead because he knows the show, knows the character and (most importantly) isn’t stupid.

          • avatar zarbisupremo says:

            Let’s hope the BBC don’t give the showrunner’s job to someone like Harriet Harman, eh ?

        • avatar Bob James says:

          The next showrunner will be hired by the BBC, and it’s going to be a matter of where the BBC stands on this issue. I don’t think that the BBC would risk destroying this franchise to cater to the whims of the moment of an illogical minority, albeit a very vocal one, a minority that would only be satisfied in the short term anyway. They have to think about keeping Doctor Who alive and thriving well into the next 50 years. The reality of the big picture for this fantasy show. I’ll put it out there straight and plain. The BBC will never advocate or allow a woman to be cast as the Doctor. They haven’t in all this time, and they’re not going to risk the future, by doing so in the future. This was never really an issue, nor will it ever be. It is and was, and probably will be a hot button topic of debate and discussion within Doctor Who fandom. And that is all.

          • avatar rickjlundeen says:

            Absolutely right. They’re taking a risk each time the Doctor regenerates at all. I think we’ve been extraordinarily lucky so far by having 11 lead actors who’ve been able to pull it off so well. I really don’t see the Beeb increasing the risk factor exponentially by changing the lead character’s sex just at the whim of a select few.

    • avatar Mary1 says:

      Hey, let women decide what is insulting to women. That said, is it women actually not wanting a female Doctor or is it the fangirls wo only want someone to lust after?

      ‘…and Time Ladies weve seen in the past. The Romanas, the Rani ..Jenny…could be a valued addition to the show.’

      Sure. When is the question.

      • avatar rickjlundeen says:

        Well, I did mention River as well and I think she’s pretty *currently* a valuable addition to the show. Or at least she was all the way up to The Name of the Doctor, not to mention a fantastic character and about as close to a female version of the Doctor as there ever has been.

  5. For me it’s never really a question of why shouldn’t it be but would it make sense? Yes I appreciate that the Doctor is a fictional character in a show about monsters and time travel so it shouldn’t matter and anything goes……and of course if it happened I’d never leave my favourite show (hell I lwatched it even when Time and the Rani was on!)…but…the Doctor’s attitude has always been quite ‘laddish’. A fear of commitment, obsessed with gadgets, won’t grow-up…all traits (not exclusive to but) mostly associated with males.

  6. avatar Barry says:

    I really like the US Watson. I don’t normally watch detective shows or police procedurals or whatever but I watched it cos I like Sherlock Holmes and it works for me. Most of the other roles that have been talked about are not regenerating aliens and so comparing the doctor to Kirk, Marple, Zena or the Queen doesn’t seem relevant. When Battlestar Galactica’s Starbuck was recast as a woman in the reboot she was amazing. I preferred the original male Lieutenant Green in Captain Scarlet though. :>)

    Still, if it has to be another white man (statistically, what are the odds?) it couldn’t have been much better than Peter Capaldi. Go Dr Pete!

    • avatar Chris says:

      I also like Lucy Liu as Watson, but there can be a lot of versions of that. I do like Moffat’s version A LOT better though. But there is just one Doctor Who show. Also, I have not read all the Sherlock Holmes books and people more well read on it could have more reasons to think its a bad idea, but for the light fan, I think she is great as well.

      I think a female Doctor however is a horrible idea. I would love to see a Romana-type Timelord spin-off, but trying to force a gender change in the character for feminism’s sake is a very bad idea IMO.

      Also, the viewpoint of having a female Doctor is more politically correct, so you will see that opinion advertised more than you will the counter, regardless if it is acually a good idea or not.

      • avatar Barry says:

        I must say it annoys me when people insist on seeing everything in terms of political correctness when you say it would nice for something different explored. I don’t see why a character who can regenerate into any race and any gender always ends up as a white male. Its like having a blue box that can take you anywhere in space and time that only goes to contemporary London. What’s the point?

  7. avatar FrancoPabloDiablo says:

    The Doctor is a man – simple as that. I’m in no way sexist. In fact both my wife and daughter are female and they are the two greatest people I know. My daughter actually called the idea of a woman Doctor ‘silly’. You can’t argue with the mind and logic of a 6 year old! P.S. we are all excited about Peter Capaldi’s portrayal next year!

    • avatar rickjlundeen says:

      Agreed! :)

    • avatar TonyS says:

      Do I detect the influence of Sir Humphrey Appleby?

  8. avatar Jim says:

    I’ll tell ya what…. Let’s save the female for the next American version.

    The character of the Doctor is not a gender equality opportunity! If that is the case, then he should also be a paraplegic incarnation, and one that is morbidly obese. Those folks would deserve representation too!!

    • avatar TonyS says:

      I’m in favour of a morbidly obese Doctor. That way, I would stand a chance of getting the part.

  9. avatar lozzer says:

    I taught a drama class the other day for youngsters, we played some games and acted out little scenes where they had to play both sexes – I have have to say the boys really reluctant to play girls, whereas the girls were a bit more mature about it. The boys were also not that keen on stories where the lead characters were girls – again, the girls were more mature. Where am I going with this you might ask… well, I don’t think a 6 year old boy would understand why his favourite character had switched to a girl, and I honestly think it could be quite a traumatic experience for a youngster – It would be traumatic for me… Personally, I think I’d lose my enthusiasm for the show – in fact, I’d be so annoyed I know I would. Just knowing it will probably happen has made me stop buying DVD’s and fan related products – I just can’t commit to something that might upset me so much – I’ll keep watching, I can’t wait to see Peter Capaldi, but I’m just going to enjoy it without getting too involved from now on. I don’t know why the female aspect had to be taken on board, surely they could have created a different show, we’ve had Batwoman, The Bionic Woman, Spiderwoman, She-Ra and many, many more – none of them felt the need to alter the original characters sex. Why not have a female centered time lord show that isn’t Doctor Who?

    And ditto, whenever anyone mentions the Doctor changing sex in front of female fans I know, they get really pissed off. It’s a tricky one – Doctor who fans are at all out war over the subject – it’s getting nasty out there.

    • avatar Philip Bates says:

      I don’t want a female Doctor – just because it wouldn’t feel right. Doctor Who is about change, sure, but that’s too much change.

      We’ve never actually seen one gender change in Time Lords; it’s just been cheekily alluded to.

      I don’t know one person who wants the Doctor to become a woman – apart from Neil Gaiman, for some strange reason.

