In article <e9fae046c68202e9e57be633db90e994@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
since when was that a sin?
Since the introdution of the Timelss Child.
The Doctor wrote:
In article <e9fae046c68202e9e57be633db90e994@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
since when was that a sin?
Since the introdution of the Timelss Child.
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around with for
decades... by many different producers.
In article <1110ubo$2ld90$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 18/06/2026 14:20, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <e9fae046c68202e9e57be633db90e994@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
since when was that a sin?
Since the introdution of the Timelss Child.
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around with for
decades... by many different producers.
No it wasn't. No one ever decided to completely rewrite the Doctor's >>origin story and turn him into a completely different character who was >>not the Doctor but a mass murdering genocidal monster from another >>dimension created from an abused race and gender swapping child.
The Timeless Child monster killed Doctor Who and wiped out almost all of >>its entire fanbase.
Major alienation.
I predict we're heading for another post of "Retcon the Timeless
Child".
As mentioned before, by myself and others, DW canon is never actively retconned (when was the last time the Doctor being half-human was mentioned?), so the best we can hope for is for the timeless child to
be quietly dropped and maybe contradicted later down the line.
On 18/06/2026 14:20, Blueshirt wrote:
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around
with for decades... by many different producers.
No it wasn't.
No one ever decided to completely rewrite the Doctor's origin
story and turn him into a completely different character who
was not the Doctor but a mass murdering genocidal monster from
another dimension created from an abused race and gender
swapping child.
In article <xn0pr69398mntvh006@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around with
for decades... by many different producers.
This time Chibnall ultimately did it.
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 01:06:43 -0000 (UTC),
doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) wrote:
In article <1110ubo$2ld90$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
The Timeless Child monster killed Doctor Who and wiped
out almost all of its entire fanbase.
Major alienation.
I predict we're heading for another post of "Retcon the
Timeless Child".
As mentioned before, by myself and others, DW canon is never
actively retconned (when was the last time the Doctor being
half-human was mentioned?), so the best we can hope for is for
the timeless child to be quietly dropped and maybe
contradicted later down the line.
AFAIC the other Chibs sin is the cyberisation of the Time
Lords, which I hope is also quietly given the boot.
Same goes for the Fugitive Doctor, who was actually quite good
(better than Jodie IMHO), but doesn't fit anywhere, being
supposedly pre-Hartnell but having a TARDIS which looks like a
police box.
Verily, in article
<lgq93ldinec9lv17k1g4k5m4993d4nnjga@jwbrown.co.uk>, did jerry@jwbrown.co.uk.invalid deliver unto us this message:
I predict we're heading for another post of "Retcon the
Timeless Child".
"Heading for"?
As mentioned before, by myself and others, DW canon is never
actively retconned (when was the last time the Doctor being
half-human was mentioned?), so the best we can hope for is
for the timeless child to be quietly dropped and maybe
contradicted later down the line.
I'm okay with it either way. Quietly dropping it would be
okay, but if a new showrunner wanted to do a quick retcon of
the bad years, it would show the right attitude and amuse
returning fans.
In article <MPG.449edcf7f4c1dfda98a089@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article <lgq93ldinec9lv17k1g4k5m4993d4nnjga@jwbrown.co.uk>,
did jerry@jwbrown.co.uk.invalid deliver unto us this message:
I predict we're heading for another post of "Retcon the Timeless
Child".
"Heading for"?
As mentioned before, by myself and others, DW canon is never actively
retconned (when was the last time the Doctor being half-human was
mentioned?), so the best we can hope for is for the timeless child to
be quietly dropped and maybe contradicted later down the line.
I'm okay with it either way. Quietly dropping it would be okay, but if a >new showrunner wanted to do a quick retcon of the bad years, it would
show the right attitude and amuse returning fans.
And that is what is needed to repair the damage!
Reminds me of Married... With Children.
Chris Chibnall's ideas were misguided and unnecessary. They were
too lore-changing and a step too far. He tried to be too clever
and misjudged his audience.
And now there is anexecutioner's noose waiting for both Chibnall and Whittaker.
When William Hartnell's 'Doctor' 'morphed' into Patrick Troughton's
'Doctor' that was pretty much T.V. lore-changing as well, wasn't it??
If UseNet had existed back then, would it have lit up, then too??
On 19/06/2026 8:43 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
Chris Chibnall's ideas were misguided and unnecessary.
They were too lore-changing and a step too far. He tried
to be too clever and misjudged his audience.
When William Hartnell's 'Doctor' 'morphed' into Patrick
Troughton's 'Doctor' that was pretty much T.V. lore-changing
as well, wasn't it??
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 01:06:43 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
(The Doctor) wrote:
In article <1110ubo$2ld90$1@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
On 18/06/2026 14:20, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <e9fae046c68202e9e57be633db90e994@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
since when was that a sin?
Since the introdution of the Timelss Child.
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around with for
decades... by many different producers.
No it wasn't. No one ever decided to completely rewrite the Doctor's
origin story and turn him into a completely different character who was
not the Doctor but a mass murdering genocidal monster from another
dimension created from an abused race and gender swapping child.
The Timeless Child monster killed Doctor Who and wiped out almost all of >>> its entire fanbase.
Major alienation.
I predict we're heading for another post of "Retcon the Timeless
Child".
As mentioned before, by myself and others, DW canon is never actively retconned (when was the last time the Doctor being half-human was mentioned?), so the best we can hope for is for the timeless child to
be quietly dropped and maybe contradicted later down the line.
