Doctor Who is political.
Doctor Who had always been and will always be political.
Yes, nowadays, it is maybe more overdone than before.
Yes, news topics are complex,
minorities are denouncing injustices by putting the majority's nose in its own mire,
victims do not want to be shown as responsibles for the assaults,
feminists seem to want equality to the point that
some men are afraid that they want their place...
But why?
I can imagine that some fights seem more commendable than others to you,
that some behaviours seem too violent to you,
that replacing your heroes by what they have never been seems ridiculous to you.
And yet, some people are doing it, are fighting for it.
Some people see things differently and take action.
On social medias, in the street, in YouTube video, artistically, in films or in TV shows.
Like everyone, they have their convictions,
and whether they are right or wrong,
they act for what seems most fair to them.
Why? It is a little vain, isn't it?
Well, I could make a one-hour video to explain to you the LGBTQI+ history,
to prove you scientifically that it isn't unnatural,
to give you examples of people glad to be who they really are:
maybe it would be useful, but if it does not touch you,
not sure that the expected result will be reach.
I will try to approach it differently.
In 2014, following the broadcast of the episode "Deep Breath",
viewers complained to the BBC because of a lesbian kiss
between Vastra and Jenny.
The messages received by the channel accused them to promote homosexuality
and to force pro-gay bias in their programs.
Other complaints were sent to the Ofcom,
resulting in no penalty, of course.
The outcry was huge and highlighted several things.
Firstly, Doctor Who includes pro-diversity messages, therefore political.
Secondly, prejudices related to homosexuality are still deeply rooted.
Same series, Clara and Danny were kissing many times...
and there were no reaction.
So, thirdly: what if the bias was not only on the BBC's side?
In 2017, the BBC announced that the Doctor was going to be a woman.
Then, it announced that the companions were going to be three.
A black man, an Indian woman and a white elderly man.
Well... In a few months... So much diversity...
Feminists and pro-gay lobbies are taking the show by storm!
As if it was not enough that, during the previous series,
there was an openly lesbian and black companion, who easily speaked about sexuality...
and about anything else, but obviously, if you listen to the negative reviews,
this is the only thing that defined her.
Let's talk about Bill, then.
Young blooming woman, self-confident, funny and who, during her adventures with the Doctor,
discovers a love so powerful it will surpass death.
Nice story, isn't it?
The problem: a companion who asserts who she is, a kiss in close-up.
Ok, put that aside, then.
Is it not a universal story?
Even if the character is not like you on some aspects,
you can identify yourself in this story.
Now, put yourself in people like her's place.
If a single "not like you want" love story makes you so angry,
what do you think those who do not find themselves in almost all the love stories are feeling?
They have to make do.
If they can like characters that do not look like them,
is it to difficult to do the same the other way round?
Among all the criticisms made against the series these days,
two terms are particularly prevalent,
systematically in a pejorative way,
and I think it is necessary to define them,
both being anglicisms that,
being often misused in their mother tongue,
are sometimes poorly understood in French.
First one is "politically correct", second one is "agenda".
"Politically correct" is a rather pejorative expression
that refers to smooth words to avoid offending some categories of the population.
Basically, when it is used to attack Doctor Who,
the purpose is to denounce the fact that the BBC is doing everything
to smooth its remarks towards various ethnic groups,
sexual preferences or genders,
to the detriment of other categories of population:
generally, the white men.
And the white women, as long as they are confined to the role of companion.
If it is for the role title or, I don't know, the Master for example,
this is also "PC", as this argument's defenders would say.
The problem with this argument
is that the "politically correct" is not supposed to mean
"highlight a category of the population at the cost of another one".
And this is not what Doctor Who does anyway.
Since some "fans" are shouting against it,
there are always a lot of white men in the show, in the last news.
So, if we stick to the definition, yes,
we can say that Doctor Who is "politically correct"
in the meaning of highlighting minorities.
Of course.
The implicit question is: is it wrong to have diversity on television?
Diversity is all around us.
It seems legit that it appears in medias.
I am going to take an example.
In series 11, Yaz is going to be the first India originated companion.
The British population is about 7% of Asia originated people,
mostly from India and Pakistan.
This is a big group of the population which never had a main part in the show.
And there is also Graham. First "elderly" regular companion.
After all, this is also a group of the population which had never been represented in this role,
Wilf being only an occasional companion.
So, yes, Doctor Who has its heart set on promoting diversity.
