Is there going to be a male Xena?

I was just thinking the other day you could actually have a male Xena.

XWP fans will know that in the lore of the show its established that Xena and Gabrielle will be reincarnated throughout all of history in different bodies. Some of these in the future are even shown to be men.

So I say why not do a sequel series where Xena and Gabrielle have reincarnated as men?

Just to be clear I 100 percent do not want a Xena series starring two men. It would be horrendous. I've already done an article on my blog "7 Actresses Who Could Play Xena" where I run through the actresses who would be good in the upcoming remake of that show. The point I am trying to make here is you could make all of the same bullshit arguments for a male Xena as a female Doctor.

"Its canon that Xena changes gender" (and PS in this case it was actually canon in the original series, before some bullshit retcon)

"There are so many groups of men who are under represented. Why not make Xena a gay man, there are so few gay male heroes (just as feminists ignore all the female heroes I'm going to ignore any LGBT male leading character) Why not make her Scottish? I am so sick of never seeing a Scots man like me on tv. Also a world famous character like Xena could help bring attention to Scottish independence and my political agenda that everyone might not agree with must usurp everything else or you are an anti Scots racist."

"Its something new. Anyone who doesn't want it is an emotional conservative who is stuck in the past and doesn't like any change ever!"

"Entitled fangirls need to learn that the world doesn't revolve around them. The overwhelming majority of fangirls who don't want a gay, male Scottish Xena are ugly, fat bitches who can't stand the idea of a strong male character because no man would ever want to fuck them. We should do it just to piss these bitches off"

How is that any different to a male Doctor? I'll tell you how. Xena is a woman, and there are sexist double standards against male fans who are always seen as privileged and sad gits compared to female fans.

I believe his name is Conan the Barbarian. Sorry, never seen Xena so please correct me if there is some huge difference between the two other than gender.

Mr. Happy wrote:I believe his name is Conan the Barbarian. Sorry, never seen Xena so please correct me if there is some huge difference between the two other than gender.

I don't think that's fair. By that logic you've kind of defeated the female Doctor argument. There is already Romana. Why not try and at least give her a spin off instead of making a third rate Buffy rip off that was racist like Class.

Conan and Xena are similar in a superficial way, but Xena is definitely her own character.

Male 'Warrior' types have been done to death.

A snarling, muscular guy in skimpy bits of leather, eating meat from the bone, conquering land and protecting his dominions is hardly a groundbreaking case of role reversal.

It works, mind. I quite like Conan.

I admit I didn't watch much Xena either, but from my recollection the cultural buzz surrounding it at the time was most founded mainly on titillation and mockery. It kind of reminded me of the kids at school mocking She-Ra's theme 'She's got the power to pick up a flower!'.

Pretty sure things would be fairly different now though. We're more comfortable with female heroes than we've ever been.

burrunjor wrote:

Mr. Happy wrote:I believe his name is Conan the Barbarian. Sorry, never seen Xena so please correct me if there is some huge difference between the two other than gender.

I don't think that's fair. By that logic you've kind of defeated the female Doctor argument. There is already Romana. Why not try and at least give her a spin off instead of making a third rate Buffy rip off that was racist like Class.

Conan and Xena are similar in a superficial way, but Xena is definitely her own character.

Of course, they are different characters and the similarity may only be superficial but is He-Man so different from She-Ra that their roles need to be reversed? How many eps of Xena do I need to watch to get a feel for the character?

Boofer wrote:Male 'Warrior' types have been done to death.

A snarling, muscular guy in skimpy bits of leather, eating meat from the bone, conquering land and protecting his dominions is hardly a groundbreaking case of role reversal.

Attila the Hun, Joan of Arc, Boadicea - Buffy?

Boofer wrote:Male 'Warrior' types have been done to death.

A snarling, muscular guy in skimpy bits of leather, eating meat from the bone, conquering land and protecting his dominions is hardly a groundbreaking case of role reversal.

It works, mind. I quite like Conan.

I admit I didn't watch much Xena either, but from my recollection the cultural buzz surrounding it at the time was most founded mainly on titillation and mockery. It kind of reminded me of the kids at school mocking She-Ra's theme 'She's got the power to pick up a flower!'.

Pretty sure things would be fairly different now though. We're more comfortable with female heroes than we've ever been.

Well I agree with you that it wouldn't work of course, but my point was to show how all of the female Doctor arguments were kind of flimsy as they were no different.

You could have a gay guy like Conan or Xena and make it a big deal.

And the original Xena show was brilliant for its first 4 seasons. Its 5th season much like new who was terrible fan fiction, and season 6 was a bit better, but nowhere near the quality of the original 4 years.