AFAIC the other Chibs sin is the cyberisation of the Time Lords, which
I hope is also quietly given the boot.
Same goes for the Fugitive Doctor, who was actually quite good (better
than Jodie IMHO), but doesn't fit anywhere, being supposedly
pre-Hartnell but having a TARDIS which looks like a police box.
Romana's regeneration too. As she physically chose her
regenerated form. Which until then, we hadn't see in the show...
and we haven't seen it since either.
Verily, in article <xn0pr7mnqxyehku00j@post.eweka.nl>, did blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
Romana's regeneration too. As she physically chose her
regenerated form. Which until then, we hadn't see in the
show... and we haven't seen it since either.
She seemed to be doing it intentionally, too. Adams wrote it
for the lulz, unconcerned about what it would do to lore.
Some have theorized that female time lords have more control
than male ones. This is based on Romana's regeneration and on
a line where the Rani makes fun of the Doctor's regenerated
face. I don't accept that argument, since I think the Rani's
line is being misinterpreted.
I doubt it will ever come up, but if I were the showrunner and
I wanted to reference Romana's reincarnation, I'd probably
lightly retcon it into an accident while repairing the TARDIS.
That might even explain why Romana II has less of the
superior, cocky attitude.
The True Doctor wrote:
On 18/06/2026 14:20, Blueshirt wrote:
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around
with for decades... by many different producers.
No it wasn't.
Don't be stupid. Of course televised Doctor Who canon has been
messed around with over the years. Things have been amended,
rewritten, retconned, adapted, ignored, (etc.) since 1963.
No one ever decided to completely rewrite the Doctor's origin
story and turn him into a completely different character who
was not the Doctor but a mass murdering genocidal monster from
another dimension created from an abused race and gender
swapping child.
Admitidly, nobody had ever done THAT before... and it was a big
lore-changing event.
However, and I'll keep coming back to this point... the two
people here who are so obsessed with the "Timeless Child" that
they just have to mention it morning, noon and night, were...
strangely enough, two of the most vocal people on RADW
against the casting of Jodie Whittaker as the 13th Doctor in
2017. Months before her episodes had aired and before they even
knew about the Timeless Child arc!
On 19/06/2026 12:12 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 18/06/2026 14:20, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <e9fae046c68202e9e57be633db90e994@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio˙ <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
since when was that a sin?
Since the introdution of the Timelss Child.
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around with for
decades... by many different producers.
No it wasn't. No one ever decided to completely rewrite the Doctor's
origin story and turn him into a completely different character who
was not the Doctor but a mass murdering genocidal monster from another
dimension created from an abused race and gender swapping child.
When will 'The Doctor ever go BACK to that Dimension ... the one from
which he just appeared??
I mean, what sort of adventures could The Doctor and The TARDIS have
there .... maybe even meet his REAL Parents!! ;-P
The Rani later bi-generated, which was another lore-changing
regeneration idea!
I doubt it will ever come up, but if I were the showrunner and
I wanted to reference Romana's reincarnation, I'd probably
lightly retcon it into an accident while repairing the TARDIS.
That might even explain why Romana II has less of the
superior, cocky attitude.
I'd rather they got rid of the stupid bi-generation thing. But
maybe it's just best never to mention that again too.
On 19/06/2026 11:19, Blueshirt wrote:
However, and I'll keep coming back to this point... the two
people here who are so obsessed with the "Timeless Child"
that they just have to mention it morning, noon and night,
were... strangely enough, two of the most vocal people on
RADW against the casting of Jodie Whittaker as the 13th
Doctor in 2017. Months before her episodes had aired and
before they even knew about the Timeless Child arc!
Wrong!
I gave Whittaker a chance but she was a shit actress with no
acting range whatsoever, totally miscast,
Verily, in article <xn0pr7oajy0mgnz00l@post.eweka.nl>, did blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The Rani later bi-generated, which was another lore-changing
regeneration idea!
I may hate that more than the Timeless Child, because it was a
stupid idea that didn't even do anything. It's a time travel
show, for cripes' sake. It's incredibly easy to have multiple
Ranis. We've had up to five Doctors at once, and nobody
quint-generated.
WRONG!
Date: 16th July 2017.
Jodie Whittaker is announced as the 13th Doctor, three months
before her first episode aired that October.
Meanwhile, over on RADW:
The True Doctor wrote:
On 19/06/2026 11:19, Blueshirt wrote:
However, and I'll keep coming back to this point... the two
people here who are so obsessed with the "Timeless Child"
that they just have to mention it morning, noon and night,
were... strangely enough, two of the most vocal people on
RADW against the casting of Jodie Whittaker as the 13th
Doctor in 2017. Months before her episodes had aired and
before they even knew about the Timeless Child arc!
Wrong!
I gave Whittaker a chance but she was a shit actress with no
acting range whatsoever, totally miscast,
WRONG!
Date: 16th July 2017.
Jodie Whittaker is announced as the 13th Doctor, three months
before her first episode aired that October.
Meanwhile, over on RADW:
------------------------------------------------------
From: "Agamemnon" <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM>
Subject: Re: Her at last
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 17:06:32 +0100
Message-ID: <2KadnfhFjoKUEvbEnZ2dnUU78SnNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Casting a woman to play the title role is the last gasp of
desperation of a series already on life support after Moffat
drove it into the ground head first.
Who are they going to get to play the screaming companion asking
all the stupid questions? A man? Do they seriously think male
viewers will keep watching? Do they seriously think female
viewers will fancy a female Doctor?