    • avatar leosapiens says:

      oh, it’s not that the girls are “more mature” about it. it’s that society in general still puts into children’s minds the fact that being a boy is an upgrade to being a girl, and the other way around is a serious downgrade. boys who act “sissy” or “girly” will be ever so slightly kicked for it (sometimes seriously), while girls get way more freedom these days to go into “manly” traits.

      it’s a win, of course, as now women are not forbidden by society to strive up into “male” positions, but it’s still not an equal world.

      which is why boys can’t bear the thought of turning or acting “female” while girls take the idea of being a boy way better.

  10. avatar GallifreyanFallenAngel says:

    To me, we need to make leading female characters, not turn one into a female character. Besides, even if a woman were cast, that doesn’t mean she’s going to be a great Doctor. I don’t see the point in making a long established male character a woman. So, I think that if feminists want a female Doctor, they should really look at the classic series. There are several Time Ladies: Romana, Flavia, Rani, Thalia, and questionably, Susan (though she’s likely just Gallifreyan). There are plenty of female Time Lords. I don’t see the point in making them regenerate into men. If the original Doctor were a woman, would there be men wanting to make the Doctor a male? I just want this silly debate put to an end and enjoy Peter Capaldi’s Doctor.

    • avatar Mary1 says:

      There are several Time Ladies: Romana, Flavia, Rani, Thalia, and questionably, Susan.


      And when is the last time we have *seen* any of them on the show? I’m not for or against the idea of the Doctor changing sex but let’s be realistic; we shouldn’t have to go back the original show to if we want to see them. Why not bring some of them back to the new series?

      • avatar rickjlundeen says:

        Again, I’d bring up River Song. Half human, half Time Lord, a fascinating character, a more well rounded and fleshed out character—a LOT better written all in all than any past Time Ladies. And River is an excellent example of creating a whole new female character that can match the Doctor pace for pace.

      • avatar Bob James says:

        Ever since the reveal of the Master’s use of the Chameleon Arch to flee the Time War, it has become increasingly difficult for me to accept that no other Time Lords managed to escape, and are “out there” somewhere. I simply can’t believe that others as dedicated to their own self preservation as the Rani, or the Meddling Monk wouldn’t have found a way to escape and conceal themselves. Depending on what Moffat considers or allows as canon, Romana was the Lord High President of Gallifrey for a considerable time at least up until the War. RTD seemed to affirm this in a short story he wrote for the first Doctor Who annual (released around early early 2006, or late 2005) in which he related events that took place shortly before the War broke out. Later we see Rassilon in charge. Did Romana also escape? There were resurrections going on left and right, so even if she perished, could she have returned and also escaped? There’s a lot of ways that any of these characters can return, and I hope they do at some point. I mean, reintroducing them or introducing them for the first time to viewers unfamiliar with them would be at least as simple as creating a whole other previously unknown and unseen Doctor with John Hurt. I’ve never really bought into the Doctor being the “Last Of The Time Lords”. If some of the Daleks found a way to escape and survive, surely some of the Time Lords must have did as well.

    • avatar lee moone says:

      This comment hits the nail on the head. Yep that’s sums it up for me. Many thanks :)

    • avatar lee moone says:

      Fallen Angles comment is the one I agree with, oops a mistake down below. Dunno what happened there!

    • avatar AlexMW says:

      I agree that we should have more female leads. Think about it: if galifrey is coming back, which seems extremely likely at this point, they can introduce a bunch of female (and gender changing) time lords. We shouldn’t force a gender change on the doctor. It isn’t about women *not* being able to fulfill the role. It’s about having the perfect fit. As has been stated in other posts, maybe in the future they can give us a female doctor; however, they need to build up to and plan for it. The change shouldn’t be to appease anyone. It should be because the time is ripe and the fan base is ready. Obviously, from these posts, the majority of the fan base is *not* ready. On a different point, why cant we have a gay or bisexual doctor? i think *that* would be quite interesting. It would open up more room for male and female companions. Because almost all of the doctor’s companions have been female. Maybe we could switch that up a bit also. It could also prepare the fan base for a female doctor! Btw I’m a woman, feminist, and I’m bisexual!

  11. Timelords don’t change sex. Its a throwaway line in one story and has no basis in the rest of the show’s hstory.

  12. avatar Spider-pope says:

    For the record i don’t want a female Doctor either. If you want a strong role model for women, create one. Don’t co-opt an existing male one.

  13. avatar rickjlundeen says:

    Yeah, it seems like 98% of the fans want the Doctor to remain a man and really, and that should be the end of it. There’d be none of this discussion if JNT hadn’t introducing the idea over 30 years ago as a joke. Fans have never let it go and the media’s even worse because they always feel the need to bring it up *every* time there’s a regen. I’m more than happy to forget all about it and enjoy the 50th special and the Christmas special and then Capaldi. Bring on #12!

  14. avatar FrancoPabloDiablo says:

    Sadly the few die-hard feminist militants that make this noise are hard to shut up. God forbid they focus their attention on a good cause!

  15. Just checked the date on the screen and its definitely 2013 and not 1913 , which is where most of these comments seem to have timeslipped from..reminds me of all the men who proclaimed that most women did not want the vote, it was only a shrill minority who were stirring things up .. its the 21st century, for heaven’s sake ..I’ve been watching since 1963 and would have no problem with a woman Doctor.. we had Romana as a Time Lady as long ago as 1978 and Mary Tamm and Lalla Ward were great in the role.

    • avatar rickjlundeen says:

      Both Romanas WERE great. River song is great. Great great female characters. You may as well say that they should all have been played by men, as say the Doctor should be a woman. Let the female characters be female and the male characters be male. I really don’t need to see a lot of character gender-switching on a whim and yeah, that really would be confusing for a lot of kids watching the show. The whole thing’s quite a bit different than women getting the right to vote. I don’t think we’re throwbacks to an unenlightened time simply because we don’t kneel down before each and every PC campaign, no matter how small.

    • avatar Spider-pope says:

      So your argument is that we should fundamentally change a character…because they’ve proven they can invent great new female characters.

      See your accusations of misogyny would hold water if anyone had said we don’t want a strong female character in sci-fi. I think it’s blatantly clear that we do. We just don’t want to lose one of the few positive, non violent role models for boys in the progress.

      Or do you think it’s not possible to create an interesting original female character?

      • avatar Mary1 says:

        Oh it is *certainly* possible to create an interesting original female character. Selling one is another thing entirely. It always comes down to T&A. Would Buffy have sold if she weren’t a cute young thing? I’m guessing not.

