Bio not provided
@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.
3 days, 3 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
@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.
3 days, 4 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
@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.
3 days, 5 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
@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?
3 days, 6 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
@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.
3 days, 9 hours 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"
3 days, 14 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
@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.
3 days, 15 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
@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.
3 days, 17 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
@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.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @Malohkeh, not a member of any acronyms I've also told you I am not about to write you an article on it. Do the research yourself.
@Beasts_a_Snarling - THE KANDYMAN'S APPRENTICE And it's not just the characters, it's the way they are regarded by the other characters in the universe. How they are referred to etc etc. And the thing about Moffat is, that you CAN see it outside the Whoniverse, it's as clear as day within Sherlock too. Basically, what women represent within his writing and how other characters respond to that.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @Malohkeh, not a member of any acronyms The argument levelled against Moffat and sexism is not limited to things people say. I've said that several times now. Moffats sexism is more than someone making slightly sexist, in context/universe remarks.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @Mark McCullough Ok... so you've just decided to ignore the sexual aggression, the male gaze, the casual sexism etc etc and chosen to focus on the sexist comments?
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @Malohkeh, not a member of any acronyms No, the point I am trying to make is, that even if you were to accept that the references were transphobic (which compared to calling someone "gay" in the context it was used...is not at ALL evidenced) presuming that a character or situation written by a writer accurately reflects their own stance is flawed.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @Mark McCullough Nope... again, you've clearly not been following the arguments being made. I don't have time here to write an entire article, I've linked to one, I would suggest you read it before trying to discuss something you don't have all the information on.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @Malohkeh, not a member of any acronyms I don't think you grasp how pejorative terms work. The context of them doesn't matter. The TERM is derogatory no matter what context you use it in. Meaning harm or not, fun or not, the implication of the term used in any context to describe a person or their reaction or their attributes in a negative manner is pejorative.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @Mark McCullough No. The evidence of Moffats sexism goes beyond how he writes his female charters. That's just one aspect of the criticism levelled.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @Malohkeh, not a member of any acronyms Doesn't matter what the tone was. The term is pejorative. It is used to denote something being "off" or "wrong" or "weak". It doesn't matter how friendly the banter was. The term is a derogatory one.
3 days, 18 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
@Malohkeh, not a member of any acronyms @LaraHarris It's using the same parameters used in the article above. The Whoniverse.
@Mark McCullough @LaraHarris @Sontaran17 This was set in modern Britain, the term is pejorative no matter what angle you come at it from, it was in common usage through lack of thought. A bit like "you run like a girl" is sexist but still used in common language, even by women.
Does putting those words in a characters mouth make the *writer* homophobic.
@Malohkeh, not a member of any acronyms @LaraHarris It is, but we are specifically discussing Who, which being as this is a thought experiment is where I would like to keep it.
So use context, but use context within Who.
@Malohkeh, not a member of any acronyms @LaraHarris Being trans has nothing to do with it and we are discussing Who here, not other stories.
Is this comment, homophobic? Could one deduce from it anything about his phobias? I used this as one example, there are others throughout the series...
Can we presume a stance on a subject because of words or attitudes given to characters or approaches within a "universe".
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris I think you are missing the point of the post. I'm not discussing other peoples reactions to the article, I'm asking people to think about how they assess or judge something and if putting words into a characters mouth represents the authors beliefs.
Ok... thought experiment to assess if what authors write can be used as a judge of their "phobias"
I'm pretty sure most folks on here are aware of the rumblings around the use of the word "gay" as in... "that's SO gay" or... "don't do that.. it's gay!"
We'd agree that it is a pejorative term right? And that this was brought to our attention by the gay community and I for one have stopped using it because, frankly, they are right. However... several years ago it was in common language usage.
In The Aliens of London.. there is the following exchange;
DOCTOR: Nine hundred years of time and space, and I've never been slapped by someone's mother.
ROSE: Your face.
DOCTOR: It hurt!
ROSE: You're so gay. When you say nine hundred years?
DOCTOR: That's my age.
ROSE: You're nine hundred years old.
RTD wrote the script. Is he Homophobic? Because by the way Toby Whitehouse and the other writers are being judged... one would have to assume he is.
@ElyotWren Danny Pink.
Cowardly, morally corrupt, ethically dubious, manipulative, nasty whiny creep, dull little insect of a man. I am so glad I am not alone. lol
3 days, 19 hours ago on Best of 2014 Awards: The Winners (Part 1)
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @Beasts_a_Snarling - THE KANDYMAN'S APPRENTICE Regarding seeing them a human before transgender... it was the author who made it a part of the discussion at the start of the article. You don't have to be trans to write an article on it but the author introduced it as a jumping off point of the argument that follows, and is therefore valid to address in an assessment of the article.