This gimmick won't last more than 5 minutes.
It's already lost them an entire generation of boys below the
age of puberty who won't watch it because there isn't a male
lead.
The only way it could work is if the male companion is made to
be the real hero of the show, saving the Doctor on every
occasion, and then you would have the question, why is a man
traveling in the TARDIS with an older woman who isn't his
mother? If they're not portrayed as being in a relationship it
won't have any credibility whatsoever and no one will watch. A
female Doctor and a female companion is out of the question;
half the audience will be gone in an instant. A female Doctor
and a male and a female companion will be a menage a trios!
Facebook is already in uproar!
For the sake of the series let's hope this is just a bad
practical joke and Jodie Whittaker is actually there to give the
key to the TARDIS to the real 13th Doctor. I almost thought it
was Joanna Lumley reenacting her role from the end of The Curse
of Fatal Death!
--------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Agamemnon" <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM>
Subject: Re: Bigotry (Political Correctness) Gone Mad
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 23:04:03 +0100
Message-ID: <_MqdnQmEapJJf_bEnZ2dnUU78XHNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
On 16/07/2017 17:53, Ignis Fatuus wrote:
I'm not having it called Political Correctness. It's BIGOTRY by
another name!
Anti-male, anti-white, anti-heterosexual, anti-British,
B-I-G-O-T-R-Y!
What's left on the BBC for white male British heterosexual
viewers to enjoy? NOTHING!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, you gave her a chance alright. No chance!
But of course you did watch her epsidoes...
So we didn't have to.
Verily, in article <xn0pr7q56y35pr0002@post.eweka.nl>, did blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
WRONG!
Date: 16th July 2017.
Jodie Whittaker is announced as the 13th Doctor, three months
before her first episode aired that October.
Meanwhile, over on RADW:
I restrained myself from replying to content almost nine years old, but
it was a struggle.
I do believe most people understand that sex is a much, much starker difference than race. Changing the sex of a beloved character is okay in
some reboots, but not in the actual vehicle show of that character.
I predict we're heading for another post of "Retcon the Timeless
Child".
As mentioned before, by myself and others, DW canon is never actively >retconned (when was the last time the Doctor being half-human was >mentioned?), so the best we can hope for is for the timeless child to
be quietly dropped and maybe contradicted later down the line.
AFAIC the other Chibs sin is the cyberisation of the Time Lords, which
I hope is also quietly given the boot.
Same goes for the Fugitive Doctor, who was actually quite good (better
than Jodie IMHO), but doesn't fit anywhere, being supposedly
pre-Hartnell but having a TARDIS which looks like a police box.
On 19/06/2026 12:12 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 18/06/2026 14:20, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <e9fae046c68202e9e57be633db90e994@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio? <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
since when was that a sin?
Since the introdution of the Timelss Child.
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around with for
decades... by many different producers.
No it wasn't. No one ever decided to completely rewrite the Doctor's
origin story and turn him into a completely different character who was
not the Doctor but a mass murdering genocidal monster from another
dimension created from an abused race and gender swapping child.
When will 'The Doctor ever go BACK to that Dimension ... the one from
which he just appeared??
I mean, what sort of adventures could The Doctor and The TARDIS have
there .... maybe even meet his REAL Parents!! ;-P
Verily, in article <1113bn0$3acrb$1@dont-email.me>, did daniel47 >@nomail.afraid.org deliver unto us this message:
When William Hartnell's 'Doctor' 'morphed' into Patrick Troughton's
'Doctor' that was pretty much T.V. lore-changing as well, wasn't it??
The term "regeneration" is used, but if we listen to what the new Doctor >says, it's really pitched as more of a rejuvenation. The idea is that
his youth was restored.
When they eventually replaced Troughton with Pertwee, they bigged the
idea up into a complete change.
If UseNet had existed back then, would it have lit up, then too??
Probably not, TBH. Restoring youth seems like something a Time Lord
might be able to do. There might have been some squawking when Two
turned into Three, or perhaps the sheer amazingness of "The War Games"
would have flattened it.
It is traditional to complain about any new actor cast, though. I
remember all the abuse Matt Smith took. I was especially amused by a
forum which took one look at one still picture and concluded he couldn't >act.
Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/06/2026 8:43 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
When William Hartnell's 'Doctor' 'morphed' into Patrick
Chris Chibnall's ideas were misguided and unnecessary.
They were too lore-changing and a step too far. He tried
to be too clever and misjudged his audience.
Troughton's 'Doctor' that was pretty much T.V. lore-changing
as well, wasn't it??
Not really, but some regenerations could be termed
lore-changing. "The Watcher" was a new thing in 1980, different
to any previous regeneration we had seen.
Romana's regeneration too. As she physically chose her
regenerated form.
Which until then, we hadn't see in the show...
and we haven't seen it since either.
In article<1113bn0$3acrb$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 19/06/2026 8:43 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article<xn0pr69398mntvh006@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around with
for decades... by many different producers.
This time Chibnall ultimately did it.
Ultimately, is correct.
Chris Chibnall's ideas were misguided and unnecessary. They wereWhen William Hartnell's 'Doctor' 'morphed' into Patrick Troughton's 'Doctor' that was pretty much T.V. lore-changing as well, wasn't it??
too lore-changing and a step too far. He tried to be too clever
and misjudged his audience.
If UseNet had existed back then, would it have lit up, then too??
Who knows?
Internet was created in 1960.
--
Daniel70
On 19/06/2026 16:00, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Doctor wrote:
I gave Whittaker a chance but she was a shit actress
with no acting range whatsoever, totally miscast,
WRONG!