        • avatar Taz says:

          I think that Sigourney Weaver as Ripley in the Alien saga is a better example of a strong independent women or Linda Hamilton in Terminator I & II (while both attractive) without the use of T&A as opposed to “Buffy” which the rational there was to take the stereotypical image of a blond cheerleader and turn it on it’s ear by making her the defender of good vs evil

          • avatar zarbisupremo says:

            Sheesh ! Did any of you actually watch Buffy ? Since when was she a cheerleader ? I always thought it was the characterisation and witty dialogue that was the key to its success.

          • avatar Taz says:

            Buffy the television show took place after her 1st battle the “Buffy” the movie she was a cheerleader (played by Kristy Swanson she was pretty much Cordelia at her old school) she claimed her birth right as a Slayer before moving to Sunnydale….Giles was her second watcher her fist was played by Donald Southerland…both were written by Joss Whedon who was displeased with how the movie turned out, he thought there was too much studio interference….

        • avatar Bob James says:

          The sexual objectification that takes place with how a good number of female characters are presented is a reality. But that still isn’t a credible reason for turning male characters into female characters. I personally think a great actress in a solidly written role can overcome the “cute young thing” stereotype. It’s been done by some great actresses, and perhaps, though I’m sure it’s daunting to one’s career as well as one’s income, more actresses need to stay well clear of roles that cast them in that light. And as a Buffy fan who loved Sarah Michelle Gellar’s performance, I do happen to think things might have been made even more interesting if Buffy’s titular character had been someone, let us say, less conventionally attractive. And also in the interest of fairness to Joss Whedon, when he concluded Buffy’s saga (at least on television), and the Slayer powers were passed on to all the potential Slayers, not all of them were “cute young things”.

          • Well said, Bob.

        • avatar Taz says:

          Buffy the television show took place after her 1st battle the “Buffy” the movie she was a cheerleader (played by Kristy Swanson she was pretty much Cordelia at her old school) she claimed her birth right as a Slayer before moving to Sunnydale….Giles was her second watcher her fist was played by Donald Southerland…both were written by Joss Whedon who was displeased with how the movie turned out, he thought there was too much studio interference….

          • avatar Taz says:

            sorry it posted twice….

  16. I hope Dr. Quinn medicine woman is recast as a man in the upcoming reboot.

    • avatar Bob James says:

      Jason Statham would be the perfect choice for that part.

  17. avatar Taz says:

    So sad…..Doctor Who is about the impossible being possible and it wasn’t just in one show that they discussed the Doctor could come back as anything…the 9th Doctor before his regeneration discussed with Rose the fact that he could come back with 2 heads or no heads….once again people use their fear of change and fear of the role of females and try to endear them to a show that has not set itself up to follow those rules…..please tell me were in Doctor Who was it ever stated that it had to be male…please list the episode and year that it stated that it had to be a White British Male…the beauty of Doctor Who is at any time anyone could show up and be the Doctor or a Companion if their motives were good and they had a sense of adventure…..the fact that you have placed yourself in a box smaller on the inside and will not accept anything new means you can’t fly away in the Tardis, because you are not yet ready for adventure and new experiences

    • “you have placed yourself in a box smaller on the inside” lovely comment..completely agree with Taz

    • avatar Spider-pope says:

      I assume you’re in favour of Mr Marple and DCI John Tennyson then?

      How about making a new, strong female character, one that can establish a 50 year legacy of their own. Or can a female character only be successful with 50 years backhistory as a man?

      • avatar Taz says:

        No, what I am in favor of is the best person for the job and allowing “Doctor Who” to be the best show that it can possible be and not allow for individuals to try and hamper it by placing their own limitations on it…what I would love is for people to see the show for the endless ways it is written or could be written or for people to realize that the Doctor is here to help teach us to think outside the basic prejudging of our on insecurities and embrace the wonders of discoveries…..I grew up in a family of strong inspiring women some who own their own companies and some who are teachers and believe that those things directly relate to the Doctor and can not sit here in 2013 and use such feeble excuses as “that is the way it has always been done” or “will someone please think of the children”……and for the Record the “Doctor” is not a man… he is male…man equates to Human and the Doctor is from Galifrey a place which places logic and intelligence above our emotional response, so who’s to say they see females as different or subservient in any way (so would they see regenerating into a female as so different) and I’m still waiting on examples of when “Doctor Who” the show said that they would always morph into a White British Male…examples please, because I have given examples of the show saying that’s not the case

        • avatar TonyS says:

          If I have followed correctly, you have given one example where the Doctor says he doesn’t know what he is going to turn into. The issue of gender is not mentioned in that exchange at all. The one and only mention of Time Lords changing gender is the description of the Corsair in “The Doctor’s Wife”. I cannot give you examples from the show where it is stated that the Doctor is male and always will be male. I suspect there are none. That does not in any way diminish the argument.

          This whole debate stems from a ‘joke’ made by John Nathan Turner and a far from happy Tom Baker, when it was announced that he was leaving the show.

          Oh. There is one example of the Doctor turning into a woman. “The Curse of Fatal Death”. Are we considering that canon now?

          • avatar Taz says:

            I would disagree about it not diminishing the argument…(9′s) statement was more in line that the Doctor had no idea what would lie on the other side of Regeneration and anything was possible and I would think that the mere mention by the show itself would quell this debate, but one side is using the argument that it has always been that way and should continue as such and the show has stated otherwise, so that would make one side of the debate personal preference and not true to the ideals set up by “Doctor Who” the series, but once is happen stance and they have now given three examples and yet people still resist

          • avatar TonyS says:

            The Ninth’s Doctor’s statement is neutral and neither adds to or detracts from the argument. The other mention is “The Doctor’s Wife” and I agree it is more specific. It is not however conclusive. By ‘three times@ do I take it that you ARE including “The Curse of Fatal Death” as canon?

          • avatar Taz says:

            I did go back and watch “The Curse of the Fatal Flaw” after you mentioned it (thanks by the way) and state that all though it was a parody it did hold true too a lot of the Doctor’s mythology and it does in my opinion hold some semblance to what I think is actually going to occur (and that’s the fact that 13 will be female)…but I would have to agree with your assessment that it is inconclusive and can’t go as far to say it’s canon. With that said however Moffat has shown a tendency too not throw away lines (and he wrote the Fatal Flaw) and in the episode “The Doctors Wife” having the Doctor show so much excitement in giving that line before being emotionally crushed….stayed with me for a while and to have had Neil Gaimen write it and he maybe in line to be the next show runner means something to me and I just don’t like it when people try to put barriers on a show that has taught me that anything is possible, when in my opinion they have made a point in saying that’s not the case….but well debated on your part and I have learned a few things so for that I am grateful

          • avatar Taz says:

            Fatal Death….not Flaw….sorry!!!!