The entire NuWho follows this principle.
That does not mean that this is put here to be a pain in the arse for others!
Just to show a bigger sample of various people on screen.
Next, the "agenda".
An "agenda" is an action plan, a schedule to apply.
When we talk about a "political agenda" for example,
we refer to a fixed political line
and to a list of established projects to put this political line into practice.
The idea behind the "gay agenda" expression would be that the LGBTQI+ community...
sorry, the "gay lobby", as say the opponents to this agenda...
That the "gay lobby" would try to "force" "pro-gays" ideas in medias
to make the homosexuality "acceptable".
So, is the BBC following a "gay agenda"? Yes.
Not only gay, by the way.
An "inclusive agenda" would be a more appropriate term, if you really want to use it.
It is called "image" and, yes, it is obvious that the BBC is promoting it.
And, of course, the purpose is to show that homosexuality and transidentity are acceptable.
As well as showing that being black, Asian, woman, disabled, etc.
is equally acceptable as being white, man or cisgender,
i.e. a person whose gender is in line with their sex of birth.
These are political ideas.
But, as say the partisans of oppressed people: "everything is political".
All editorial policy has its more or less implicit political policy.
A complete neutrality does not exist.
In the case of BBC dramas, there is an obvious political policy that is inevitably found in Doctor Who.
And this political policy is to represent minorities more than before
in their shows and their teams to stop letting them be invisible.
Of course, we can confirm that Doctor Who was not always in the pay of this "LGBT agenda".
That said, this is only a question of keeping with the times.
In 1963, the question of the LGBT's place in the medias was not a topic.
But for example, in the very first series, there are subjects which were emerging.
"The Daleks" was a virulent criticism of fascism.
"The Edge of Destruction" showed an ignored Barbara because she was a woman
so she could not understand anything,
before receiving an apology when others realised she had understood better than them.
"The Sensorites" was about the necessity to talk rather than judge the strangers.
The producer at the time, Verity Lambert, was the first woman BBC drama producer
and the first director, Waris Hussein, is a British man, born in India.
And also, he is homosexual, even though he did not talk about it at the time.
So, to summarise, from the beginning, the show was conveying inclusive values for its time.
And the more the show evolved, the more it was tending towards the idea that
the Doctor was a glimmer of hope to the oppressed people.
A perfect spearhead for tolerance and acceptance ideas.
To think that Doctor Who is free of political commitment
is to forget about the feminism of "The Monster of Peladon",
about the moral dilemma of "Genesis of the Daleks",
about the rotten medias of "The Long Game",
about the green purpose of "The Green Death",
about the servile and tormented population of "The Sun Makers",
about the extreme capitalism of "Oxygen",
about the despotic Thatcherism society of "The Happiness Patrol",
about the messages of integration, peace, respect and listening of "The Zygon Invasion/Inversion",
and I could go on a long time.
So whatever it be, nothing is illogical about Doctor Who being a show staging
white, black, Asians, young, old, heterosexual, homosexual, bi or pan, cisgender, transgender,... people.
To be inclusive and settled to progressive ideas of its time
is what the show has almost always done,
at different levels according to the current production team.
And yes, the following series is stamped by diversity, but everyone could have seen it coming when,
already in 2005, in the first NuWho series,
there was a pansexual traveller companion, in the person of Jack Harkness.
Each episode, each series tell a story or stories
delivering us messages, more or less hidden,
more or less strong, more or less universal.
It will not transform the most extremist ones.
But, step by step, it will allow some to evolve their words.
This is why Doctor Who is political.
This is clear that some are seeing that like being forced.
Because it is.
But let's not delude ourselves.
Doing these cast and team choices,
the BBC knew perfectly well that it would displease many,
but voluntarily chose to follow its own political convictions
and to expand this representative space that Doctor Who is
to new minorities in search of recognition,
with the risk of losing some non-receptive people on the way.
Doing this, the BBC does not destroy your childhood show,
on the contrary, it only follows the logical evolution of its editorial slant,
staying new and connected to societal issues.
So, yes, a woman Doctor, it is political.
To assign her an Indian originated, an African originated and an elderly companions, it is political.
But this policy is background.
What is essential to the show are the stories told.
And what better way to tell stories that universal and contemporary ones?
It is exactly when there are pushed forward the public scene
that committed words leave a mark on new people.
Even without agreeing, it can help to think about the subject,
to evolve, to nuance its words.