Date: 16th July 2017.
Jodie Whittaker is announced as the 13th Doctor.
Meanwhile, over on RADW...
From: "Agamemnon" <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM>
Subject: Re: Bigotry (Political Correctness) Gone Mad
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 23:04:03 +0100
I'm not having it called Political Correctness. It's BIGOTRY
by another name!
Anti-male, anti-white, anti-heterosexual, anti-British,
B-I-G-O-T-R-Y!
What's left on the BBC for white male British heterosexual
viewers to enjoy? NOTHING!
And once again I was absolutely right.
The Timeless Child alienated a major chunk of Doctor
Who fans.
The Doctor wrote:
The Timeless Child alienated a major chunk of Doctor
Who fans.
Yes Dave, it did.
However, you were against the 13th Doctor from the beginning,
because she was a woman.
Just as you would be against the 16th Doctor (or any other
future Doctor) being a female.
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 08:12:24 +0100, Jerry Brown
<jerry@jwbrown.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
<snip>
I predict we're heading for another post of "Retcon the Timeless
Child".
As mentioned before, by myself and others, DW canon is never actively
retconned (when was the last time the Doctor being half-human was
mentioned?), so the best we can hope for is for the timeless child to
be quietly dropped and maybe contradicted later down the line.
AFAIC the other Chibs sin is the cyberisation of the Time Lords, which
I hope is also quietly given the boot.
Same goes for the Fugitive Doctor, who was actually quite good (better
than Jodie IMHO), but doesn't fit anywhere, being supposedly
pre-Hartnell but having a TARDIS which looks like a police box.
Another thought has occurred to me: as well as the in-universe issues
of actively retconning any of the above, in the Real World Chibs may
someday (unlikely as it seems now) become a major player, so any
future showrunner who explicitly decanonises his work effectively
burns their bridges with him.
I notice that RTD has moved to UK Channel 4 with "Tip Toe", which
appears to be Spike Lee's "Do the Right Thing" with gay substituted
for black (i.e. a cascading sequence of small events/misunderstandings
leads to a major tragic consequences).
I saw the last five minutes of an early episode - a montage of the Sympathetic Gay Characters getting off on porn on their phones/tablets
while the Evil Hetero neighbour is watching execution videos. So not
for me, although personally I hope it's a huge success and RTD is able
to forge a long-term career on C4 doing such issue dramas, and keeping
him far away from the BBC and DW. Far Far Away!
On 20/06/2026 14:40, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
The Timeless Child alienated a major chunk of Doctor
Who fans.
Yes Dave, it did.
However, you were against the 13th Doctor from the beginning,
because she was a woman.
Why shouldn't he be against her because she's a woman? It's a
perfectly valid and justifiable reason for being against her
because the Doctor is a male character and had been that way
for over 50 years and 13 incarnations up to that point.
Just as you would be against the 16th Doctor (or any other
future Doctor) being a female.
As should everyone.
Same as being against turning the Doctor gay
or changing his racist. Changing an existing characters
sex, race, and sexuality and expecting the audience to accept
it and lap it up is sexist, and racist, and bigoted to the
highest degree possible.
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 22:04:40 +1000, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 19/06/2026 12:12 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 18/06/2026 14:20, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <e9fae046c68202e9e57be633db90e994@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio? <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
since when was that a sin?
Since the introdution of the Timelss Child.
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around with for
decades... by many different producers.
No it wasn't. No one ever decided to completely rewrite the Doctor's
origin story and turn him into a completely different character who was
not the Doctor but a mass murdering genocidal monster from another
dimension created from an abused race and gender swapping child.
When will 'The Doctor ever go BACK to that Dimension ... the one from
which he just appeared??
I mean, what sort of adventures could The Doctor and The TARDIS have
there .... maybe even meet his REAL Parents!! ;-P
Much as I enjoyed SM's tenure I did find his constant insertion of The Impossible Girl into the Doctor's timeline rather irritating and was
worried that she would eventually wind up present at the Doctor's
conception.
On 2026-06-20 08:55:02 +0000, Jerry Brown said:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 22:04:40 +1000, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 19/06/2026 12:12 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 18/06/2026 14:20, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <e9fae046c68202e9e57be633db90e994@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio? <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
since when was that a sin?
Since the introdution of the Timelss Child.
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around with for
decades... by many different producers.
No it wasn't. No one ever decided to completely rewrite the Doctor's
origin story and turn him into a completely different character who was >>>> not the Doctor but a mass murdering genocidal monster from another
dimension created from an abused race and gender swapping child.
When will 'The Doctor ever go BACK to that Dimension ... the one from
which he just appeared??
I mean, what sort of adventures could The Doctor and The TARDIS have
there .... maybe even meet his REAL Parents!! ;-P
Much as I enjoyed SM's tenure I did find his constant insertion of The
Impossible Girl into the Doctor's timeline rather irritating and was
worried that she would eventually wind up present at the Doctor's
conception.
She's probably the Doctor's mother. ;-)
On 2026-06-20 08:55:02 +0000, Jerry Brown said:
Much as I enjoyed SM's tenure I did find his constant
insertion of The Impossible Girl into the Doctor's
timeline rather irritating and was worried that she
would eventually wind up present at the Doctor's conception.
She's probably the Doctor's mother. ;-)
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 10:56:01 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2026-06-20 08:55:02 +0000, Jerry Brown said:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 22:04:40 +1000, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 19/06/2026 12:12 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 18/06/2026 14:20, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <e9fae046c68202e9e57be633db90e994@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio? <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
since when was that a sin?