          • avatar TonyS says:

            Taz, you make your points well and it is a pleasure to exchange views with you.

          • avatar Taz says:

            Agreed!!!!! it was an absolute pleasure on this end and I feel as though “Doctor Who” the television show brings in such a well educated and well rounded view of different ideas that debates such as these can be used to help bring people together and offer spirited debate and any time that occurs in the words of (9) is “Fantastic”

          • avatar TonyS says:

            One of the truly enjoyable things about this website is that, in the vast majority of cases, participants make their points clearly and respectfully. That’s why I keep coming back here.

        • avatar Spider-pope says:

          Excuse me, but kindly take your projections of misogyny elsewhere. Show me a single occasion where i have said a female is “different or subservient”.

          I am all in favour of a female lead characters. I am all in favour of strong female characters. I am all in favour of a strong, female character as the lead of a science fiction show.

          What i am not in favour of is taking away a male role model to satisfy a quota or to make self declared champions of feminism feel like they have accomplished something.

          I can count on one hand the number of male, positive role models that don’t use violence to solve their problems, that don’t sleep with anything with a pulse, that make it clear that using your brain is the best way to solve a problem, that make it clear that it is okay for men to be emotional and care what happens to people.
          It is a role model that is needed.

          I am all in favour of a female role model offering the same, but make your own.
          Create something to fill the Sarah Jane Smith shaped void in television. There is no need at all to co-opt a male one, and by doing so you are all but declaring that a female character can’t stand on her own two feet unless she has a man set her up.

          • avatar Taz says:

            If you go back and read what I wrote you will see that I was saying that from the point of view of those from Galifrey. I am still waiting on someone to show me an example of the Doctor having to stay Male and have yet to see one and for a show that is all about using the brain to solve an argument I find this debate to be the exact opposite….with emotion ruling the day…but saying there are no Male role models who display those traits is not really that true, now is it…Fox Mulder….Harry Potter…Sherlock Holmes…Bill Cosby…Andy Griffith….Matlock…Ironside…Rupert Giles..etc…etc… what I can’t understand is this Fear of a female or minority and what they may bring to the role and in my humble opinion “Doctor Who” the television show is about us putting aside our fear of change or differences and realizing the beauty in embracing the unknown and the arguments I see here are the exact opposite and detail all of our petty fear in change and our unhealthy obsession with holding on to antiquated ideas

          • avatar Spider-pope says:

            To address Taz below, as it won’t string further:
            Once again, how dare you suggest that those not wanting a female Doctor are afraid of women, or that we are racist and don’t want a “minority” lead.
            If you cannot make your argument without accusing others, then don’t make it.

            As for your list of supposed role models: Firstly, how many kids do you know who watch TV shows from the ’70s, ’80′s and ’90s? Secondly lets look at them.
            Fox Mulder – usually kills anything strange and out of the ordinary.
            Bill Cosby – hasn’t been on UK tv for decades.
            Andy Griffith – As far as i know, has never been on UK tv.
            Matlock – Ditto
            Ironside – Last on in the nineties
            Rupert Giles – Kills daemons.

            Like i said, i can count on one hand the number of non-violent, non-sexual, non-sports based role models for boys.

            The reason why you “can’t understand this fear” is because it doesn’t exist. You are projecting and making offensive accusations against those who simply disagree with taking a character and swapping his gender for no good reason.

            If you want to actually do something for women’s rights, join me in donating money to shelters for abused women, to charities tackling the heinous crimes of the sex trade, to raising awareness of the abuse of women in certain religions.

            Or you can try to salve your own misplaced feelings of guilt by demanding an arbitrary change to a television character, whilst projecting onto those who don’t agree.

          • avatar Taz says:

            Spider-Pope I never played the race card or the gender card and for you too constantly try and attribute that to me is quite unfair….I think I was very clear in my statement that I don’t consider “Doctor Who” as a character to be a man (because he is not Human and not subject to our definition of the term) the character is Galifryian so right now he his male in the context in which we see the character…the issue I have with your statements is the fact that it is based on personal feelings and not the facts that have been set-up by the show itself and I have actually giving several examples…I will admit that they may be somewhat cryptic and ambiguous…which is why I asked for examples from the show stating that it was always going to be a male, British or white….and have yet to receive any, so if you have examples of the show making that statement I would love to see them…but I feel as though you have taken on a course of misdirection, by saying I called you a misogynist, or a racist…I never said I needed the Doctor to be anything other then what the show runners choose….I just don’t believe it has to fit a certain criteria, that the Doctor can be anyone and if you have other information from the show to dispute that I would love to see it and that’s what I’ve asked for several times…”Doctor Who” is about using the logic and the brain wrapped in Human compassion to give balance and all I’m asking for balance in your argument.

          • avatar Spider-pope says:

            “this Fear of a female or minority ”
            “fear of the role of females”

            No, you’ve not inferred those who don’t agree with you are misogynists or racists at all…

          • avatar Taz says:

            Fear… indicating the unknown quantities of how it would effect the direction of the show, but if my statement left any reason for one to believe I was name calling then for that I apologize, however you have still not answered my original thesis and that is…I believe that your statements are ones of personal choice and not rooted in the actual ideology of the show and “Doctor Who” is a show about us moving beyond our preconceptions of others who are different (or alien) and generating a greater truth that understanding and logical assertions of our differences and thinking those through should rule the day

      • avatar zarbisupremo says:

        I’d sell my soul to see DCI Jeanette Hunt.

    • avatar Bob James says:

      I was unaware that affirming the logical importance of gender in the context of identity put one in any kind of “box smaller on the inside”. Yes Doctor Who is a television show, and yes he is an alien who can regenerate into other species, but we’ve never been given any evidence that gender doesn’t play the same crucial role in the identity of Gallifreyans, as it does in human beings. The Corsair was clearly a trangender individual for whom a choice of gender in the regeneration process was an option. The Doctor’s description of the Corsair more than merely suggested that the Corsair identitified with both genders. This has never even been remotely in evidence in regards to the Doctor.

