Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2017 11:09:54 GMT
Think about it. It's us, isn't it? We are the ones who invest in the programme and personally, I am not going to let anyone bully me into not enjoying a series I have adored since childhood. Not the extremists who cannot tolerate another viewpoint, not the media who are taking what scraps they can and blowing them out of proportion. No one has that fundamental power over me unless I wish it. That is what I choose. To those who feel confused by this development, it's okay to be confused. But don't throw away something that can bring joy to your life just because you don't understand how you feel yet, one way or the other. And I'm not saying they can't. I get it, and Jodie wasn't my choice, but what I'm speaking against is an excessive dependence on the show, or any bit of media, for validation. The people out there who are treating a change in actor like the death of their entire family and equating it thusly are a cause for concern. 'Who' of all shows is about being proactive, affirmative, standing on your own two legs. It is not about unhealthy co-dependance to define who you are as a person. You are a person because of you, not who happens to be on the production team. 100%. Absolutely. But I believe feeling a sense of frustration towards that area of fandom is purposeless. If anything, I worry about people who use it as an emotional crutch because things have become so terrible or so confused in their own lives that they must retreat so completely into fiction. Where reality has become so alienating and hostile that the only reasonable option seems to fall back into fantasy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2017 12:04:26 GMT
I really don't and apologies to some but the idea of walking away from Doctor Who and/or Big Finish because of the casting of a woman as The Doctor just strikes as supremely silly. Actually, I can understand people who do not like the idea of a female Doctor not watching the show, as that's normal. If you don't like something about a TV show, not watching it anymore is perfectly reasonable. I nearly gave up on The Walking Dead during the last season because I didn't like some of the bad episodes and slow plotting. Everybody else in the house wanted to watch it though, so Fox @ 9pm was still a regime in our house and I saw the rest of the season. But yeah, I could easily have walked away from it. So if people genuinely dislike a female Doctor, not watching Doctor Who is understandable. In fact, I would advise them to not watch Doctor Who anymore. Rather than watch it and keep moaning about Jodie Whittaker every week after an episode airs! However... I cannot understand people who are walking away from Big Finish because the BBC cast a woman as the Doctor on TV. As it has nothing to do with Big Finish! So that is silly. As for Davison v Baker, the word 'clash' seems a bit melodramatic. I see it as a bit of friendly banter. Unfortunately things like that are going to get blown up in the current climate, but I see nothing wrong with either of their opinions.
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jul 23, 2017 13:33:09 GMT
i don't think....I have given up the show entirely but we will see, but almost a week on and I feel less interest each day with each new way to make me feel bad, redundant doctors having their say for a few more minutes of notoriety & the worst side of fandom being paraded for the media to sneer at once again I just despair. I did send my 31 doctor who t-shirts to the charity shop yesterday as I just could not wear them anymore and my tardis has dematerialised from the windowsill to the wardrobe. its been a funny week who would have thought it! But by far the worst thing to happen was losing Trevor Baxter! This is not aimed at you, your comment just happens to springboard into this: RANT INCOMING:Am I the only one who is sick and tired, not just in Who fandom but in geekdom period, of fans treating shows and their creators like social workers or surrogate parents? Having a passion is one thing, but if you are actually building a piece of media into an integral part of your life, and when you constantly seek approval or vindication from a show for something you say, do or believe in... clearly you've got priorities badly out of whack. Using a piece of media as an excuse not to deal with your own problems or even just 'think', a type of discount counselling if you will, is not healthy. If it takes a female Doctor to force individuals out there to start getting themselves in order and not rely on senpai Moffat or Chibnall's notices, then at least it's already done something we can all, hopefully, agree is beneficial. i fully understand what you mean and kinda agree with you broadly speaking, but i don't think that is the case for most. Media is an internal part of peoples lives, more so these days. i know plenty of people who build soap opera as an integral part, talk about it as though it's real, even cry when they tug your heartstrings. We don't poor scorn on them, same goes for football and other tribal mentality sports. they are all as pointless as doctor who, so why single them out?..... yes its a crutch to lean on, a little piece of childhood that you can cling too, blot out troubles but I don't see many people using as a surrogate parent or divine teachings. Distraction from the real world but hey....it's better then drugs and alcohol! for me though i am just so disappointed & embarrassed with the politicising of, something that was a joy to me.
