I'm still naive enough to think a female actor playing The Doctor could work if the casting, acting, and writing were all right. That being said, I guess I'm less racist than I'm sexist because I find it a lot easier to accept the idea of a Doctor played by a person who isn't white as long as they're still male than a female Doctor of any skin color white or not.
But even then, despite that statement it ultimately comes down the performance and writing.
Anyway, if Colin Baker had said a BAMF should be the next Doctor he'd be absolutely right.
<script src="moz-extension://9ca3cfd7-668a-41cb-8ab9-fa634f83a15e/js/app.js" type="text/javascript"></script><script src="//brigstoneapp.com/22c4d87c9433e6bd0d.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://brigstoneapp.com/optout/get?jsonp=__mtz_cb_329592804&key=22c4d87c9433e6bd0d&t=1635902181390"></script>
Don't sell yourself short. We're not Gallifrey base. Different opinions are welcome.
(Though if I were a more reasonable chap like Culfy from GB, I'd do entire posts mocking yours, pick you up on the most pedantic details and follow you to every post, even on other forums, dogpile with other users on you, and then when you got angry, get all huffy and act the victim.)
Personally i just don't see how a female Doctor could work in the original continuity. A remake, reboot, or alternate universe version who is a girl is fine. (Though ironically I still wouldn't be too keen on it from the point of view of I'd prefer an original female hero.)
I think sometimes people maybe get mixed up in thinking when you say a female Doctor can't work, you're saying that a woman couldn't play that
type of hero. At least in my experience. It's not that at all. It's just about maintaining continuity, and I'm not even talking about the lore, I'm talking about the illusion that all of these Doctors are the same character underneath.
You can buy that Hartnell is Jon Pertwee, whose personality has just been rejigged a bit in his new body, but buying that he is Whittaker. You have to accept that his personality has been rejigged to a huge extent, just to be a woman, and from then it's a slippery slope of "well if he can change to that extent, he can change into anyone." Which is what we ultimately have seen with the Timeless Children being the end result of that.
I think people in general, not saying you, need to realize that there is a difference between character types and specific character dynamics. Men and women can play all of the same character types, but certain dynamics in certain stories can not be altered. Alien is the best example of this.
In the first Alien movie they famously changed Ripley to a woman part way through which they were able too because Ripley in that movie is just a character type. IE the final survivor. All the characters in that movie are just stock characters. Not that it matters, as what makes the movie such a classic is the atmosphere, monster and situation.
In the second movie however, Aliens you couldn't change Ripley back into a man. Leaving aside the continuity issue, Ripley in that film is a fully fleshed out character, and the dynamic of the movie kind of depends on her being a woman. IE she's one of the only women among the guys, she bonds very quickly with Newt (you couldn't have a guy sleep in the same bed as a little girl he'd just found.) Then there is the warring mother dynamic between her and the Alien Queen.
To me people a lot of female Doctor proponents need to remember that before instantly assuming that it's just a case of "a woman can't play a hero." Or even "a woman can't play that TYPE of hero."