      • avatar Taz says:

        Transgender by your definition… the Human definition and you are correct Sir it may hold true on Galifrey, but what’s too say that isn’t the majority thinking on Galifrey in the 11th Doctor “The Doctors Wife” discussing the Corsair he was very matter of fact about the whole situation, as if it shouldn’t have been an issue and even took slight delight in what a “bad girl” she was during certain regeneration…my thought is they have no control over the regeneration as pointed out by “9″ two heads…or no head……so that line of thinking would lead one to believe that they don’t or would have at least gotten over a stated preference, because it’s something they can’t control (as long as it’s not Ginger…hahahahahaha….Brilliant!!!!!)…..I’m not saying I’m right I could be wrong which is why I’ve been asking for examples that state the Doctor has to be White British Male…and don’t get me wrong I have loved each and every Doctor (even Paul McGann, but I can not excuse Eric Roberts as the Master…..Fox what were you thinking…just joking I found him intriguing in a I can’t watch this, but I have too watch it sort of way), because they all bring their own sense of the character to their performance and that only helps build the mythology

        • avatar zarbisupremo says:

          I thought the 2 heads thing signified that he was worried that he’d come back as Zaphod Beeblebrox.

          • avatar Taz says:

            Excellent “Hitchhiker’s Guide” reference and one would be a full think that the Doctor wouldn’t have checked that book out at some time, so maybe I am reading too much into it….hahahahahahahaha

  18. avatar Bob James says:

    How about we just stop this silly debate for awhile. The new Doctor has been cast, and we have much to look forward to in the remainder of the Anniversary year, and into the next. We have much to appreciate and be grateful for. Let’s leave it alone, and move on. We’re going to have plenty to talk about in the coming months and years. It was time to let this go a long time ago, so let us do just that.

    • avatar Al says:

      Hear, hear. And that goes for those miffed that a non-caucasian wasn’t cast too. Hopefully this will put it to bed for a few years and we can just relax and enjoy the show.

  19. avatar Laz says:

    I most definitely want the next Doctor to be a woman (As long as she’s a good actress blah blah blah… usual stuff.)

    But the Moff is right, I’ve been saying that I’d love a woman to be the Doctor for a few months now and most of the “NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!”s came from women.

    I do hope he (or whoever will be in his place) won’t care about what people thing, next time, and choose a woman (if he wants to)

  20. avatar matthewstott says:

    A Doctor Who isn’t a skinny, white bloke? Sure, if that happens to be the right actor for the job when it comes up; but turning him into a woman? Not as keen. He’s a man. If those in charge went for it, then I’d give it a chance and hope it worked, but really, how about creating original great female characters, rather than trying to make some sort of point with what has always been a male character? If Tilda Swinton, say, had strode out on Sunday, I’d have definitely given it a chance and trusted they knew what they were doing, but I don’t really see why it would need to be done. It does irk me that it seems to be becoming an ever greater race & gender issue each time a regeneration is mooted; it’s a telly role, stop trying to make some sort of point and pick the right person for the job.

  21. avatar Tomer Feiner says:

    It’s not a skirt, it’s a kilt!

  22. avatar Al says:

    It’s not sexism to maintain the gender of a character created as a male. You don’t see women being cast as James Bond, either. Or Sherlock Holmes. When they wanted a female Superman they created a new character. Such should be the case with the Doctor. All the Corsair thing established is that Time Lords have an LBGT element, specifically the T part, which is fine. I’d rather see someone cast as the Corsair first. While a female Doctor would be an interesting novelty, I wouldn’t be able to accept it because it would mean that Susan, Romana and the Rani, all played by lovely and (pardon the word) sexy actresses, could one day regenerate and end up looking like Ron “The Hedgehog” Jeremy. Similarly, all the female (and gay male) fans who fell in love with David Tennant or Tom Baker or Matt Smith – and will likely do same with Peter Capaldi – would have to contend with the fact that the character they fell in love with has fallen out of their interest zone. John Barrowman is right – they could just regenerate “her” if it didn’t work out. But we saw with Colin Baker how mishandling the character (in his case in the writing/costuming arena) dealt the original series a mortal blow; it just took a few years for it to die.

  23. avatar Mugen Pharoah says:

    I’ve been disappointed with a lot of online fan’s reactions to the merest suggestion of a female doctor.

    A female doctor is inevitable, it will happen one day and I hope that a lot of fans will have changed their minds by then and be on the right side of history…. When future Who historians look over the online vitriol in blogs and forums they will look on in bafflement and even disgust.

    Would the Doctor object to becoming female? No. The Doctor believes in fairness and operates without prejudice.

    I’m disappointed in Moffat being too afraid of fan opinion. He doesn’t make the show for fans. It’s for everyone – it’s not a niche show. What next get Ian Levine on the production team like JNT? We all know how pandering to fans went.

    • avatar lee moone says:

      I don’t know why some people are disappointed about the fan reaction of the suggestion that The Dr could be a woman. If that’s what they feel that’s OK, Dr Who means something to us all. We don’t have to want a female in the role if we don’t want to. Its about choice and how we see our hero. No one is sexist for wanting a male Dr and it’s silly to even suggest that. My wife said she wouldn’t like a female Dr. And she’s a strong liberated women. Personally I think The Dr is a great role model for boys and gets away from the Shoot-em up Hero’s that are a plenty on TV. That who I identified with and wanted to be when I was a boy. Blimey, I bet Moffat wishes he’d never let that throwaway line stay in ‘The Drs Wife’ as it’s put him in a difficult situation ;)

      • avatar Mugen Pharoah says:

        Let’s get a few things straight – one I am absolutely 100% behind Capaldi’s casting and I think he is a fantastic choice for the Doctor. I get exactly what the Moff is saying — the time was right…when an actor of Capaldi’s calibre actively expresses an interest in the part you would be mad not to hand over the TARDIS keys. I am in no way disappointed he’s a brilliant choice.

        Considering Doctor Who is about the fantastic; the impossible, approaching the universe with an open mind I just don’t understand why fans cannot even entertain for the slightest second the notion of a female Doctor. Some people cite canonical reasons. They say things like Oh the Corsair was deliberatley transgender. This makes no difference.

        If Doctor Who was bound by canon and what had gone before, you would have no Daleks (going against Sydney Newman’s no BEM’s rule), no regeneration into the Second Doctor. No UNIT. No Deadly Assassin. No youthful Fifth Doctor. No Valeyard, no Remembrance of the Daleks (it rips up established Dalek continuity), no half-human Doctor (OK bad example – but a potential seismic canon shift totally ignored [for the better!]), no Northern Doctor in a series with real emotional punch, no resurrection of the Master, no marriage to River Song. The series is marked by change and constant reinvention.

        Doctor Who is not the same show as it was in 1963. Nor is it the same show as it was in 2005. Can you imagine an openly bisexual companion on board with Hartnell?

        What is the the core of Doctor Who? What’s been there from the start, that’s with us now? The TARDIS? Yes, but Season 7 it barely featured and it’s a belter. Companions, yes companions! OK but what about the Deadly Assassin or Waters of Mars? No companions and they’re both fab. Daleks? Well Nation took them off to America and the Troughton era survived without them. Can people really say that an essential part of Doctor Who is that he’s a white male? I think the Doctor would be horrified.

