By Kathy Gyngell: The great announcement has been made. 'Look who’s ‘Tardis bound’ and tipped to be the first female doctor today’, The Mail on Sunday dared to declare in advance. They called it right. Around 4 o’clock yesterday, as soon as that all male Roger Federer had smashed his way to his eighth Wimbledon victory, the BBC confirmed the first ever woman/female Doctor Who. They weren’t going to let him take her fire power away.
Who cares? You may not, if like me you’ve never watched the programme anyway (not for me since the OTT Tom Baker had the role). So what? Yes, that too was my first thought. Is this latest, albeit irritating, BBC celebration of female domination worth putting pen to paper for? So why the niggle?
I thought again. First there was something false about Jodie Whittaker’s ‘plea’ to her fans: "not to be scared by my gender …. Doctor Who represents everything that’s exciting about change. The fans have lived through so many changes, and this is only a new, different one, not a fearful one.”
Then I looked at the tweets - not all 122,000 of them but enough to note a nasty note of triumphalism. The feminists out there weren’t celebrating equality. They were celebrating appropriation - the female appropriation of a male role.
You might have thought that female reporters dominating male sports reporting or women’s cricket getting equal coverage to men’s, regardless of what the dominantly male sports audience wants, would be enough . You might well think that the BBC, having met every demand for equal representation at every level off staffing and management, regardless of competence or ability, would have been able with confidence to put the gender equality debate to bed. Job done, they could announce.
Not so. The BBC is on a greedy and dishonest, anti male gender revolution, thanks to a licence fee we are made to pay whether we watch or not. They do not rest. Now their latest determination is: "to drill down" to the specific actions needed "to create a working environment that enables women, throughout the BBC, to thrive and achieve their full potential at every level and in every area of work”.
They’ve claimed the men’s jobs and they’ve taken over the men’s sports ….What is left to come up with or drill down to?
YES! Why not? How about now showing the world just how amazingly talented women are by taking original already established male characters and making them female!
It couldn’t have worked better. More proof that up until now women, denied men’s roles, have been sidelined and demeaned!
'The future is female' @thetimeladies tweeted - or rather crowed - 'no longer will little girls be confined to the role of the companion in games on the playground. The future IS female #doctor13’.
I fear it is and that men had better look out. Yes, beware. This is a new front of attack. They'll just steal men’s ideas and their writing and then, hey presto, they’ll stick in a female character where there was once a man.
Soon there will be nothing left unique to men - no male roles. Everything must belong to women. This is all out war - and a very deceitful one.
Objecting to this takeover has nothing to with being unenlightened or prejudiced - about the inability to conceive that a woman could be a doctor (a medical one) as one disingenuous tweeter would have it. No, this is emphatically not about a job (that either a man or a woman could do). This about ‘a role’ - a man’s role - and casting a female for it. It is about appropriation - sex appropriation - and the pretence there's no difference between men and women.
Well there is.
That's why I plan to celebrate this new appointment by going to see the film Dunkirk, which I assume has all male roles because it was men who died and risked their lives there, drowning or getting shot to pieces so these idiot women could tweet their idiot ideas and the BBC pursue an idiot anti male vendetta.
Imagine their outrage if men played the same game - if a load of blokes appropriated Sex and the City and nicked all four of the female roles. ‘Men behaving badly’ - it would not be allowed.
It's like a bad divorce case when the wife gets the lot - the children, the house, the money and the dog.
That is why the new female Doctor Who is something to bother about.
Will there be any men left, on TV, allowed to play their own roles - or even allowed to be men - and better at the things men are best at - like the great Roger Federer?
Source
Who cares? You may not, if like me you’ve never watched the programme anyway (not for me since the OTT Tom Baker had the role). So what? Yes, that too was my first thought. Is this latest, albeit irritating, BBC celebration of female domination worth putting pen to paper for? So why the niggle?I thought again. First there was something false about Jodie Whittaker’s ‘plea’ to her fans: "not to be scared by my gender …. Doctor Who represents everything that’s exciting about change. The fans have lived through so many changes, and this is only a new, different one, not a fearful one.”
Then I looked at the tweets - not all 122,000 of them but enough to note a nasty note of triumphalism. The feminists out there weren’t celebrating equality. They were celebrating appropriation - the female appropriation of a male role.
You might have thought that female reporters dominating male sports reporting or women’s cricket getting equal coverage to men’s, regardless of what the dominantly male sports audience wants, would be enough . You might well think that the BBC, having met every demand for equal representation at every level off staffing and management, regardless of competence or ability, would have been able with confidence to put the gender equality debate to bed. Job done, they could announce.
Not so. The BBC is on a greedy and dishonest, anti male gender revolution, thanks to a licence fee we are made to pay whether we watch or not. They do not rest. Now their latest determination is: "to drill down" to the specific actions needed "to create a working environment that enables women, throughout the BBC, to thrive and achieve their full potential at every level and in every area of work”.
YES! Why not? How about now showing the world just how amazingly talented women are by taking original already established male characters and making them female!
It couldn’t have worked better. More proof that up until now women, denied men’s roles, have been sidelined and demeaned!
'The future is female' @thetimeladies tweeted - or rather crowed - 'no longer will little girls be confined to the role of the companion in games on the playground. The future IS female #doctor13’.
I fear it is and that men had better look out. Yes, beware. This is a new front of attack. They'll just steal men’s ideas and their writing and then, hey presto, they’ll stick in a female character where there was once a man.
Soon there will be nothing left unique to men - no male roles. Everything must belong to women. This is all out war - and a very deceitful one.
Objecting to this takeover has nothing to with being unenlightened or prejudiced - about the inability to conceive that a woman could be a doctor (a medical one) as one disingenuous tweeter would have it. No, this is emphatically not about a job (that either a man or a woman could do). This about ‘a role’ - a man’s role - and casting a female for it. It is about appropriation - sex appropriation - and the pretence there's no difference between men and women.
Well there is.
That's why I plan to celebrate this new appointment by going to see the film Dunkirk, which I assume has all male roles because it was men who died and risked their lives there, drowning or getting shot to pieces so these idiot women could tweet their idiot ideas and the BBC pursue an idiot anti male vendetta.
Imagine their outrage if men played the same game - if a load of blokes appropriated Sex and the City and nicked all four of the female roles. ‘Men behaving badly’ - it would not be allowed.
It's like a bad divorce case when the wife gets the lot - the children, the house, the money and the dog.
That is why the new female Doctor Who is something to bother about.
Will there be any men left, on TV, allowed to play their own roles - or even allowed to be men - and better at the things men are best at - like the great Roger Federer?
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment