God I hope this is true.
i just fucking choked
Even in space you can’t escape the fragility of men when it comes to their penis size.
what if instead of renaming them synonyms for big they renamed them tiny, dinky, and small
I wonder what sort of criticism Moffat would face if Clara had said the line “You’re so gay!” and not Rose
I wonder what people would say if Moffat had wrote a scene where a main character drugged and raped two people with no repercussions and it was played for laughs
I wonder how people would react if Moffat’s script involved the Doctor committing genocide against thousands of sentient newly born aliens
Or if Moffat had said that the Doctor couldn’t be female because it’s a ‘family show’
Or if Moffat had created a trans character who’s entire story revolves around how surgery had made them into something less than human
Or if Moffat had brought back a classic who companion only to retcon her relationship with the doctor into an inexplicable romance
I wonder how much criticism you’d see towards anything in the eleventh doctor’s era if it had been written by Russell T Davies
I’m a pretty vocal “Moffat-hater”, and the majority of the people I follow prefer RTD to Moffat, but I have seen “RTD stans” bring up and discuss all of the issues you mention.
I don’t have time to look up examples of everything, but for starters, I’ve posted discussion of "You’re so gay" being problematic on my blog 3 days ago, two months ago, and seven months ago. I may have posted about it at other times as well, but not tagged it, and I’m not going to wade through my entire “aliens of london” tag to find them.
I think there’s a lot more discussion of Moffat’s faults because he’s the current showrunner and some people wish he wasn’t. And when something that happened in a recent episode is brought up, and people say “Oh well, that’s just one example,” it’s a natural thing to go back through the rest of the Moffat era to find more examples. It seems to me that it’s a lot easier to find numerous examples for a single criticism in the Moffat era than the RTD era. The things you mention above *are* problematic, but they’re mostly isolated examples.
- Owen was a douchebag. He was WRITTEN to be a douchebag. And it could be argued that karma slapped him in the face when he was forced to witness the rape and murder of someone else. I’m not excusing him, but I do think that’s oversimplified. Either way, writing a character who’s gross doesn’t make someone a bad writer. Ask the writers of any crime dramas.
- It’s not the Doctor committing genocide that’s a problem. This has happened before. It’s the Doctor doing things like brainwashing one species into the genocide of another, or being excited about the genocide of a species.
- "Or if Moffat had said that the Doctor couldn’t be female because it’s a ‘family show’". RTD didn’t say that. Ever. Peter Davison said he didn’t like it, because it would be like suddenly having a female James Bond. RTD, on the other hand, said: "I am often tempted to say yes to that to placate everyone but, while I think kids will not have a problem with [a female Doctor], I think fathers will have a problem with it because they will then imagine they will have to describe sex changes to their children." That’s not the same thing. Saying that FATHERS would have an issue with it, probably for a number of reasons—some of which are more of a parental issue than a sexist one—and they’re the ones who would complain. Also, this is straight after giving a list of possible female doctors.
- If we’re talking about Cassandra, it’s not surgery that made her less human. It was the addiction to surgery based on a sense of superiority. She was so completely sure that she was a better human than the ‘mongrels’, the hybrids born of cross-species breeding, and that led to her throwing away everything it meant to BE human in the process. That’s not the same either.
- I adore Sarah Jane Smith with all my being. That said, I don’t think that her having romantic feelings for the Doctor is all that inexplicable. Same goes for her bitterness and resentment. She’s obviously still capable, still BRILLIANT. But she’s also human, and she was also hurt. The shippyness between the Doctor and SJ is obviously a matter of opinion, but to say she was brought back only to have her relationship retconned into an inexplicable romance is reaching. And, once again, COMPLETELY missing the point of the episode. So well done.
ALL THAT SAID.
There are things that I don’t agree with in RTD’s era. There are things I don’t agree with in EVERY era, because they don’t actually cater to me individually. But there’s a hell of a lot less that seems like actual, rational criticisms for RTD’s era (note the actual and rational bit in there). And really, it doesn’t matter. Moffat crits don’t…actually worship RTD the way that Moffat stans would have people believe. He’s rarely brought up in a Moffat criticism, to be honest. Moffat FANS, on the other hand, bring him up all the time, pointing out his sins as some sort of defense for Moffat’s.
Vilifying RTD is not a defense for Moffat.
I don’t know what about this concept is so difficult to grasp. RTD’s faults were his faults. Moffat’s are his. One doesn’t justify the other. I realize it’s a matter of ‘well, you put up with this then’, except…we didn’t. We have complaints about RTD too. But we have a lot more relevant ones about Moffat, since he’s the current showrunner, like his incredibly sexist attitude toward women, both in actions by male characters and the lack of reaction by the female ones, or the way he’s made the Doctor into a character that is wholly unrecognizable, or the way he’s made it his job rewrite the whole of Doctor Who’s history, the fact that he’s so caught up in whatever shiny plots he’s trying to spin that he forgets about things like characterization and continuity…
Yeah, I think Russel T Davies is a better writer. So sue me. But RTD’s era isn’t what makes me dislike Moffat’s era. Moffat handled that quite well on his own.