|
|
|
Post by kimalysong on Jul 23, 2017 21:49:44 GMT
I was just happy to log on to the Beeb at lunchtime and Colin Baker was on the main page I've made my feelings clear, but I'm glad the show is causing such debate and maintaining relevance. But perhaps at the expense of long term ratings & viewers. its good to see how passionate people are but I still maintain that most of the pro's don't have doctor who on sky+, series link, etc or watch regular. upset the old guard, nothing for the new blood (cause what 8-14 is going to want to watch their mum) and you are left with a weaker audience and a show that might just have jumped the shark for headlines & politics. for me, and this is just me. i feel that this has diminished the show, not the casting (I think I can live with that) but all the stuff and nonsense that has gone with it. I cannot bring myself to listen to BF, I have not checked the website for days, my lastest issue of DWM remains unread & it all feels tainted. its all become about gender politics, I am labelled sexist to shut down discussion even on here the bastion of rational thinking the same thing has been used, in fact I feel a bit embarrassed to be a doctor who fan now, actually I don't feel like I am one anymore. i don't think....I have given up the show entirely but we will see, but almost a week on and I feel less interest each day with each new way to make me feel bad, redundant doctors having their say for a few more minutes of notoriety & the worst side of fandom being paraded for the media to sneer at once again I just despair. I did send my 31 doctor who t-shirts to the charity shop yesterday as I just could not wear them anymore and my tardis has dematerialised from the windowsill to the wardrobe. its been a funny week who would have thought it! But by far the worst thing to happen was losing Trevor Baxter! Bit confused when you say no 8-14 year is going to want to watch their mom
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jul 23, 2017 22:29:08 GMT
But perhaps at the expense of long term ratings & viewers. its good to see how passionate people are but I still maintain that most of the pro's don't have doctor who on sky+, series link, etc or watch regular. upset the old guard, nothing for the new blood (cause what 8-14 is going to want to watch their mum) and you are left with a weaker audience and a show that might just have jumped the shark for headlines & politics. for me, and this is just me. i feel that this has diminished the show, not the casting (I think I can live with that) but all the stuff and nonsense that has gone with it. I cannot bring myself to listen to BF, I have not checked the website for days, my lastest issue of DWM remains unread & it all feels tainted. its all become about gender politics, I am labelled sexist to shut down discussion even on here the bastion of rational thinking the same thing has been used, in fact I feel a bit embarrassed to be a doctor who fan now, actually I don't feel like I am one anymore. i don't think....I have given up the show entirely but we will see, but almost a week on and I feel less interest each day with each new way to make me feel bad, redundant doctors having their say for a few more minutes of notoriety & the worst side of fandom being paraded for the media to sneer at once again I just despair. I did send my 31 doctor who t-shirts to the charity shop yesterday as I just could not wear them anymore and my tardis has dematerialised from the windowsill to the wardrobe. its been a funny week who would have thought it! But by far the worst thing to happen was losing Trevor Baxter! Bit confused when you say no 8-14 year is going to want to watch their mom It's a bit generalised buy she is a thirty something, approx age for 8-14 year olds mums. I missed out the most important bit though which is BOYS. she is very mumsy, dull, normal, a bit safe! that my problem with her, she's great in what I have seen her in, but not Doctor material. (although it made me smile when my friend said, she will be fine....a nurse in attack the block she must have gone back to school to retrain as a doctor) i can see young boys accepting a young sexy female in the tardis, the oddball aunt type or a mad old woman but not their mum! but hey, maybe because she is all them things we will warm to her immediately & this will all be a storm in a teacup...god I hope so. buy hey it's only what I think, based on what I liked at that age......but then again I had a big time crush on Tegan but by the time I was 16 I was much more interested in the henchmen & bad boys!
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Jul 23, 2017 22:38:07 GMT
Bit confused when you say no 8-14 year is going to want to watch their mom It's a bit generalised buy she is a thirty something, approx age for 8-14 year olds mums. I missed out the most important bit though which is BOYS. she is very mumsy, dull, normal, a bit safe! that my problem with her, she's great in what I have seen her in, but not Doctor material. (although it made me smile when my friend said, she will be fine....a nurse in attack the block she must have gone back to school to retrain as a doctor) i can see young boys accepting a young sexy female in the tardis, the oddball aunt type or a mad old woman but not their mum! We haven't seen how she's playing the part yet. She might not be mumsy, dull or normal. I don't see why being 'mumsy' would necessarily turn off boys. A key aspect of Sarah Jane's characterisation in SJA was her motherhood of Luke (and later Sky) and I'm fairly sure boys watched that regardless (well I did anyway).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 6:50:08 GMT
It's a bit generalised buy she is a thirty something, approx age for 8-14 year olds mums. I missed out the most important bit though which is BOYS. she is very mumsy, dull, normal, a bit safe! that my problem with her, she's great in what I have seen her in, but not Doctor material. (although it made me smile when my friend said, she will be fine....a nurse in attack the block she must have gone back to school to retrain as a doctor) i can see young boys accepting a young sexy female in the tardis, the oddball aunt type or a mad old woman but not their mum! We haven't seen how she's playing the part yet. She might not be mumsy, dull or normal. I don't see why being 'mumsy' would necessarily turn off boys. A key aspect of Sarah Jane's characterisation in SJA was her motherhood of Luke (and later Sky) and I'm fairly sure boys watched that regardless (well I did anyway). Sorry, I'm going to indulge in a bit of pedantry here: "Mumsy" typically means having a feeling of home, something that is cosy, comfortable and approachable. Technically, I think we've already had that thrice -- the Second, Fifth and Eighth Doctors, respectively. The Fifth Doctor, in particular, proves that a bit safe isn't necessarily a bad thing for a character so long as it's tempered with something else like quiet sarcasm, endearing honesty or ageless wisdom.
|
|
|
Post by glynnlondon on Jul 24, 2017 9:15:58 GMT
It see Peter is coming off twitter now. After the week we've had where we lost two Dr who legends a bit more understanding from all sides would be nice.
All this toxicity about a sci-fi show has been sobering, so I'm calling it a day. @peterdavison5 used to be fun. Now it's not. Must Dash. xx
|
|
|
Post by kimalysong on Jul 24, 2017 10:18:19 GMT
It see Peter is coming off twitter now. After the week we've had where we lost two Dr who legends a bit more understanding from all sides would be nice. All this toxicity about a sci-fi show has been sobering, so I'm calling it a day. @peterdavison5 used to be fun. Now it's not. Must Dash. xx His words were taking out of the context by the media. Same with a supposed feud with Colin Baker when we know it wasn't that at all. I don't agree with his stance at all but I don't think he was nasty about it and he even said Jodie would do a good job. It is a shame but hopefully he will reconsider when this whole things blows over and the Internet moves onto the next thing.
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jul 24, 2017 10:56:52 GMT
It's a bit generalised buy she is a thirty something, approx age for 8-14 year olds mums. I missed out the most important bit though which is BOYS. she is very mumsy, dull, normal, a bit safe! that my problem with her, she's great in what I have seen her in, but not Doctor material. (although it made me smile when my friend said, she will be fine....a nurse in attack the block she must have gone back to school to retrain as a doctor) i can see young boys accepting a young sexy female in the tardis, the oddball aunt type or a mad old woman but not their mum! We haven't seen how she's playing the part yet. She might not be mumsy, dull or normal. I don't see why being 'mumsy' would necessarily turn off boys. A key aspect of Sarah Jane's characterisation in SJA was her motherhood of Luke (and later Sky) and I'm fairly sure boys watched that regardless (well I did anyway). Of course she has every chance of to change my opinion. but I have to disagree with you on Sarah Jane though, she was defiantly in the mad auntie type sure she took care of Luke & co. But defiantly not as homely mum figure. the Sarah Jane model is the type of doctor I had hoped for if they went the female route. but this is all just talking in stereotypes and the one thing we do know is that doctor who always changes things up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 12:03:10 GMT
The thing was that the whole situation is being portrayed as if Davison was being objective about it. If you read all his tweets, he was clearly being subjective.
And I'm still quite annoyed with the people who say that if you don't think the Doctor shouldn't be a woman you're wrong. Because, at the end of the day, it's just an opinion.
