Nameless Voice on 21/7/2017 at 12:51
Was it ever stated anywhere that time lords couldn't change their sex during regeneration?
I don't see how it's a "corruption of canon" if it's not contradicting or retconning something from the previous canon.
Since people were mentioning Space Marines: in canon, all Space Marines must be male due to Reasons (albeit not good reasons, but it has been stated in canon.)
If the Imperium discovered and pursued a way to make female Space Marines, that would be fine within the canon (though odd, considering how new science is heresy and how resistant to change the Imperium is.)
On the other hand, if they randomly decided that half of the original Space Marine chapters were women and always had been, then that would be a "corruption of canon" as you put it, because it's changing already-established facts rather than adding new ones.
(... Not that Games Workshop don't love to retcon things in random ways. Just look at Ollanius Pius.)
Isn't the Doctor Who case the first scenario and not the second?
Neb on 21/7/2017 at 16:55
Ohhhhh, it's her. I binged on Black Mirror a few months back, and she was good.
nickie on 21/7/2017 at 16:58
A couple of doctors (
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-40679134) have now joined in your discussion.
Quote:
Two ex-Time Lords have had a war of words over Jodie Whittaker being cast as TV's first female Doctor.
Peter Davison, who played the Doctor from 1981 to 1984, said he "liked the idea" of a male Doctor and that he felt "a bit sad" the character might no longer be "a role model for boys".
His comments were promptly dubbed "rubbish" by his successor Colin Baker. "You don't have to be of a gender to be a role model," said the actor, who portrayed the Doctor from 1984 to 1986.
Renzatic on 21/7/2017 at 17:22
olol English people tawk funneh.
Renzatic on 22/7/2017 at 05:00
ICEMANN GON GET BEAT! :mad:
Kolya on 22/7/2017 at 11:06
As I told you in that post and again after, this wasn't aimed at you specifically, but at the group of people whose voice you had joined. And while my wording after a few beer was out of line, I stand by the point that women deserve not to be rejected because of their gender.
That being said, I really wish to stay on friendly terms with you, icemann.
Trance on 22/7/2017 at 11:37
That does seem to be the boilerplate reaction whenever there's pushback from a man on a gender politics issue; immediately insult his sexual prospects, or call him a crybaby. It's an ultimately self-defeating tactic, since it doesn't address his points to his satisfaction, and it can only serve to further polarize him against you.
Don't drive the moderates out of the discussion. You may herd more people into the opposing camp than you're prepared to deal with. This is a lesson we should have learned last year.
Tony_Tarantula on 23/7/2017 at 18:29
Quote Posted by Vae
Change is welcome within a virtual universe when it doesn't corrupt canon. The problem isn't change itself, it's
corruptive change.
There have been several people, including myself, who have made clear, logical points, that have defined why a retconned gender-swap is poor choice for the Dr. Who IP, which has nothing to do with your small-minded "anti-woman" fabrication that you irrationally project onto other people. The fact that you're having difficulty understanding that these logical points exist on this thread only speaks to your clouded state of mind, and your struggle with objective reality.
To be fair, a lot of the show's direction over the past few years has consisted of blow-hard, pretentious retcons. It doesn't always distract from some excellent intra-episode plots and writing but the meta has been complete shit for awhile. They ALMOST had something extremely interested with the arc about "The Silence" but managed to completely fuck up the execution and turn it into an almost cringe-worthy resolution.
Quote:
That does seem to be the boilerplate reaction whenever there's pushback from a man on a gender politics issue; immediately insult his sexual prospects, or call him a crybaby. It's an ultimately self-defeating tactic, since it doesn't address his points to his satisfaction, and it can only serve to further polarize him against you.
Don't drive the moderates out of the discussion. You may herd more people into the opposing camp than you're prepared to deal with. This is a lesson we should have learned last year.
And that's.....kind of what led to the whole Gamergate thing. People would probably have forgotten about it very quickly if it wasn't for things like a gaming magazine editor saying that Gamers were "losers who need to be bullied into submission".
Still I'm impressed by how many people almost reflexively attack and hate any positive expression of masculinity or any portrayal of males that doesn't shame masculinity. Personally I still think it's fucking stupid and self defeating: trying to turn everyone into effeminate, "nice guy", males is how you get MORE people like Elliot Rogers who start building up a quiet hatred for women that eventually explodes into violence or assault.
In fact I'd go so far as to say that a huge portion of the "misogony" that currently exists is because of guys who were raised by women or to behave like women (e.g. that their masculinity is somehow inherently bad). Sure it makes you feel great growing up because those environments are dominated by female authority figures who like it when you act that way. However that upbringing generally results in a lack of real life emotional intelligence so it just leads to you getting shit on constantly by more competitive, aggressive personality types...to say nothing of how those guys have tend to experience the worst side of women regularly. Eventually the pendulum swings back violently the other direction and it doesn't always stop in that healthy middle ground where a man neither pedestalizes nor hates women.
Sure it feels good to just bash them as "hating women", and "misogynists". It's a far more productive discussion to ask WHY they became that way. That might give some more accurate insight into why there is now starting to be a backlash against constant female empowerment.
Bucky Seifert on 23/7/2017 at 19:00
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
And that's.....kind of what led to the whole Gamergate thing. People would probably have forgotten about it very quickly if it wasn't for things like a gaming magazine editor saying that Gamers were "losers who need to be bullied into submission".
Where was this? I actually never saw the article that set off the whole thing.
Renzatic on 23/7/2017 at 19:37
There was no such thing as a moderate center during the Gamersgate fiasco. It started out with some guy smearing his ex-girlfriend on the internet, then immediately went to everyone doxing and death threating each other from there. Stupidest goddamn thing I've ever seen in my entire life.