Since the introdution of the Timelss Child.
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around with for
decades... by many different producers.
No it wasn't. No one ever decided to completely rewrite the Doctor's >>>> origin story and turn him into a completely different character who was >>>> not the Doctor but a mass murdering genocidal monster from another
dimension created from an abused race and gender swapping child.
When will 'The Doctor ever go BACK to that Dimension ... the one from
which he just appeared??
I mean, what sort of adventures could The Doctor and The TARDIS have
there .... maybe even meet his REAL Parents!! ;-P
Much as I enjoyed SM's tenure I did find his constant insertion of The
Impossible Girl into the Doctor's timeline rather irritating and was
worried that she would eventually wind up present at the Doctor's
conception.
She's probably the Doctor's mother. ;-)
That didn't occur to me since SM was a fan of closed-time loops, so
making the Doctor his/her own mother/father/son/daughter seemed right
up his street.
But yes you're right, making Clara his mother would have resurrected/explained the half-human origin from the 1996 TV movie.
Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-20 08:55:02 +0000, Jerry Brown said:
Much as I enjoyed SM's tenure I did find his constant
insertion of The Impossible Girl into the Doctor's
timeline rather irritating and was worried that she
would eventually wind up present at the Doctor's conception.
She's probably the Doctor's mother. ;-)
That was the woman in "The End of Time"!
Allegedly.
The Doctor's mother is a bit of a muddle. The movie had that half-human
line, but some of the expanded universe goes with that and some has her
as Gallifreyan.
An older woman who appeared on Gallifrey during Capaldi's time, who recognized the Doctor and showed concern for him, was believed by some
to be his mother. I think RTD said something about that, although of
late it's best not to take RTD's pronouncements too seriously.
The True Doctor wrote:
On 20/06/2026 14:40, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
The Timeless Child alienated a major chunk of Doctor
Who fans.
Yes Dave, it did.
However, you were against the 13th Doctor from the beginning,
because she was a woman.
Why shouldn't he be against her because she's a woman? It's a
perfectly valid and justifiable reason for being against her
because the Doctor is a male character and had been that way
for over 50 years and 13 incarnations up to that point.
Then I'd rather people just said that, rather than pretending
it's the "Timeless Child" storyline they were against.
Especially when the evidence from the RADW archives proves they
were complaining here since the day Jodie Whittaker was cast as
the 13th Doctor.
Just as you would be against the 16th Doctor (or any other
future Doctor) being a female.
As should everyone.
Not liking a female Doctor/Master is a perfectly legitimate POV
as long as it's not dressed up as anything other than misogyny.
As that's what it is.
Doctor Who is a sci-fi based TV show, featuring an alien who
travels in time and space. Nobody has ever said Time Lords
cannot change their gender when their body regenerates.
It may not have been the wisest decision to make the 13th Doctor
female but in sci-fi I don't see why it can't be done.
Same as being against turning the Doctor gay
My view is The Doctor should be asexual and he/she shouldn't be
having romantic storylines with anyone, male, female or animal!
I don't believe that's what anyone watches "Doctor Who" for.
or changing his racist. Changing an existing characters
sex, race, and sexuality and expecting the audience to accept
it and lap it up is sexist, and racist, and bigoted to the
highest degree possible.
But The Doctor is an alien, from another planet... if written
well who is to say The Doctor (or any other Time Lord) can't
change their sex or race? How do we know how Gallifrey biology
works?
Verily, in article <4c4f3ldr0lahl8ribfsa9vgfpmagsn33j3@jwbrown.co.uk>,
did jerry@jwbrown.co.uk.invalid deliver unto us this message:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 10:56:01 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2026-06-20 08:55:02 +0000, Jerry Brown said:
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 22:04:40 +1000, Daniel70
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
On 19/06/2026 12:12 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 18/06/2026 14:20, Blueshirt wrote:
The Doctor wrote:
In article <e9fae046c68202e9e57be633db90e994@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio˙ <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
since when was that a sin?
Since the introdution of the Timelss Child.
Doctor Who televised "canon" has been messed around with for
decades... by many different producers.
No it wasn't. No one ever decided to completely rewrite the Doctor's >>>>>> origin story and turn him into a completely different character who was >>>>>> not the Doctor but a mass murdering genocidal monster from another >>>>>> dimension created from an abused race and gender swapping child.
When will 'The Doctor ever go BACK to that Dimension ... the one from >>>>> which he just appeared??
I mean, what sort of adventures could The Doctor and The TARDIS have >>>>> there .... maybe even meet his REAL Parents!! ;-P
Much as I enjoyed SM's tenure I did find his constant insertion of The >>>> Impossible Girl into the Doctor's timeline rather irritating and was
worried that she would eventually wind up present at the Doctor's
conception.
She's probably the Doctor's mother. ;-)
That didn't occur to me since SM was a fan of closed-time loops, so
making the Doctor his/her own mother/father/son/daughter seemed right
up his street.
But yes you're right, making Clara his mother would have
resurrected/explained the half-human origin from the 1996 TV movie.
The Doctor's mother is a bit of a muddle. The movie had that half-human
line, but some of the expanded universe goes with that and some has her
as Gallifreyan.
An older woman who appeared on Gallifrey during Capaldi's time, who
recognized the Doctor and showed concern for him, was believed by some
to be his mother. I think RTD said something about that, although of
late it's best not to take RTD's pronouncements too seriously.