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Jul 24, 2017 12:16:54 GMT
"mad auntie"?! "mumsy"?! Sarah is one of the great Companions - and for many classic-era fans, the greatest. Brave, intelligent, independent-minded but empathic - and ready for adventure just for the fun of it. Earlier companions were either rescued like Vicki and Jamie, kidnapped! like Barbara and Ian, did it as part of the job like Jo Grant, or entered the TARDIS by accident and got swept away into the Vortex like Polly, Ben and later, Tegan. Sarah did it by choice. She was the first companion to have her own life on Earth (and an interesting one too, as an investigative journalist) who deliberately gave it up to go travelling with the Doctor, not once but several times. I think she knew perfectly well that when she accepted the Doctor's offer of 'a lift back to London' at the end of 'Terror of the Zygons', London was the very last place they were likely to land... And Elisabeth Sladen made her a national treasure with all those wonderful performances. Yes, she could do the 'terrified and needs saving' bit like all Companions have to! but she was equally good at 'a bit scared but totally determined' and 'going to the Doctor's rescue whatever the odds' and also the relaxed, jokey TARDIS moments with two quite different but equally fabulous Doctors. It helps that she was lucky enough to play the role during a run of golden seasons (and I include the final Pertwee season) when practically every script was a winner which left a legacy of 'Who'-lore behind it. But she really was an excellent actress. Two examples: in 'Death to the Daleks', the moment when Sarah sees the City of the Exxilons by night is just a reaction shot intercut with a polystyrene model under good lighting and some evocative music - but as a moment of wonder on a strange new world, it's perfect. And Sarah's temporary blindness in 'The Brain of Morbius', feeling her way around Solon's lab in which we know IT is lurking... (shiver down the spine!) So then - "mad auntie"?! "mumsy"?! (Crumbs-y!! ) This is Sarah Jane Smith we're talking about, and from 'The Time Warrior' to 'The Hand of Fear' and later in 'The Five Doctors' and 'School Reunion' (and the couple of SJAs I've seen) she never changed at all where it matters - in that spirit of adventure that saw her through so many great stories with five Doctors.
|
|
|
Post by kimalysong on Jul 24, 2017 13:23:10 GMT
We haven't seen how she's playing the part yet. She might not be mumsy, dull or normal. I don't see why being 'mumsy' would necessarily turn off boys. A key aspect of Sarah Jane's characterisation in SJA was her motherhood of Luke (and later Sky) and I'm fairly sure boys watched that regardless (well I did anyway). Of course she has every chance of to change my opinion. but I have to disagree with you on Sarah Jane though, she was defiantly in the mad auntie type sure she took care of Luke & co. But defiantly not as homely mum figure. the Sarah Jane model is the type of doctor I had hoped for if they went the female route. but this is all just talking in stereotypes and the one thing we do know is that doctor who always changes things up. Just confused from 1 little clip where you think she is going to be like a mom. From one little clip of a male Doctor would you have said 8-14 years olds wouldn't want to see their dad?
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Jul 24, 2017 13:33:39 GMT
So then - "mad auntie"?! "mumsy"?! (Crumbs-y!! ) This is Sarah Jane Smith we're talking about, and from 'The Time Warrior' to 'The Hand of Fear' and later in 'The Five Doctors' and 'School Reunion' (and the couple of SJAs I've seen) she never changed at all where it matters - in that spirit of adventure that saw her through so many great stories with five Doctors. I think it was the part where she became a mum that I thought was most mumsy. Having adventures with the neighbor kids seemed kind of mumsy too. Wild guess that after they were done saving the world, she baked everyone a batch of cookies or took them all out for an ice cream. This doesn't mean (in my mind, at least) that she isn't a force to be reckoned with. :-)
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jul 24, 2017 14:44:29 GMT
