Bio not provided
4 days, 10 hours ago on Rank the Revival: 2012 Part 2
6 days, 11 hours ago on Rank the Revival: 2012 Part 1
1 week, 1 day ago on Rank the Revival: 2011 Part 3
1 week, 3 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2011 Part 2
1 week, 4 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2011 Part 1
1 week, 5 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2010 Part 3
1 week, 6 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2010 Part 2
2 weeks ago on Rank the Revival: 2010 Part 1
2 weeks, 2 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2009-10 Specials
@HarveyWallbanger We never see it.
2 weeks, 2 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2008 Part 3
I really think Midnight is one of the best episodes Who has ever produced. It makes Blink (which I love and also rated a 10) look amateurish. Quite apart from the concept. The way it builds and builds the tension cranking it up slowly before getting run away and alarming to break it, or rather what you *think* is a break only to have it ramp up further... I felt like I was holding my breath the entire time.
2 weeks, 2 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2008 Part 2
2 weeks, 4 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2008 Part 1
2 weeks, 5 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2007 Part 3
2 weeks, 6 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2007 Part 2
2 weeks, 6 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2007 Part 1
9. 6. 7. 9. 10
3 weeks, 3 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2006 Part 3
8. 8. 9. 10. 10.
3 weeks, 4 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2006 Part 2
@ Notsosmartguy @stargazer0118 @LaraHarris @MrRazza has joined David Dimbleby @twoheartsonemind (Six Seasons and a Movie) and sorry,,, but are you really trying to say that her thinking she can ousmart the Doctor and blackmail him into doing what she wants isn't arrogance? And her level of control freaky... "do as you're told" doesn't come from cockyness it comes from the arrogance of believing you know best. She displays that a LOT. Amy was cocky. Clara is arrogant.
3 weeks, 4 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2006 Part 1
@ Notsosmartguy @stargazer0118 @LaraHarris @MrRazza has joined David Dimbleby @twoheartsonemind (Six Seasons and a Movie) Because we've all felt jealousy and could understand WHY she felt that way.
8, 9, 9, 9
3 weeks, 5 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2006 Part 1
@MrRazza has joined David Dimbleby @twoheartsonemind (Six Seasons and a Movie) I think difference is the flaws themselves. Rose and Clara have flaws written into them as stated but the problem with one of Claras flaws is that she is cocky to begin with but by the time we get to the end, she's SO arrogant. Many of us find her very unlikeable.
That said, I *much* preferred her in season 7 than 8. I could understand her behaviour in season 7 even if I found her difficult at times (you can't like everyone.. I would have pushed Tegan out of an airlock without hesitation) I quite liked her... but by the end of 8 (not Last Christmas because that wound her character back again) I was just sick to death of the sight of her. I disliked her for a lot of the same reasons I disliked Adric and like it or not, I think a lot of people felt the same. Don't blame us, blame the writers. Jenna Coleman is a great actress, she shines as Clara in many moments, she shines in most things she's in but the *character* of Clara is very hard to take.
@Planet of the Deaf @joseffwilliams *blink*
I'm pretty sure Zoe, Liz, Jo, Sarah Leela, Romana, Nyssa, and Ace may have something to say about that. lol
3 weeks, 5 days ago on How Often Does Doctor Who Pass The Bechdel Test?
@4sure @joseffwilliams It's a misconception to think that because a female character is written as "strong" it is a positive female character and when it becomes a consistent theme within the characters you write then there is an issue.
It shows an inability to see women as whole people and when you add that to the fact that all his main companions (Amy, Clara and River) have all be plot devices as opposed to people it raises even more red flags.
And before people start jumping all over me, that doesn't make them dull characters and it doesn't prevent the show from being entertaining but it does and should raise some flags.
@TheOncomingHurricane @LaraHarris @voterassilon I'm really not sure that you can. I agree its not relevant to the test, but it's not subjective.
@voterassilon Um... I don't think you can class sexism as "subjective".