        Doctor Who will outlive all of us.

        There is an infinity of Doctors waiting out there for us in the future. Non-white Doctor…it’s going to happen…female Doctor…it’s going to happen, disabled Doctor….they are all out there. Fans may as well get used to the idea. Look, if we are slaves to canon and continuity this poses are far greater threat than a female Doctor. Look at the Star Wars universe. It’s ruined. I’m not as much a prequel hater as the fact that every last nook and creative alley is charted. You can find out the name and species of every alien in the Mos Eisley cantina. Wasn’t it better when your imagination was allowed to wander that universe instead of everything being told to you? We cannot allow slavish adherence to ‘what’s gone before’ to limit and restrict Doctor Who in the same way. Canon does not matter and should never exist in the minds of the programme makers. Just look at the Hinchcliffe era!

        The references to the Corsair make no difference. If they weren’t there it wouldn’t matter. The Doctor speculates he’s female in the Eleventh Hour but I don’t need that reference either to say he could or should become female. The possibility is there.

        Look at the media’s presentation of transgender people. Maybe it would help if young boys could see a male character regenerate into a female. Maybe a female Doctor would give girls a positive role model instead of passive princesses or the like. Girls could consider something different for toys instead of the sea of pink on the toy shelves, toys that teach girls to aspire to nothing beyond fame, vanity, and a marginalised role in society.

        If a woman had been announced on Sunday then all I wish is that anti-femDoc fans would have given her a chance. After all, it’s what the Doctor would do.

      • avatar lozzer says:

        The problem is, if you don’t agree with the PC brigade they label you sexist, homophobic or racist. The Doctor is a man but for some reason that’s not enough for them. If the Doctors Wife episode can so often be quoted to prove otherwise then this clip can be used to counter with –

  24. avatar Ian K says:

    I think that what many fans see is that Doctor Who is a continuing narrative. That all TV versions are versions of the one story. There are of course other version of Doctor Who i.e. in books, audios, films etc. Perhaps we should have a film version called Doctor Who where the lead is played by an actress? But like the 2 Peter Cushing films that is not part of the ongoing narrative of Doctor Who which has been ongoing now for almost 50 years. With many of the TV episodes from the past being available – and those not available on DVD – being accessible in other forms i.e. books – many people see the current TV series as being just like a chapter in a long novel. Because of that it can be difficult to imagine the title character being female when the character has been male for so long . It is very rare for main characters to change gender like that in the middle of a story – especially a story intended for both children or adults. Talking about the female Doctor Watson or a female version of Lear is not the same as these are different versions of the same story and exist in their own separate realities. I don’t think that many productions have say male characters being played by actresses midway through the narrative or vice versa. As regards the programme on television A Doctor from a parallel universe who is female would be fine. She would be a new character with the qualities of the Doctor from our universe. For many years the TV show Taggart did not feature a character called Taggart so Doctor Who could be a series about a time travelling alien who is female but who is not the same character whom we first met in An Unearthly Child. When Doctor Who originally started the Doctor was after all very much an antihero and not really the leading man/woman. For those who want a female Doctor in the series though the question would be what happened after that actress left? Would the Doctor from then on always be a female or would she change back? Do people who want a female version of the Doctor want it as a one off to see what it might be like. Would it be even worse if the Doctor after the female version was male again than if the Doctor was never female at all?

  25. avatar TimeChaser says:

    I’m sure that if they were to find the right actress, it would be good and intriguing to explore that route. However, I am like many and do not want them to change the Doctor, and I don’t think its sexist to want to change such an established character for some misguided sense of PC. The writers can create strong female characters without having to change the Doctor

    • avatar TimeChaser says:

      Don’t think ist sexist to *not* want to change the Doctor, I meant.

  26. avatar Craig Zemke says:

    I think the success of having a woman doctor would totally depend on the actress. Seeing what she’s done as River Song, it’s obvious Alex Kingston would have been a wonderful Doctor. The ideal would be someone like Helena Bonham Carter – bizarre fashion, “hair of an idiot,” alien and ethereal, with the capacity for whimsy, wonder, and explosive anger. It could certainly be done, the Doctor’s sort of androgenous anyway, and Tom Baker always reminded me a bit of my aunt (who was an actress). It seems pretty obvious that casing a young, pretty leading lady of the moment type would be a mistake, but I don’t think that’s what anybody is considering when they say the Doctor should be a woman. The Doctor should be played by a quirky character actor who can do comedy, drama and a bit of action as well as child like enthusiasm. It’s actually a short list all around, but it does contain some women as well as men.

    • avatar Spider-pope says:

      Helena Bonham Carter would be a terrible Doctor. She’s contracted full on Tim Burton’s Syndrome that has sadly effected Johnny Depp. Symptoms include the inability to act, a love of Danny Elfman music and the desire to see Superman with transparent skin.

    • avatar zarbisupremo says:

      There’s only one woman who could play a female Doctor successfully and that is la Lumley, unfortunately she’s a bit past it now.

  27. avatar Neu 75 says:

    While I think the idea of a woman Doctor an interesting one, I think what was annoying was that there was a definite agenda this time round about casting a woman in the role. In fact this whole speculation about the new Doctor, in which the agenda’s rained in from all directions was a bit wearying to say the least, topped off by the over hype of the reveal show.
    Next time, the current Doctor departing and the new one announced should be no more than a couple of days, maybe a week at the most. To think there was just one week between the announcement of Pertwee’s departure and Baker’s arrival in 1974…

  28. avatar Christine says:

    Stop! All of you. I am a woman, I just want good casting and wheather the Doctor is a woman is irrelevant. I want good characters, as companions , baddies or otherwise. I would love the return of a time lady but She doesn’t have to be the Doctor. She can also be a knowledgeble companion. And, yes, I also wish for strong gay, bisexual or omnisexual characters and interesting black characters. Martha or Mickey for example. This whole discussion is pretty silly. Leave it and enjoy, just hope for good stories and characters.

  29. avatar Guest says:

    I think a new writer is more important at this stage than a new Doctor. How about a woman to replace Mr. Moffat?

    • avatar Mary1 says:

      Ok..why was a guest comment suggesting a woman be showrunner next, downvoted?

      • avatar Bob James says:

        Moffat will leave when he decides to leave. That isn’t up to you, or anyone other than Moffat himself and the BBC. If his successor should turn out to be a woman, because that particular woman was the right person for the job, then that would be completely appropriate. More women writing for the show, likewise.