Of course she has every chance of to change my opinion. but I have to disagree with you on Sarah Jane though, she was defiantly in the mad auntie type sure she took care of Luke & co. But defiantly not as homely mum figure. the Sarah Jane model is the type of doctor I had hoped for if they went the female route. but this is all just talking in stereotypes and the one thing we do know is that doctor who always changes things up. Just confused from 1 little clip where you think she is going to be like a mom. From one little clip of a male Doctor would you have said 8-14 years olds wouldn't want to see their dad? to be perfectly honest, apart from DR No.5, I would have said the doctor has never resembled the "stereotypical" Dad. show me 5 seconds of Tom Baker, Peter Capaldi even Matt Smith and I would defiantly not think dad. But if Kris Marshall had got it, I would be thinking Dad and oh no I don't want that! I don't confess to have seen everything JW has been in, but based on what I have seen she is not the most chameleon like of actresses, I would say her strengths lie in the warm & fuzzy roles and that's fine. I like her, I have said before I liked broadchurch more than new who, it's just not the way I wanted it to go. that's probably why she was cast as a contrast to Capalidi's doctor......I get that. as I say, Its my mostly biased grumpy opinion based on very little facts and even more instinct. I do want to thank you guys for having a proper (pointless) dr who discussion without the awful gender politics, sexist accusations and down right nastiness of the last few days, maybe you may just restore my faith in fandom.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Jul 24, 2017 14:54:23 GMT
Just confused from 1 little clip where you think she is going to be like a mom. From one little clip of a male Doctor would you have said 8-14 years olds wouldn't want to see their dad? to be perfectly honest, apart from DR No.5, I would have said the doctor has never resembled the "stereotypical" Dad. show me 5 seconds of Tom Baker, Peter Capaldi even Matt Smith and I would defiantly not think dad. But if Kris Marshall had got it, I would be thinking Dad and oh no I don't want that! I don't confess to have seen everything JW has been in, but based on what I have seen she is not the most chameleon like of actresses, I would say her strengths lie in the warm & fuzzy roles and that's fine. I like her, I have said before I liked broadchurch more than new who, it's just not the way I wanted it to go. that's probably why she was cast as a contrast to Capalidi's doctor......I get that. Jodie's soon to appear in a BBC drama as a nurse who steals her best friend's identity and pretends to be a senior doctor. (http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/tv/jodie-whittaker-play-doctor-different-13376879), which certainly doesn't sound warm or fuzzy to me.
|
|
|
Post by kimalysong on Jul 24, 2017 15:35:00 GMT
Just confused from 1 little clip where you think she is going to be like a mom. From one little clip of a male Doctor would you have said 8-14 years olds wouldn't want to see their dad? to be perfectly honest, apart from DR No.5, I would have said the doctor has never resembled the "stereotypical" Dad. show me 5 seconds of Tom Baker, Peter Capaldi even Matt Smith and I would defiantly not think dad. But if Kris Marshall had got it, I would be thinking Dad and oh no I don't want that! I don't confess to have seen everything JW has been in, but based on what I have seen she is not the most chameleon like of actresses, I would say her strengths lie in the warm & fuzzy roles and that's fine. I like her, I have said before I liked broadchurch more than new who, it's just not the way I wanted it to go. that's probably why she was cast as a contrast to Capalidi's doctor......I get that. as I say, Its my mostly biased grumpy opinion based on very little facts and even more instinct. I do want to thank you guys for having a proper (pointless) dr who discussion without the awful gender politics, sexist accusations and down right nastiness of the last few days, maybe you may just restore my faith in fandom. Well I just hope you will give her chance. Don't get me wrong I understand having some preconceived notions based on who is cast (whether its a man or woman) but sometimes past roles don't actually tell us about how an actor or actress will portray a character in a new series. And I just realized she is 6 days older than me. Now that does feels a bit weird (but not in a bad way).
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jul 24, 2017 15:35:13 GMT
to be perfectly honest, apart from DR No.5, I would have said the doctor has never resembled the "stereotypical" Dad. show me 5 seconds of Tom Baker, Peter Capaldi even Matt Smith and I would defiantly not think dad. But if Kris Marshall had got it, I would be thinking Dad and oh no I don't want that! I don't confess to have seen everything JW has been in, but based on what I have seen she is not the most chameleon like of actresses, I would say her strengths lie in the warm & fuzzy roles and that's fine. I like her, I have said before I liked broadchurch more than new who, it's just not the way I wanted it to go. that's probably why she was cast as a contrast to Capalidi's doctor......I get that. Jodie's soon to appear in a BBC drama as a nurse who steals her best friend's identity and pretends to be a senior doctor. (http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/tv/jodie-whittaker-play-doctor-different-13376879), which certainly doesn't sound warm or fuzzy to me. I bet she is, just a warm fuzzy person doing horrible things.....
|
|
|
Post by mrperson on Jul 24, 2017 15:36:31 GMT
....and here we go again....