On 21/06/2026 12:27, The True Melissa wrote:
[quoted text muted]
The Doctor's mother is a bit of a muddle. The movie had that half-human line, but some of the expanded universe goes with that and some has her
as Gallifreyan.
An older woman who appeared on Gallifrey during Capaldi's time, who
You mean Tennant in The End of Time.
On 22/06/2026 3:09 am, The True Doctor wrote:
Turning the Doctor into a woman is implicit bad writing
and therefore it can never be written well after doing
that.
The Doctor is a white British heterosexual male character
The Doctor WAS PORTRAYED BY a white British heterosexual male
character ... until the T.V. character wasn't.
and always must be a white British heterosexual male
character.
WHY must it always be?? Will it break some Universal Law or
other if the Sex of a PREVIOUSLY MALE T.V. Character changes??
I say, bring back Jodie Whittaker and give her some decent
companions... and some decent scripts! Make the whole 14th &
15th Doctor eras of the show a dream... you know, just like
"Dallas".
and always must be a white British heterosexual male
character.
WHY must it always be?? Will it break some Universal Law or
other if the Sex of a PREVIOUSLY MALE T.V. Character changes??
It will break everyone's TV... as writing fiction that is not
consistent with other fiction goes against the laws of
literature... or something.
On 22/06/2026 3:09 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 20/06/2026 22:36, Blueshirt wrote:
<Snip>
well who is to say The Doctor (or any other Time Lord) can't change
their sex or race? How do we know how Gallifrey biology works?
IMPOSSIBLE! Turning the Doctor into a woman is implicit bad writing and
therefore it can never be written well after doing that.
The Doctor is a white British heterosexual male character
The Doctor *WAS* PORTRAYED BY a white British heterosexual male
character ... until the T.V. character wasn't.
and always must be a white British heterosexual male character.
WHY must it always be?? Will it break some Universal Law or other if
the Sex of a PREVIOUSLY MALE T.V. Character changes??
Anyone who doesn't like that is a sexist, a racist, and a bigot.
Anyone who doesn't like that should go outside and smell the pollution!!
Verily, in article <xn0prbwzq12enl000@post.eweka.nl>, did blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
I say, bring back Jodie Whittaker and give her some decent
companions... and some decent scripts! Make the whole 14th & 15th
Doctor eras of the show a dream... you know, just like "Dallas".
Do you think she wants to come back?
and always must be a white British heterosexual male character.
WHY must it always be?? Will it break some Universal Law or other if
the Sex of a PREVIOUSLY MALE T.V. Character changes??
It will break everyone's TV... as writing fiction that is not
consistent with other fiction goes against the laws of literature... or
something.
I mean, it kind of does. Stories are supposed to be internally
consistent. A reboot can change sexes and races, since it's supposed
to be a different take of the same idea. It's strange to change the sex
of the character while the show is already running.
It's also strange that all the Time Lords suddenly started swapping
sexes whenever they regenerated, though it had never happened before.
It might have been a little more palatable if it had been treated as
the major change it was. Instead, the world was changed to make a new
thing seem as if it weren't new.
On 22/06/2026 3:09 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 20/06/2026 22:36, Blueshirt wrote:
<Snip>
well who is to say The Doctor (or any other Time Lord) can't change
their sex or race? How do we know how Gallifrey biology works?
IMPOSSIBLE! Turning the Doctor into a woman is implicit bad writing
and therefore it can never be written well after doing that.
The Doctor is a white British heterosexual male character
The Doctor *WAS* PORTRAYED BY a white British heterosexual male
character ... until the T.V. character wasn't.
and always must be a white British heterosexual male character.
WHY must it always be?? Will it break some Universal Law or other if the
Sex of a PREVIOUSLY MALE T.V. Character changes??
Anyone who doesn't like that is a sexist, a racist, and a bigot.Anyone who doesn't like that should go outside and smell the pollution!!
Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/06/2026 3:09 am, The True Doctor wrote:
Turning the Doctor into a woman is implicit bad writing
and therefore it can never be written well after doing
that.
The Doctor is a white British heterosexual male character
The Doctor WAS PORTRAYED BY a white British heterosexual male
character ... until the T.V. character wasn't.
I say, bring back Jodie Whittaker and give her some decent
companions... and some decent scripts! Make the whole 14th &
15th Doctor eras of the show a dream... you know, just like
"Dallas".
and always must be a white British heterosexual male
character.
WHY must it always be?? Will it break some Universal Law or
other if the Sex of a PREVIOUSLY MALE T.V. Character changes??
It will break everyone's TV... as writing fiction that is not
consistent with other fiction goes against the laws of
literature... or something.
On 2026-06-22 14:58:27 +0000, The True Melissa said:
Verily, in article <xn0prbwzq12enl000@post.eweka.nl>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
I say, bring back Jodie Whittaker and give her some decent
companions... and some decent scripts! Make the whole 14th & 15th
Doctor eras of the show a dream... you know, just like "Dallas".
Do you think she wants to come back?
She has recently said that she would love to play the role again ...
which begs the question of why did she leave in the first place? Most
likely answer is that she in fact hated or was bored of the role by the
time she left, and is simply trying to be polite so she still gets hired
for other shows.
and always must be a white British heterosexual male character.
WHY must it always be?? Will it break some Universal Law or other if
the Sex of a PREVIOUSLY MALE T.V. Character changes??
It will break everyone's TV... as writing fiction that is not
consistent with other fiction goes against the laws of literature...
or something.