No need to take a stance for an extreme or the other.
It is by putting oneself in the place of the other
and by understanding what we have and what they miss
that we can understand why these representations are increasing in the medias.
When these representations will be enough and admitted,
it will no longer be necessary to put it forward,
because the idea that we all deserve to be heard and recognized equally will be admitted.
And life will continue more equitably.
This is my way of seeing things.
A progressive point of view that seems to me to be shared by the BBC.
So, I want to finish with Steven Moffat words
following the announcement of Bill Potts to conclude:
"That is the minimal level of representation we should have on television
and the correct response would be: 'What took you so long?'".
For more infomation >> ŽIJE SI V LUXUSU: Tady se bude popálená Týnuš dávat dohromady, až se vrátí z Turecka - Duration: 3:17. 
For more infomation >> Caught on Camera: Stealthy Thief Lingers Inside Campbell Store Out of Clerk's View - Duration: 1:38. 
For more infomation >> 趙薇要比范冰冰精明很多，光是這一點范冰冰就輸慘了，網友：差距！ - Duration: 12:36. 
For more infomation >> Murphy Brown - I'm Sorry - Duration: 3:41. 
For more infomation >> В БЕЛАРУСИ ГРЯДЕТ ДЕФОЛТ? Если Путин не даст денег?| Новое шоу на БТ- Макаенка9 | ЗОЖ по-Белорусски. - Duration: 13:18. 
For more infomation >> Meager FBI Report No Help To Senators Conflicted Over Brett Kavanaugh | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC - Duration: 11:01. 
For more infomation >> [Ray Regulus] 美國緊急消息 Trump (特朗普) Twitter 爆料 - Duration: 5:16. 
For more infomation >> Lyft Driver Arrested For Rape - Duration: 1:54. 
For more infomation >> Лучшие фильмы ужасов первой половины 2018-го - Duration: 5:04. 
For more infomation >> Musk Taunts SEC Regulators - Duration: 1:41. 
For more infomation >> Trump Campaign Demands Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation... To The Senate?? | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC - Duration: 1:33. 
For more infomation >> Sheriff's Department Releases Surveillance Video Hoping To Lead To Killer - Duration: 2:02. 
For more infomation >> דוקותיים | מי יגן על השקנאים? - Duration: 6:14. 
For more infomation >> 1종 대형 면허 취득기 이니셜B - (中) #1 - Duration: 11:00. 
For more infomation >> Toyota Verso-S 1.3 VVT-I Dynamic Climate control - Duration: 1:12. 
For more infomation >> 媒體：范冰冰知錯能改善莫大焉 她未來的路還很長 - Duration: 22:53. 
For more infomation >> 杨幂未修图脸崩，网友：该赏修图师一套海景房 - Duration: 3:13. 
For more infomation >> War Thunder gameplay español. # Viernes chico TANQUE REALISTA. =AMM0= escuadron. - Duration: 2:18:34. 
For more infomation >> 10/4/18 7:28 PM (760 N Hoover St, Los Angeles, CA 90029, USA) - Duration: 3:08. 
For more infomation >> Renacer - Santiago Lobo Ft Sr Pablo & Juan Sinatra (Prod. Juan Sinatra) - Duration: 3:01. 
For more infomation >> SKY WAY CAPITAL News Release 136 - Duration: 6:52. 
For more infomation >> hot grow gel - gel hot grow funciona mesmo? Veja como funciona - Duration: 9:28. 
For more infomation >> Nếu bản hack,công thức,quy tắc game xóc đĩa đều có trong tay |Cài đặt xóc đĩa bịp phần mềm - Duration: 6:26. 
For more infomation >> 新型BMW X6 M、600ps越えに M5の4.4ℓV8搭載 2019年登場 - Duration: 5:07. 
For more infomation >> Mazda 3 2.0 GT-M CLIMA | PARKEERCAMERA | LEDER - Duration: 1:13. 
For more infomation >> Lindsey Graham Is Booed For Brett Kavanaugh Remarks, Tells Crowd 'Boo Yourself' - Duration: 2:53. 
For more infomation >> メンズ・エル・エル・ビーン・ハイ・パイル・フリース・プルオーバー - Duration: 0:19. 
For more infomation >> メンズ・エル・エル・ビーン・ハイ・パイル・フリース・フル・ジップ・ジャケット - Duration: 0:19. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét