aka “Elitism is my middle name”
I like how Moffat would say that Reinette - a female character that he wrote into the show - is obviously a perfect match for the Doctor based on her level of ‘civilization’ and education.
As opposed to oh say…Rose Tyler - a lower-class girl who never went to university - whom the Doctor actually fell in love with and did settle down with in another universe.
This quote just has it all, doesn’t it?
- The elitism
- The dig at Rose Tyler and RTD, by extension
- The elevation of ‘his’ character at the expense of existing ones.
- The implication that Madame de Pompadour - one of the most powerful women in the country - would of course drop everything she had worked for to go and ‘settle down’ with a man who is basically a homeless spacehobo.
People who call Moffat a talentless hack are mistaken. It takes some skill to cram that much fail into just three sentences.
Hah, excellent Moffat-criticism here. He is so petty, and so unequipped to write insightful sci-fi.
Like, okay, let’s pretend for a second that by “educated and civilised” he means “has a lot of knowledge and social insight” (which is a valid thing to look for in a romantic partner) rather than, you know, “rich, fancy and subservient” (which is what Moffat expects people to look for in a romantic partner).
… I really don’t think that an 18th century aristocrat has more understanding of science and society than a 21st person without A levels but with a working television. And in any case, if the Doctor was really looking for people who are Intellectual Equals, he’d surely look in the future, when people understand time travel, and have wikipedia installed in their brains, or whatever. Or AIs! I can’t imagine anyone more educated and ‘civilised’ than AI people!
Just, one thing I really loved about RTD’s Who arcs - which Moffat clearly didn’t understand at all - was that EVERYTHING the companions knew was useful - Harry Potter trivia! Game-show quickness! Fast typing! - and that the, like, real-world hierarchy of skills and marketability was always shown as less important than courage and compassion.
WITHOUT A LEVELS BUT WITH A WORKING TELEVISION
I’m imagining the real Madame de Pompadour and how very unimpressed she would be by Steven Moffat declaring his ~admiration for her, but
did this man just admit that he think the position of Companion is actually the Doctor’s maîtresse-en-titre? Jesus wept.
That is exactly what this man thinks, and what he writes also. He thinks women are wired to ‘cling’ and men are wired to want to escape them, and the only way a relationship can be agreeable to both parties is if the woman accepts that they can only spend time together when the dude initiates it.
… Suddenly I am kinda surprised that Sherlock and Irene didn’t set up a long-distance relationship where she spends her days in an orientalist parody of a villa, waiting for Sherlock and passing the time taking luxurious bubble-baths and emotionlessly spanking female nobility.
Oh my god this is some sick shit— and really, really, really highlights how much Moffat doesn’t understand the fundamental heart of the show he’s fucking running. If the Doctor was so hot for intelligent, well educated, civilized women why the fuck did he ever leave his home planet? Why has he only ever had one Gallifreyan companion after he left his granddaughter to go her own way? Romana was foisted on him by the time lord ellimist, he didn’t go picking her out of a catalogue.
The Doctor runs around with soldiers and schoolkids and teachers and sailors and students and journalists and shop girls and alien refugees and orphans and robot dogs and barbarians and private detective penguins and renegade archaeologists. If he wanted a slice of properly civilized girlfriend he had the whole universe to go pick one out from, and he never did till Moffat wrote him launching himself smooch-first at the lady in the fancy dress and historically inaccurate boobies.
Goddamn I am so mad.
(Source: badwollf, via weetbixgod)
There exists a sub-section of men who literally cannot sit through a discussion of structural misogyny without receiving constant and emphatic reassurance that no one is accusing them personally of being a misogynist. This is a derail and an attempt to shut down debate. Because, to quote “Sometimes, it’s just a cigar”:
“Suppose you disagree with women about whether rape is part of the structure of our society, used to reinforce patriarchy. Do you make that debate possible by standing on your wounded pride, and just insisting that the debate must start with a disclaimer that says you’re not a rapist? Forgive me, but that’s nothing more than narcissism.”
The conviction that you have never participated or been complicit in structural misogyny is dubious to say the least, no matter what your gender. But even if you are resolute that you, personally, have managed to transcend the system you were born and raised in and now stand as a shining beacon of gender equity outside the mire of patriarchy? Good for you, but structural misogyny still exists and we still need to have a conversation about it. If you think you have nothing to learn, go play elsewhere on the internet.
Wil Wheaton dares to talk about misogyny in games, bombarded by whiny dudes who all have the same talking points
"Google is breeding the young minds of the next generation of artists. Don’t take me wrong, it’s not my opinion, it’s simply what Google states in the marketing campaign (see the heading image) that is accompanying the infamous DevArt exhibition at the Barbican in London. There has been an intense debate in the past weeks on what this powerful curatorial and marketing move by Google actually means. Will it affect or benefit the already unsteady and ephemeral world of digital art, and how? The discussion have rapidly condensed over the web in the form of newspaper articles, artists-led initiatives and discussions on the web through twitter and pastebin statements. After following the whole issue in a quasi-silence, I felt the need to make a statement and share it with you. I won’t loose(sic) more time on a preamble and will get straight to the point."