I suppose it's a bit of a rehash:
1. I'm still definitely giving it a chance.
2. I still don't like it, because:
a. While I think aiming for diversity - and not just sex/gender diversity - across the entire spectrum of audiovisual entertainment is a worthy goal, I do not take kindly to the notion that it is to be done by going into existing shows and changing around people's sex/gender/whatever. That feels like some sort of quota is being imposed, to satisfy identity politics. Granted, Moffat made room for it by altering the show's canon (see b), but it does not feel all that different to me than announcing that James Bond will be a female in the next film. That too would be altering an in-universe story or reality simply to serve some out-universe goal. That rubs me the wrong way. Counter-remarks along the lines of "oh, well, I'm sure that women don't like being told they have to wait" are simply not helpful, nor do they fairly address any of these points.
b. There simply was no natural evolution in Who in this regard. Nothing about the Doctor's story made this in any way inevitable or even foreseeable. The only reason that this can even be a thing is because Moffat had the Doctor start talking about "The Corsair" sometimes being a woman in The Doctor's Wife, then following it up with the General only being a male once while quipping about men being unreasonable (I forget the exact line), and finally capping the set-up with various one-liners about gender not mattering. Of course, that's all new. Before we had Time Lords and Time ladies. In other words, NO, Time Lords were never genderless. They only were made to be when Moffat used his power to insert a line to that effect, but that's "might", not necessarily "right".
(Caveat: someone said something about there being wilderness years fiction involving sex change regeneration. I don't really count that as any sort of official statement, as it's not the owner of the show - BBC - putting it into the show. It's fan fiction. I could write my own fan fiction making the Doctor a secret super-advanced cyberman all along, but that wouldn't make it so. What is and is not "canon" is a whole different can of worms, of course). 3. I certainly do not feel that any other part of Who is tainted and have trouble understanding a sudden dislike for previously liked things. Every episode is it's own slice of in-universe time.
4. Of course, there's a final worry that they won't be able to help themselves, and put a bunch of jokes in the script that play off or employ stereotypes about women in general. That would make the biggest possible mess of things, as it would be contrary to the reason this happened in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by muckypup on Jul 24, 2017 16:09:52 GMT
to be perfectly honest, apart from DR No.5, I would have said the doctor has never resembled the "stereotypical" Dad. show me 5 seconds of Tom Baker, Peter Capaldi even Matt Smith and I would defiantly not think dad. But if Kris Marshall had got it, I would be thinking Dad and oh no I don't want that! I don't confess to have seen everything JW has been in, but based on what I have seen she is not the most chameleon like of actresses, I would say her strengths lie in the warm & fuzzy roles and that's fine. I like her, I have said before I liked broadchurch more than new who, it's just not the way I wanted it to go. that's probably why she was cast as a contrast to Capalidi's doctor......I get that. as I say, Its my mostly biased grumpy opinion based on very little facts and even more instinct. I do want to thank you guys for having a proper (pointless) dr who discussion without the awful gender politics, sexist accusations and down right nastiness of the last few days, maybe you may just restore my faith in fandom. Well I just hope you will give her chance. Don't get me wrong I understand having some preconceived notions based on who is cast (whether its a man or woman) but sometimes past roles don't actually tell us about how an actor or actress will portray a character in a new series. And I just realized she is 6 days older than me. Now that does feels a bit weird (but not in a bad way). of course she will get a chance.......I was so wrong about bill.....I am happy to be proved wrong. but I am not sure it will feel like MY doctor who anymore, the whole "Who har" around it has change the way I feel. When a "friend" puts a tampon in my tardis cookie jar and others think its funny to post pictures of dr frankenfurter, you do question you devotion to the program and how this change has opened me up again to "harmless" joking, that feels anything but harmless when its direct at you. So when the sexist and bigot comments are labelled at you for having an opinion, I am not sure I will ever feel the same. something has changed as ridiculous & dramatic as it sounds. nothing will stop me watching it, but it might just stop me loving it so openly.
|
|