I mean, it kind of does. Stories are supposed to be internally
consistent.˙ A reboot can change sexes and races, since it's supposed
to be a different take of the same idea. It's strange to change the
sex of the character while the show is already running.
It's also strange that all the Time Lords suddenly started swapping
sexes whenever they regenerated, though it had never happened before.
It might have been a little more palatable if it had been treated as
the major change it was. Instead, the world was changed to make a new
thing seem as if it weren't new.
It was done simply to appease Politically Correct whiners and quotas.
Same with teh change to a black and gay male.
Verily, in article <xn0prbwzq12enl000@post.eweka.nl>, did blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
I say, bring back Jodie Whittaker and give her some decent
companions... and some decent scripts! Make the whole 14th &
15th Doctor eras of the show a dream... you know, just like
"Dallas".
Do you think she wants to come back?
On 2026-06-22 14:58:27 +0000, The True Melissa said:
It's also strange that all the Time Lords suddenly started
swapping sexes whenever they regenerated, though it had
never happened before. It might have been a little more
palatable if it had been treated as the major change it
was. Instead, the world was changed to make a new thing
seem as if it weren't new.
It was done simply to appease Politically Correct whiners and
quotas. Same with the change to a black and gay male.
The thing is - and I've been in Doctor Who fandom a long time -
I don't recall anybody ever calling for a female or black Doctor.
Fandom has moaned about plenty of things over the years, and
demanded many many things, in a variety of forms, but the
request for a female/black Doctor was never top of anyone's list.
Verily, in article <xn0prd412xxog004@post.eweka.nl>, did blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The thing is - and I've been in Doctor Who fandom a long
time - I don't recall anybody ever calling for a female or
black Doctor.
Fandom has moaned about plenty of things over the years, and
demanded many many things, in a variety of forms, but the
request for a female/black Doctor was never top of anyone's
list.
I do. Back around 2008-10, many people on Outpost Gallifrey
were calling for a black Doctor. There was a perpetual
argument between those who wanted that and those who didn't.
There were fewer who wanted a woman Doctor, though. Those
issues get lumped together a lot, but they're not the same.
There were fewer who wanted a woman Doctor, though. Those
issues get lumped together a lot, but they're not the same.
Similar though, as it's all to appease a vocal political correct
minority that seem to think they are entitled to representation
when it comes to being "The Doctor". But, had the actual stories
been as good as we had in the Pertwee/Tom Baker era of the show
with the female or black Doctor that we did get, I don't think I
would have minded at the end of the day. Tokenism itself doesn't
sell a story, it still needs to be enjoyable and entertaining.
Verily, in article
<xn0prd58q2jzpc000@news.eternal-september.org>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
There were fewer who wanted a woman Doctor, though. Those
issues get lumped together a lot, but they're not the same.
Similar though, as it's all to appease a vocal political
correct minority that seem to think they are entitled to
representation when it comes to being "The Doctor". But, had
the actual stories been as good as we had in the Pertwee/Tom
Baker era of the show with the female or black Doctor that
we did get, I don't think I would have minded at the end of
the day. Tokenism itself doesn't sell a story, it still
needs to be enjoyable and entertaining.
I could have lived with a female Doctor if there'd been some
explanation for the swap. Instead, RTD just decided to call
off the entire male/female division that has existed ever
since C. elegans developed a chromosome copying error.
I agree that the stories are what matter most. I didn't see
much of Whittaker, but she sure seemed to be saddled with some
subpar stories.
Is Outpost Gallifry still an exclusive club?
In article <MPG.44a45e2918dfe42698a0d4@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
[quoted text muted]
don't you? That was all I did.
When the site moved, I signed up again and managed to score the "Lady >President" username.
I signed up and was rejected.
Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-22 14:58:27 +0000, The True Melissa said:
It's also strange that all the Time Lords suddenly started
swapping sexes whenever they regenerated, though it had
never happened before. It might have been a little more
palatable if it had been treated as the major change it
was. Instead, the world was changed to make a new thing
seem as if it weren't new.
It was done simply to appease Politically Correct whiners and
quotas. Same with the change to a black and gay male.
The thing is - and I've been in Doctor Who fandom a long time -
I don't recall anybody ever calling for a female or black Doctor.
In article <xn0prd412xxog004@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-22 14:58:27 +0000, The True Melissa said:
It's also strange that all the Time Lords suddenly started
swapping sexes whenever they regenerated, though it had
never happened before. It might have been a little more
palatable if it had been treated as the major change it
was. Instead, the world was changed to make a new thing
seem as if it weren't new.
It was done simply to appease Politically Correct whiners and
quotas. Same with the change to a black and gay male.
The thing is - and I've been in Doctor Who fandom a long time -
I don't recall anybody ever calling for a female or black Doctor.
Fandom has moaned about plenty of things over the years, and
demanded many many things, in a variety of forms, but the
request for a female/black Doctor was never top of anyone's list.
It was something the producers decided to do because they wanted
to do... they wanted to be seen to be trendy. Either that or the
BBC told them to do it, as inclusivity is the 'in' thing in
their politically correct world.
Either way, the producers/writers should have just continued to
write good Doctor Who stories and leave the virtue signalling at
the door.
What if Joanne Lumley were the Doctor sometimes in the 1980s?
In article
<MPG.44a45e2918dfe42698a0d4@news.eternal-september.org>, The
True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> wrote:
Verily, in article <111e2gg$1uup$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
Is Outpost Gallifry still an exclusive club?
I didn't know it ever was. You just have to sign up for
an account, don't you? That was all I did.