Have to admit that surprises me. I genuinely don't remember conversations between the female characters that aren't about the Doctor or other men apart from interactions Rose had with her mum and the "crew" in Last Christmas. I must rewatch and make notes of when it happens! lol
@YaelMoise Agreed. It also has that lovely little moral/ethical dilemma running through it. I don't think you could argue that some of the RTD stories weren't silly in some respect, but the themes they delt with I think were always excellent. Even in the "bad" ones like Fear Her the story itself was strong. IMO. A vastly underrated one for me is Love and Monsters, yes, the Absorbaloff was a bit daft... but the story itself, the concept of damaged people coming together, the group and the people in it all brilliant.
Maybe it's because I'm an old Whovian and grew up with bubble wrap monsters and a Cactus in a pot as a major villain that the Slitheen and the Rutans... do you remember the rutans? lol If the story is good I can look past the silly.
3 weeks, 5 days ago on Rank the Revival: 2005 Part 3
10. 7. 8. 9. 9.
4 weeks ago on Rank the Revival: 2005 Part 2
I'm sorry.. maybe I am missing something.. but why do you think that? What happened to lead you to that possible conclusion? Was there something said or done to indicate it as a possibility?
4 weeks ago on Love from Gallifrey: Something We All Missed?
9, 7, 8, 7, 7.
4 weeks ago on Rank the Revival: 2005 Part 1
@TheOncomingHurricane @gunslinger19 Whereas most people I know (including myself) took it to mean that you can't presume to put your concepts of reality on to anyone or any other species. The Joke was being made at the priest/minister... NOT at the expense of "Susan". It was making fun of religion (as the show does repeatedly), NOT transgender issues.
1 month ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
@TheOncomingHurricane @LaraHarris @ Notsosmartguy @Beasts_a_Snarling - THE KANDYMAN'S APPRENTICE I've seen people try and take it apart. I have never seen the arguments effectively rebutted.
@TheOncomingHurricane @LaraHarris I'm sorry I have to disagree. If we did not already know that RTD was gay and that line was there, a gay person would have had as much legitimacy as you feel you have had to point it out as an example of latent homophobia.
It would be very easy to argue that the term is pejorative, that his defence of it shows a lack of understanding of the issues and that it showed at the very least a disregard of the issues.
The ONLY reason he gets a "by" on it is because he is gay and regardless of that his comments about "people complaining about words" is entirely wrong. The term "gay" in this instance refers to homosexuality and denotes it as something wrong or flawed.
He was called to task on it *many* times and several organisations at the time expressed their deep disappointment that a gay may would perpetuate the use of the term "gay" in a derogatory way.
@91 Queen of Evil @LaraHarris @Sontaran17 Not talking to people like sh*t. But you go right ahead and accuse me of that if it makes you feel better.
@91 Queen of Evil @LaraHarris @Sontaran17 Any particular reason you deleted this and moved it? Makes the conversation look a little weird. lol
@91 Queen of Evil @LaraHarris @Sontaran17
I'm not the one having a tirade. I'm doing this thing called "sticking to one's guns"
"I'm being attacked" was a poor choice of words on my part. I'm not being attacked I am being accused of being offensive repeatedly but noone seems to be able to show me where the offence is beyond "you're a bit blunt"
Why am I arguing? I posted an opinion someone decided they didn't like it and made comments about me needing to respect peoples opinions because they didn't like my point of view. I disagree. If I disagree with something I have a tendency to speak up.
I do that a lot. Speaking up/standing up for things I believe.
@HeyProfessor @LaraHarris If I may.. Have been told I am too direct...
Normally I would just say "actually no, he's quoted as saying the following regarding it - "It seems to me that we're becoming people who complain about the use of the word gay, much as people *used* to complain about the word gay, because it no longer meant 'happy'. No words stay static."
But I've been told some folks don't like the direct approach so... um... thank you for you opinion however it would appear that RTD himself does not uphold it.
@91 Queen of Evil @LaraHarris @Sontaran17 No you didn't you said I wasn't humble enough that's not offensive. I do respect people, I don't respect opinions if I believe them to be wrong or being told I have use fluffy language to make it easier for people.