If you can't *then *see that the authors perceptions are coloured by their circumstances and experiences and pointing that out when the evidence seems to suggest that it is overwhelming what they perceive as a valid counter to their opinions then there is no hope for you.
3 days, 19 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @the666thdoctor My apologies I did not see that.
@Sontaran17 @Beasts_a_Snarling - THE KANDYMAN'S APPRENTICE Once again, (and now I am getting frustrated) I did NOT say that the author made it up. I said, I felt her confirmation bias was overly colouring her perception. And if I have to start putting IMO at the end of every damned post it's going to get very boring very quickly.
@Sontaran17 @the666thdoctor No-one is suggesting she is "making" an issue. People are just disagreeing with her perception.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris Do please point out where I said that? I said (again) that I disagreed with her opinion and suggested that her confirmation bias was overshadowing/creating the issues she was seeing.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris I didn't disrespect it, I disagreed and pointed out a reason why I felt the author believed what they did.
@Mark McCullough @LaraHarris @Sontaran17 And I felt, as I said, that they saw things that weren't there. Why is that a problem?
@TardisBoy! Please point out to me where I was tactless?
I'm the kind of person who calls a spade a spade. I don't believe in being coddling. I don't believe that it leads to any meaningful understanding or discussion of a debate or situation. As a friend of mine is fond of saying "just because someone is in a wheelchair doesn't mean they can't be an a**hole.
Having an issue and expressing you opinion on that doesn't mean just because you do you are right. It also doesn't mean *I* am right. Mine is my opinion. I expressed it clearly and succinctly. I wasn't mean, I wasn't rude (unless you think I was in which case please point it out). I was direct. I'm fairly certain that the author is grown up enough to handle that. They certainly don't come across in their article as needing their hand held. They were articulate and quite damning of in some places of people they don't know. I'm fairly sure they can take what they dish out.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris No, I said the authors bias clouded her analysis. She wrote beautifully.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris Excuse me. I said it was a very well written article.
Pointing out confirmation bias is not cheapening someone's opinions, it's pointing out confirmation bias.
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris @Supermoff, member of CATS @Beasts_a_Snarling - THE KANDYMAN'S APPRENTICE A *few* of the same characteristics? A FEW??? Seriously? And if you think that's the only argument you clearly have missed several of the memos.
3 days, 20 hours ago on Little Boxes Will Make You Angry: Doctor Who and Transphobia
@Sontaran17 @LaraHarris Thats a ridiculous thing to say. We are ALL coloured by our experiences and beliefs and emotions. We ALL look for confirmation bias in everything we watch and read.
I am suggesting that the authors bias is overwhelming their approach to the point that they can't see past it. I'm entitled to that opinion. I don't agree with what is stated in the article and just because it's a difficult subject doesn't mean I won't say what I think on it. I won't be shame bullied into not calling b***s**t.
@Supermoff, member of CATS @LaraHarris @Beasts_a_Snarling - THE KANDYMAN'S APPRENTICE I think you need to look at the characters as a whole, not just the long term ones... but look at ALL of them, even the women on Sherlock. There is absolutely an issue with how he writes women. The story of Amy and Clara is the same story (up till season 8 but there are even some overlaps there).
Seriously... read the Kasterberous article I posted up and then come back and tell me if you feel the same. I think you may feel a little differently. It's a summation of a couple of articles but it sums them up well.
@Supermoff, member of CATS @Beasts_a_Snarling - THE KANDYMAN'S APPRENTICE Yes because comparing one off characters like nancy and sally to long term characters like River or Clara or Amy makes total sense.
@ Notsosmartguy is nervous about Miles's fate. @LaraHarris @Beasts_a_Snarling - THE KANDYMAN'S APPRENTICE Nice little summation of some of the arguments here.
@ Notsosmartguy is nervous about Miles's fate. @LaraHarris @Beasts_a_Snarling - THE KANDYMAN'S APPRENTICE There is no evidence that RTD is racist. There is plenty that Moffat is sexist. You just have to look at how he writes women. It's right there in front of you.
@ Notsosmartguy is nervous about Miles's fate. @Beasts_a_Snarling - THE KANDYMAN'S APPRENTICE Lots of evidence he's sexist. Not deliberately so I don't think, although there are some times I wonder... but yes. Definitely sexist.
Wow... definitely reading WAY too much into things.
Nice article, well written, but seeing things that aren't there. Cassandra was vain because she was vain. I never took the "when I was a boy" as an accurate description of her gender any more than I took the ipod as an accurate description of the juke box or Tainted Love as "an old world classic"
Regarding Toby. People use analogies when they talk to others to express a concept. He was talking about someone behaving differently and then changing unexpectedly.
As for the rest... I'd suggest confirmation bias. I very much doubt the idea of transgender even entered the heads of RTD or Moffat as they wrote.