When the site moved, I signed up again and managed to score
the "Lady President" username.
I signed up and was rejected.
Verily, in article <111e5kp$1oo$5@gallifrey.nk.ca>, did doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca deliver unto us this message:
I signed up and was rejected.
I didn't even know that could happen. Was a reason given?
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0prd412xxog004@post.eweka.nl>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The thing is - and I've been in Doctor Who fandom a long
time - I don't recall anybody ever calling for a female or
black Doctor.
Fandom has moaned about plenty of things over the years, and
demanded many many things, in a variety of forms, but the
request for a female/black Doctor was never top of anyone's
list.
I do. Back around 2008-10, many people on Outpost Gallifrey
were calling for a black Doctor. There was a perpetual
argument between those who wanted that and those who didn't.
I can't recall too much of that debate. Although come to think of
it, I do recall some sort of call for Patterson Joseph to be the
"next Doctor" once upon a time, but I don't think that was ever
a major debate.
I'm sure the threads about the Morbius 'Doctors' or UNIT dating
went on for much longer!
There were fewer who wanted a woman Doctor, though. Those
issues get lumped together a lot, but they're not the same.
Similar though, as it's all to appease a vocal political correct
minority that seem to think they are entitled to representation
when it comes to being "The Doctor". But, had the actual stories
been as good as we had in the Pertwee/Tom Baker era of the show
with the female or black Doctor that we did get, I don't think I
would have minded at the end of the day. Tokenism itself doesn't
sell a story, it still needs to be enjoyable and entertaining.
On 23/06/2026 8:27 pm, Blueshirt wrote:
The True Melissa wrote:
Verily, in article <xn0prd412xxog004@post.eweka.nl>, did
blueshirt@indigo.news deliver unto us this message:
The thing is - and I've been in Doctor Who fandom a long time - I don't >>>> recall anybody ever calling for a female or black Doctor.
Fandom has moaned about plenty of things over the years, and demanded >>>> many many things, in a variety of forms, but the request for a
female/black Doctor was never top of anyone's list.
I do. Back around 2008-10, many people on Outpost Gallifrey were
calling for a black Doctor. There was a perpetual argument between
those who wanted that and those who didn't.
I can't recall too much of that debate. Although come to think of it, I
do recall some sort of call for Patterson Joseph to be the "next
Doctor" once upon a time, but I don't think that was ever a major
debate.
Didn't 'The Doctor' suggest, some time ago, HERE, that Idris Elba was
going to be, or should be, the next Doctor??
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0252961/?ref_=fn_t_1
On 23/06/2026 8:58 am, Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-22 09:58:25 +0000, Daniel70 said:
On 22/06/2026 3:09 am, The True Doctor wrote:
On 20/06/2026 22:36, Blueshirt wrote:
<Snip>
well who is to say The Doctor (or any other Time Lord) can't change >>>>> their sex or race? How do we know how Gallifrey biology works?
IMPOSSIBLE! Turning the Doctor into a woman is implicit bad writing and >>>> therefore it can never be written well after doing that.
The Doctor is a white British heterosexual male character
The Doctor *WAS* PORTRAYED BY a white British heterosexual male
character ... until the T.V. character wasn't.
and always must be a white British heterosexual male character.
WHY must it always be?? Will it break some Universal Law or other if
the Sex of a PREVIOUSLY MALE T.V. Character changes??
Yep, the "laws" of common sense and intelligence ... but those laws
disappeared long ago thanks to the Politically Correct / Equality
morons.? :-(
No. Those laws disappeared long ago .... when William Hartnell
"regenerated" into Patrick Troughton.
On 2026-06-23 13:26:09 +0000, Daniel70 said:
Didn't 'The Doctor' suggest, some time ago, HERE, that
Idris Elba was going to be, or should be, the next Doctor??
Idris Alba has just been reported as saying he will never play
James Bond because people won't accept a black Bond.
Your Name wrote:
On 2026-06-23 13:26:09 +0000, Daniel70 said:
Didn't 'The Doctor' suggest, some time ago, HERE, that Idris Elba was
going to be, or should be, the next Doctor??
Idris Alba has just been reported as saying he will never play James
Bond because people won't accept a black Bond.
Now that Amazon are in charge of the James Bond franchise, they could
cast anyone!
In article <111hj7e$3bb5p$1@dont-email.me>,
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2026-06-24 09:38:08 +0000, Blueshirt said:
Your Name wrote:
Idris Alba has just been reported as saying he will
never play James Bond because people won't accept a
black Bond.
Now that Amazon are in charge of the James Bond franchise,
they could cast anyone!
They could ... but it wouldn't be sensible and would ruin
yet another franchise.
Get the correct people!
The Doctor wrote:
In article <111hj7e$3bb5p$1@dont-email.me>,
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2026-06-24 09:38:08 +0000, Blueshirt said:
Your Name wrote:
Idris Alba has just been reported as saying he will never play James >>>>> Bond because people won't accept a black Bond.
Now that Amazon are in charge of the James Bond franchise, they could >>>> cast anyone!
They could ... but it wouldn't be sensible and would ruin yet another
franchise.
Get the correct people!
That's just it... who you, me or anybody else here feels are the
correct people could be entirely different to who Amazon / MGM feel are
the correct people. (In the case of James Bond.)
No production company can keep EVERYONE happy.
| Sysop: | Tetrazocine |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
| Users: | 12 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 36:15:11 |
| Calls: | 220 |
| Files: | 21,513 |
| Messages: | 84,697 |