Men and women will see things from different perspectives, and I'll be dammed, if I watch another episode where Moffat is a sexist dick lord.Zero=Interrupt said:Who cares about the gender of the writer? If they're good, then hire them. If not, then don't. How hard is that?
This isn't just directed at you, Rebel, apologies for singling you out here:Rebel_Raven said:In six years, there was NEVER a woman worthy of writing for Doctor Who? No one woman talented enough? Not one woman hired to write?
That's not at all weird to people who claim it's no big deal?
It's not something I'm outraged over, the 6 year gap, but I do think it's weird.
Apparently not, since the options here appear to be discriminatory hiring practices or the notion that women just aren't as good as men. The idea that it's 87 to 6, and it's been five years since #4, would indicate one of these two. One way or another, you would think this would be noteworthy: either because a sausage fest actually hired a woman, or because they finally found a chick who could write like man.kenu12345 said:Good for her? I honestly don't see the big deal here. Gender does not a good writer make. A good writer can anyone
Or, in other words, what RR said.Rebel_Raven said:In six years, there was NEVER a woman worthy of writing for Doctor Who? No one woman talented enough? Not one woman hired to write?
That's not at all weird to people who claim it's no big deal?
It's not something I'm outraged over, the 6 year gap, but I do think it's weird.
It's all good. ^-^ I'm still gunna reply with no hard feelings, though!LostGryphon said::/
It seems like these articles exist purely for the "female" bit of the title and little else, just because it gets people gabbing away or making inconsequential posts/comments like...well, the one I'm writing right now.
I'm glad they hired her and I hope her output is good, but the gender isn't important.
This isn't just directed at you, Rebel, apologies for singling you out here:Rebel_Raven said:In six years, there was NEVER a woman worthy of writing for Doctor Who? No one woman talented enough? Not one woman hired to write?
That's not at all weird to people who claim it's no big deal?
It's not something I'm outraged over, the 6 year gap, but I do think it's weird.
Is it truly so difficult to assume a lack of guilt/sexism, rather than...not?
Any number of factors are potentially at work here, including number/quality/demographic of viable applicants, how often they were actually hiring, how well applicants did in their respective interviews, the interviewer/ee's health or mood during any given interview, any number of minute details that affected either interviewer/ee, etc. etc. etc.
A gender gap, even one that large, is not explicitly indicative of sexism, no matter which gender it is that is the majority.
Sincerely, if it were a 95% female to male ratio, I wouldn't immediately view it as being motivated by sexist behavior on the part of human resources.
I can certainly understand an incredulous viewpoint, given the length of time and ratio, but...hell, benefit of the doubt?
No offense man I barely know you and all, but that came off really odd to me. Probably cause I just see people as people or something I don't know, but isn't there just a chance that not many (in this case)woman applied over the years or that they just haven't need to change writers that much. I mean I all for cheering on women when they do something that challenge something obviously misogynistic, but just seems to be a bit of random circumstance that kept a woman from this position for this long. Either way, as I said good for her. She got a job woot wootZachary Amaranth said:Apparently not, since the options here appear to be discriminatory hiring practices or the notion that women just aren't as good as men. The idea that it's 87 to 6, and it's been five years since #4, would indicate one of these two. One way or another, you would think this would be noteworthy: either because a sausage fest actually hired a woman, or because they finally found a chick who could write like man.kenu12345 said:Good for her? I honestly don't see the big deal here. Gender does not a good writer make. A good writer can anyone
Certainly understandable.Rebel_Raven said:It's all good. ^-^ I'm still gunna reply with no hard feelings, though!
Personally, I don't believe much in people as a group/whole. Some stand out, but as a whole? They don't really get the benefit of the doubt. I don't see why they get to have it some times.
I used to give the benefit of the doubt pretty easily, but decades of it taught me that they don't always get it. I'd need some reason to believe that it wasn't because of a boy's club mentality over it not. The boy's club method of hiring is just soooo easy to get away with, even these days regardless if it's actively sexist, or due to some other reason that just happens to make an excuse to exclude women.
I figure if we just let this sort of thing slip by, not calling out an unusual hiring ratio, and applauding the end of an unusual hiring policy just leaves the doors wide open for the unusual ratios to keep going because no one cares they exist, so a status quo that can be harmless at times, but isn't harmless at others continues.
It's okay for people to not care (even if they get annoying as a whole with snippy replies), and it's okay for people to care. I'm just glad for this event, and I hope it works out coz I'm still expecting a good show no matter who's writing.
I dunno, I just can't blindly give people the benefit of the doubt. Especially when it's a situation like this where the vast majority of it favors one group so much. It just feels a bit too wrong. Like I said before, it's hard to imagine that it takes so long to run into a person that's not the usual sort to do something that pretty much everyone can do equally, and have been famous for. In this case,it's women capable of writing a script suitable for a tv show. Gap's way too big in an industry notorious for not being the best to women.
But hey, on the bright side, if they occasionally keep hiring women that are good at their job, this won't ever be news/brought up again until they stop for a long amount of time.
Also, I know most people weren't fond of DIM/EotD but I highly doubt they were written a year after they aired.Mr Cwtchy said:DiM/EoTD came out in series 3, TSS and TPS in series 4. Unless writers write episodes in a very bizarre order I think these may be backwards.roseofbattle said:Before Tregenna's hiring, the last woman to write for the show was Helen Raynor, who wrote "Daleks in Manhattan/Evolution of the Daleks" in 2008, "The Sontaran Stratagem," and "The Poison Sky" in 2007.
What, that there weren't any female writers whatsoever good enough to write any Dr Who in the last 6 years? That the right person for the good just happening to be a man for each of the last 70 odd episodes? That, no matter how god-awful some of the writing for those episodes were, a woman would have done it worse?Res Plus said:Are you will to accept that it's just possible that there are other reasons for this mix of gender?
Because they had nothing to do with what I had said, and didn't appear to have been asked in good faith. My apologies if this isn't the case.Res Plus said:Sorry to bark questions at you there thaluikhain, was at work.
Two further questions:
1) I am interested that you ignored the other first two questions (if that makes sense):
"What percentage would you deem acceptable?"
"Whether you'd choose a poorer female writer over a male one in order to achieve your acceptable percentage?"
Why did you do that?
That might hold true if there was an uneven distribution between male and female writers, if things were merely leaning one way. But that's not the case.Res Plus said:I'd suggest that while you'd probably argue you are being tolerant and open-minded, personal prejudices colour everyone's judgment and it's very easy to apply "post hoc" thinking to subjects where we "know" what is going on.
This article strikes me as actually quite exploitative of the current goodwill toward "sexism" arguments in it's inference without any proof of "sexism". What do you reckon?
except this was managed many times in it's original run, and yet not once has the doctor had a male companion and not a female companion in the new run. Nor is the doctors sex anything to do with it, as it has been demonstrated ( several times now), that they can change sex during regeneration.zelda2fanboy said:When your show's basic premise is "male alien who has a friend," then it's going to be pretty difficult to not have "female characters tied to men."