Friendly advice? You may want to check your own tone.
Last word, absolutely when I believe I am being attacked for no good reason. Northern Irish... we don't go down quietly.
Oh and Bi... as for some reason it seems to be relevant.
@91 Queen of Evil @LaraHarris @Sontaran17 I keep repeating my views because people keep choosing to misrepresent them.
I wasn't being ignorant or condescending. I would appreciate you pointing out where I was.
Not being transgender does not exclude you from the discussion on whether or not transgender is being represented *at all* much like being white doesn't prevent you from having an opinion and a right to voice it on racism or being a man doesn't prevent you from having a opinion and a right to voice it on sexism.
Finally I'd like to know what I said that was offensive. I've asked previously.. I've yet to be told. It seems the offence that is taken is because I pointed out where there may be a flaw in the writers perception. Apparently that is offensive. Not sure why. Some clarity on that would be fab.
As for apologising for the causing of offence. Again, as soon as someone can point out where I said something was offensive I will be happy to do so.
@Djornad @LaraHarris @TwelvesHoodie I will endeavour to take that on board.
@Djornad @LaraHarris @TwelvesHoodie That's a fair observation.
I think people see confrontation in my style because I am direct. I never intend to be aggressive and I never intend offence. I think sometimes people find the direct approach a little hard to take and see it as "having a go". I just wasn't raised to couch things in fluffy terms.
I suppose I think if you get the niceties out of the way at the start, "good article, well written, interesting view point, good points raised and worth discussing..." you should then be able to get on with the actual discussion. lol
I also fall into the trap of presumption. I would never disrespect the person, I feel falling to ad hominem shows a weak argument I suppose I expect the respecting the person to go without saying.
That's not to say I won't be sarcastic and it's not to say I won't get frustrated (as I am sure I have illustrated lol) I just... I guess I'm a bit like the 12th Doctor as opposed to the 10th or 11th. To the point. LOL!
@TwelvesHoodie @LaraHarris Thank you, I appreciate the support! :) I don't mind a wee bit of a gauntlet run, keeps the mind sharp eh?
@Typo42 "Magic Carrots" @LaraHarris @ElyotWren
" How many wells has that man dug for the good of others?"
Laughed a lot at that lol
I think that's the amazing thing about people. They can be one thing to some and something completely different to someone else. For example... I have a friend who is an amazing friend. Caring, considerate, would give you the shirt off his back but he is a nightmare for women he gets into relationships with. He's needy and controlling in a very passive aggressive way.
Danny was, as you pointed out, brilliant with the kids and could be very focused. However, he was not good for Clara when it came to her relationship with the Doctor.
He tried on several occasions to make out that the Doctor was "an officer" (like that was a bad thing) and tried to imply that he was wrong for doing whatever it was he could to "win".
He wasn't incorrect that the Doctor did what needed done (as evidenced in Mummy when he said that they didn't have time to grieve) but that wasn't wrong. That was absolutely the right thing to do, just like informing Danny that he needed to plug him into the Cyberconscience to access the information. The choice was Danny or the world and the Doctor chose the world and THAT was the right choice and Danny's attempt to make the Doctor out to be a "bad" man for making that choice was one of the most selfish, morally corrupt, manipulative things I have ever witnessed a character on Who (that is supposed to be a good guy) do.
The Doctor is right when he says "sometimes the only choices you have are bad ones but you still have to choose". That was a fact (because in times of hardship it is a fact) that Danny wanted to ignore. It was a fact that he couldn't live with. When he entered that room and shot that kid, that was a bad choice but it was his only choice and he's choosing to blame others for what is unfortunately a simple fact of life.
The big picture that Danny seems to fail to notice is, that someone has to fight *this* war, someone has to make the hard decisions and that doesn't make them bad or corrupt. It makes them the people who make the hard choices. Danny tried to shame the Doctor and make Clara see him in a bad light for that. That's horrific.