        • avatar Mary1 says:

          Bob, I think you are misreading what I said.

          Do show me where I said I think Moffat should leave at a time appointed by me.

          Excuse me for asking a simple question.

          • avatar Bob James says:

            You basically implied that it was time for Moffat to leave and be replaced by a woman. You stated that you thought that this was more important “at this stage” than a new Doctor. Did you mean to suggest that “at this stage” wasn’t meant to apply in the present tense? That wouldn’t make sense. Had you said, when Moffat decides to leave you felt that that would be a good time for a woman to become showrunner, it would have been you clearly stating your point of view. The use of “at this stage” suggested that you implied that the time for this to take place, to “replace” Steven Moffat, was now.

        • avatar Mary1 says:

          Bob. I didn’t write that original post. A guest did. I asked why the idea of a female showrunner was thumbed down.

          • avatar Bob James says:

            I beg a thousand pardons. My apologies. I actually had overlooked that. Thank you for the correction. My response should have directed at “Guest”.

  30. avatar rickjlundeen says:

    “I would love the return of a Time-Lady” is what I’m hearing a lot in this discussion and all those asking for this are conveniently forgetting/ignoring the existence of River Song. Like it or not, she’s a Time Lady, and a great one. Yeah, she’s a mutt, half human but so was the Doctor for a minute and a half in the ’90′s and we got over it. Anyone yearning for a time Lady should be thrilled that someone listened and went to the trouble of CREATING ONE since all the other ones are allegedly dead. Of course, there’s also those who simply don’t *like* River. Why is no one EVER satisfied?

    • avatar Bob James says:

      That’s just it rickjlundeen, I have come to think that this debate isn’t even about strong female characters. There is just a very wannabe PC, very vocal minority who have it stuck in their heads that they want to force a gender transformation on the Doctor. It has absolutely nothing to do with feminism, or representing the LGBT community. It’s wrong headed, ridiculous, and just plain silly. The reality that there has always been a strong line of female characters in Doctor Who (River Song being perhaps arguably, the strongest and most unique) and even the progress made to create a clearly transgender character in the Corsair simply isn’t sufficient to silence this bunch. They won’t be happy until the Doctor regenerates into a woman. And as I stated in my comment above, that simply means that they will never be happy, because that’s never going to happen.

      • avatar Mary1 says:

        Outside of a tiny minority, the majority of women who want the *possibility* of a female doctor aren’t doing it to be PC. Our attitude is why not? I am personally open to an actor of any colour or sex. I think the Doctor, if real would be too.

        And if we are indeed going to bring up the Corsair as being an example of inclusion for the LGBT community; how many episodes has he/she actually *been* in? I’m pretty sure the answer is zero as of late.

      • “There is just a very wannabe PC, very vocal minority” ..nobody on the left ever used the phrase PC ie “politicaly correct “. This was something that the Daily Mail and other papers of that ilk came up with the 80s to attack those of us campaigning for civil rights for all. Those were nasty times..but we won the argument, eventually . How do i know? Because you can put an openly bi-sexual character, Captain Jack Harkness, into Doctor Who and Torchwood, and its not an issue, there is no controversy. Social change, cultural change, never easy but always worthwhile..

  31. Pingback: A Different Doctor

  32. avatar docwhom says:

    ***So what do you think – is the Doctor first and foremost a man, or is that sexism that should be left in the last century?***

    That’s a silly false antithesis. If the Doctor can be a woman, it’s not because the alternative would be outdated sexism.

    Given that the Doctor doesn’t display any of the stereotypically masculine traits, what exactly would his being a woman bring to the character that’s new? There are plenty of heroes who might benefit from a gender change. 007 for a start. As has been said before, it seems counter productive to try to guilt people into imposing it on the only half-decent male hero role model.

    GallifreyanFallenAngel gets it spot on. If you want great female roles then create them. To make the Doctor a woman would only be tokenism and would say to the world that the only way a woman can get a good TV role is by becoming a man.

    And trying to equate changing gender with changing race verges on racism. It implies that differences in skin colour are fundamental differences and not just skin deep. Hardly anyone has a problem with a black Doctor because skin colour is irrelevant to character. Lots of people have a problem with a female Doctor because they see it for what it is – a silly whim which only gets a semblance of being taken seriously because some try to paint anyone who opposes it as sexist.

    Finally, with a male Doctor, you can have a strong Doctor and a strong companion. With a female Doctor, we’d get a strong Doctor and a weak and/or stupid companion. The companion would have to be male and you just know that he’d be written as a wimpish idiot because the clichéd minds of TV writers are terrified that putting a strong male character next to a female lead would overshadow her. TV writing would have to advance massively in this country before we could get around that.

    • avatar Christine says:

      Sigh. Stop it you guys. I love the choice for the new doctor. And we are going from there. …

  33. avatar iank says:

    I want the next Agatha Christies adaptations to feature a man playing Miss Marple.

    No? Then get stuffed with this female Doctor nonsense.

    • avatar Bob James says:

      Jason Statham would be the perfect choice for this part as well. Sharp and whip smart, but clearly a woman through and through.

      • avatar zarbisupremo says:

        Nah, Billy Connolly, he’s about the right age.

  34. I am a women and I have been watching Dr. Who since the Pertwee era and I think David Tennant is the best Doctor ever. So with that said I do not want to see a Female Doctor or Black or Asian, I think it is just wrong. Their is nothing wrong with having a Female or Black or Asian time lord, just not The Doctor. I believe the most appreciate age for The Doctor is late 30′s to early 40″s. I believe a actor younger or older can play The Doctor but it depends on the quality of acting ability and the quality of the writing, and the quality of the production. This is the reason, I was not high up on Matt’s Doctor – He is a good actor but the writing let him down a lot and I do not think he had the presence or the maturity for the role.

    • avatar Mary1 says:

      ‘Their is nothing wrong with having a Female or Black or Asian time lord, just not The Doctor.”

      Why is it wrong? It is just colour. Colour means nothing.

      • avatar Bob James says:

        Color very much means a very great deal to people of color, whatever color they may be, and that should be appreciated by others as well. Color very often signifies diversity, and any society or culture benefits from that. We haven’t been given any example of this to any great extent as of yet within the mythology of the Time Lords. We’ve seen Time Lords of different color more recently, but it has never as of yet been explored in regards to what that would mean when it comes to diversity amongst Gallifreyans.

        • avatar Mary1 says:

          Um Bob…I AM A PERSON OF COLOUR. In real life colour shouldn’t matter as much as it does and it *certainly* shouldn’t matter to a race of what we should presume to be advanced aliens.