1 month ago on Best of 2014 Awards: The Winners (Part 1)
No need for anyone to "zip it"he question being raised in the comments is not how they are being portrayed but IF they are. That's the question many on here are trying to establish. Many on here, including other Trans members do not feel it is.
Oh... and being white does not exclude you from discussing racism just like being a man doesnt prevent you from discussing sexism.
No need for anyone to "zip it"
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris They aren't extreme examples they are examples. Opinions are just that, opinions. Her being transgender should have no bearing on whether or not the issue is *true* or not. Or do you feel she is afforded some higher level of truth because she is Trans? That being the case should I not be afforded some higher level of authority on the sexism of Moffat because I am a woman?
No, I don't think treating people like adults is offensive. Nor do I think it's disrespectful. I do think it's disrespectful and condescending to suggest that being trans means you should automatically have your opinion respected on a trans matter. It's the equivalent of a pat on the head.
If the author of the piece presents their gender at the start of an article to give themselves some sort of authority over the article calls it "background" that makes it very bloody relevant to their approach. If you can't grasp that, that's your issue not mine.
I choose to see people as individuals. Not their causes, or disabilities or gender or sexual orientation or age UNLESS they cite it as giving authority. Which they did in this case.
I have stated repeatedly. I admire the well written article, I appreciate the contribution and even the discussion it raises, I understand the place the concepts she is discussing come from. I do NOT have to respect her conclusions or her opinions based on it.
The person who seems to be unable to separate the author from their words is you. Like it or not confirmation bias is something we all do and (again) she cited it at the top of the article to assume authority on the subject. You seem to have fallen for that and seem think it affords her some sort of respect "just because" and it makes her an authority on the subject. It doesn't. And the sooner you and others grasp the concept that the only thing that makes a good argument is in fact, a good argument, the better off the whole planet will be on a whole bundle of issues.
As for your last bit... offence is taken not given and considering I issued no personal insults, commended the article, and challenged the opinion, I honestly couldn't give a fig if you were offended or not. It has no bearing on the subject.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris No, they really shouldn't. You can be respectful of the person and have a civil conversation without respecting their opinions on things.
In the past, people held the opinion that black people were sub human or that homosexuals were deviants (in fact some still do today). A sincerely held belief or opinion, no matter how well argued does not mean it should be afforded respect.
The person, absolutely. The effort they made... hell yes. The opinion. No.
@Sontaran17 When the author introduces her transgender into the argument at the top of the article I have every right, and valid reason to point out it may be an aspect that colours how she perceives what she sees. I've said that before and another thing I have said before and will now say again, is that I will respect a person I do NOT have to respect their opinion or their reasoning.
You don't have to be trans to write an article like this. I'm not responding to it in this way because she is trans, I am responding to it as a whole. Her gender perception is a part of this because she said it was. Not me.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @Malohkeh, not a member of any acronyms I've answered this argument several times on this site. I've said to you on several occasions here that there is more than just sexist remarks that are the issue and I've linked you to articles that sum up the issues, and pointed out to you where you seemed to miss several of the points listed in the article so don't even TRY and say all I have said is "just because" because it's ridiculous.
Regarding the article. I think it is perfectly possible to respect a person and attack their beliefs.
Personally I find the whole "lets all just nod along" approach to be dreadful.
I appreciate her efforts, I appreciate her taking the time, I can even see from her point of view where she is coming from but I do not agree that the arguments were well thought out. If that makes me a bad person for pointing out that's fine I can live with that.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris Where exactly did I say she didn't have the right to express it? Once more, slowly this time...
I have never denied her right to her opinion. I have never denied her right to express herself. I do not accept her arguments, I believe her perception is flawed and I have stated why. That is not disrespectful. It's very f**king respectful because I'm treating her like the adult she is.
You respect a person, not an opinion. Anyone has every right to challenge any opinion they like if they feel they have cause and every right to point out why they think the argument is flawed or why you think their approach may be flawed. That's not disrespectful. That's the grown up way of doing things.