          If ‘Mels’ can become River Song then there is no real reason why the Doctor can’t be black, Asian or green.

          • avatar Bob James says:

            I agree completely with you on that last point. I was responding to your statement “Color means nothing”. It does matter, it can mean a great deal, as ones ethnicity has a great deal to do with ones identity. Why shouldn’t it matter to a race of advanced aliens? I merely stated that we have as yet to see precisely how it might within this context, as this has not been explored within Doctor Who’s mythology.

        • avatar Mary1 says:

          Disagree. A truly advanced species wouldn’t place much importance on something as arbitary as skin tone.

          And I can honestly say that my being of colour has little to nothing to do with my identity. I am a human being. The colour I was born has nothing to do with anything. If people perceive me a certain way due to my colour, that is on them. Not me.

          • avatar Bob James says:

            You can only speak for yourself, and perhaps any number of others you know who may concur with you. I have known a good number of individuals for whom color has been a very important factor, and something that they take a great deal of pride in. It has value and meaning in regards to how they view themselves, not so much in regards to how others view them. Not in the sense that it creates barriers, but that they place a great deal of importance on what their ethnicity means to them and their place in the world and the larger picture. It’s not meant or used as an obstruction to their interaction with the people and the world around them, but something that can often facilitate the contributions they can make through those interactions. And my follow through was that we simply haven’t seen what role that plays in Gallifreyan culture, if any, as we haven’t seen a lot of it, and certainly not within any context that would designate its impact. The real world at large, different cultures, the often cited “melting pot” that comprises any diverse society, as well as the mythology of Doctor Who is not down merely to how you view yourself.

  35. avatar Steve Mc says:

    I think you are all getting it so wrong, and Moffat too. The Doctor could regenerate all the way through the series 8 shows and even during each show. He/ She could start off in the titles and then wander through the script morphing with the viewing figures. At key points, that could form the basis of future arguments, the part could be thrown out to vocal figures in the audience who want to have a go. This approach would surely fit the bill for the Doctor’s universal character. It would only remain for the folks at home to make any sense of the script. Would the alien baddies just give up and go home on the basis of wanting to take over somewhere that was not so seriously messed up. Finally the closing titles could have the Doctor regenerating into pet of the week, so that animal lovers would not feel left out. Those who still felt left out could always get a life and watch some other show. Regards.

  36. Pingback: New Doctor to be Revealed this Sunday - Page 5 - Science Fiction Fantasy Chronicles: forums

  37. avatar Ranger says:

    Because the Doctor has been established as a white man. If a black actor had originally been cast, why change him to white; ditto for a woman. It just that the programme started in 1963 when it was all white men. Doesn’t mean we can just arbitarily change things now just because it’s PC. I think feminists do women a big disservice by constantly harping on about of it should be a man. It’s better to get the female characters to be strong. And that’s what was wrong with the classic series (much as I adore it) – the female companions were just there to ask questions and scream. The female companions of the new series are much better – they actually have backbones. Oh, and I’m a woman. I want equality for women, however, I am not obsessed with everything being from a woman’s viewpoint.

  38. avatar Ranger says:

    Apologies for the rather incoherent rant above – not easy to make sense when your boss is hanging over your shoulder! I meant, of course, feminists harping on that it should be a woman.

  39. avatar Hoosier Whovian says:

    When I watch “The Doctor’s Wife” I imagine the genders reversed and also change a bit of the dialogue between the two of them and it could be done, but at this point I think a lot of fans like the Doctor being;
    1. – BRITISH
    2. Somewhat relatable to the audience IE; “human”,
    3. Essentially good, (wasting the entire Gallifreyan race was a bit evil even if it was necessary) and
    4. A man (until you get a really strong female who could make you forget about the gender thing) Any candidates you care to suggest?

  40. avatar Chris says:

    Are strong female characters under represented in mainstream media? Yes
    Are strong female characters under represented in Sci fi? Yes (but less so than above)
    Does casting a female actor as the Doctor solve either of the above? No

    The missing concept in all this is that yes men and women are equal, but that does not mean they are the same. River Song celebrates female strength, sexuality, intelligence and guile, she is the first chracter in the show to almost permanenetly know more than the Doctor. This is progressive, this is a strong role model for girls. Would anyone cast a male River, what about Russel Brand? He is clever, he is attractive, he has that twinkle in his eye and he has mad hair… I just think however similar he is to the character he is not a woman, and so he couldnt play her without becoming a painful characture (See Tennant in New Earth).

    Kira Nerys, Jadzia Dax, River Song, Kara Thrace, Laura Roslin are just a few examples of strong female characters in science fiction, we have come a long way as a society and absolutly there is room for more characters on my list, However Sandi Togsvik undertaking a three year tenure as the Doctor is not an answer, its a misunderstanding of the problem.

    As an aside if we are saying that the Doctor should represent the races and sexes in the UK then purely from a statistical point of view surely the argument is that at the very least the next 12 doctors should be women?

    • avatar Mary1 says:

      I’m very openminded. We have an alien race that can regenerate. IfRussell Brand was the best choice for a new incarnation of River Song then I could accept that. Not a problem for me.

  41. avatar TonyS says:

    Whether the Doctor could or should be played by a woman is irrelevant at the moment. The next Doctor is a caucasian male aged 55. Based on his career so far I am pleased that he is the next Doctor and am looking forward to seeing what he and the Production Team do with the part.

    What sort of welcome to the show are the calls for a female Doctor, calls for his two predecessors to go/not leave and calls for the Showrunner (I loathe that word almost as much as I loathe the word ‘whovians’)?

    Let’s enjoy the news that we have a new lead actor and look forward to the celebrations this autumn.

  42. avatar Nat says:

    This really is a non-debate; everyone arguing a point they all agree on. Should I say “it’s downright sexist to not have a female doctor” just give some sort of validity to all this hullabaloo?

  43. avatar Chris says:

    I think if the site posts a story detailing the head writer/showrunner responses to ‘media’ calls for a female Doctor, then in a country with free speech having a conversation about that is fine and in no way detracts from the casting of Peter Capaldi. If the premise is we should only talk about ‘relevent’ things to all people then we should all be out there ignoring sci fi and raising money for cancer research, the third world hunger, the UKs social problems etc etc. Sometimes people need downtime and when they do they shoot the breeze with each other, thats fine if you ask me.

    • avatar Mugen Pharoah says:

      Indeed, it is after all a Doctor Who blog…that invites comments from site visitors to respond and offer their own opinions. Who’d have thunk it?

Please be aware that all comments are subject to adherence to our comments policy.
Back to Top ↑