Still Xena's archenemy Callisto was one of the top 5 villains in tv history for me. Also I think the titilation argument against Xena is a bit unfair. To start with again look at male heroes in tv shows from that time. Julian McMahon, James Marsters, Kevin Sorbo, David Boreanaz. All sexualized.

Also I think the women in Xena though gorgeous were a bit more rough around the edges than in other shows. Lucy Lawless was an absolutely shameless ham. Seriously she is on the level of Tom Baker and William Shatner any day. I remember one episode had Xena suffer a diahorrea attack and wipe her arse on all of Gabrielle's scrolls.

I remember another one where Xena got head lice, and Gabrielle got foot rot and scabs all over her belly. It was hilarious when they rode into a town to help and gave a big rousing speech, whilst Xena was all sweaty, and smelly with her hair messy scratching her scalp, and being sick, and Gabrielle was dribbling from her mouth and scratching her green, rotting scabs LOL.

Then of course there is Alti who though gorgeous looked really fucking twisted and scary. Also a thing I liked about the show was that it wasn't afraid to put its female heroes through absolute hell too.

ena got killed about 6 times, crucified, had her legs smashed with a giant mallet, smashed with a log, strung from the ceiling and beaten with clubs, fired full of arrows, decapitated, tortured dozens of times. IMO the show really gave women a chance to do all of the things men do in these shows and thankfully didn't have to remind us " HEY A WOMAN IS THE HERO AREN'T WE FUCKING AWESOME" like that ghastly Supergirl show.

Mr. Happy wrote:

Boofer wrote:Male 'Warrior' types have been done to death.

A snarling, muscular guy in skimpy bits of leather, eating meat from the bone, conquering land and protecting his dominions is hardly a groundbreaking case of role reversal.

Attila the Hun, Joan of Arc, Boadicea - Buffy?

Have you noticed how that list gets more attractive the longer you read it?

Of course, they are different characters and the similarity may only be superficial but is He-Man so different from She-Ra that their roles need to be reversed? How many eps of Xena do I need to watch to get a feel for the character?

Well my point was that doing a similar character is not the same as taking a pre-existing character and changing their gender.

No one has ever had a problem with say Miss Marple, She Hulk, The Bionic Woman and again nobody here, me, Rob, Iank would have been angry about a Romana spin off or an encore appearance of the Rani. In fact I personally would have LOVED a Romana spin off. Certainly much more than Class (spit)

And as for Xena and Conan well I see the differences between them as being like this.

Xena is firmly rooted in Greek mythology (she's an original character, but obviously her world draws from the old myths) Conan I believe for the most part made up its own mythology.

Conan was a king, or became one who defended his country. Xena was always just a wanderer travelling from place to place (kind of more like the Doctor in that respect) fighting bad guys with no help but her little sidekick.

Conan was a victim who was motivated by the murder of his people and parents. Xena meanwhile originally was an evil warlord who later sees the error of her ways and tries to make up for them (think Angel but earlier.)

Her archenemies are people from her past. Ares who wants her to go evil again, Callisto, a woman whose village she burned down when she was evil, and whose family were killed in the fire and wants to make her pay (Quentin Tarrantino apparently based the Bride from Kill Bill on Callisto.)

Ultimately other than just being big, sword wielding heroes there isn't really any similarity between Conan and Xena. Xena owes more to Batman ironically in a lot of ways. Callisto is a female Joker in a way (crazy archfoe, made by the hero etc)

burrunjor wrote:

Of course, they are different characters and the similarity may only be superficial but is He-Man so different from She-Ra that their roles need to be reversed? How many eps of Xena do I need to watch to get a feel for the character?

Well my point was that doing a similar character is not the same as taking a pre-existing character and changing their gender.

No one has ever had a problem with say Miss Marple, She Hulk, The Bionic Woman and again nobody here, me, Rob, Iank would have been angry about a Romana spin off or an encore appearance of the Rani. In fact I personally would have LOVED a Romana spin off. Certainly much more than Class (spit)

And as for Xena and Conan well I see the differences between them as being like this.

Xena is firmly rooted in Greek mythology (she's an original character, but obviously her world draws from the old myths) Conan I believe for the most part made up its own mythology.

Conan was a king, or became one who defended his country. Xena was always just a wanderer travelling from place to place (kind of more like the Doctor in that respect) fighting bad guys with no help but her little sidekick.

Conan was a victim who was motivated by the murder of his people and parents. Xena meanwhile originally was an evil warlord who later sees the error of her ways and tries to make up for them (think Angel but earlier.)

Her archenemies are people from her past. Ares who wants her to go evil again, Callisto, a woman whose village she burned down when she was evil, and whose family were killed in the fire and wants to make her pay (Quentin Tarrantino apparently based the Bride from Kill Bill on Callisto.)

Ultimately other than just being big, sword wielding heroes there isn't really any similarity between Conan and Xena. Xena owes more to Batman ironically in a lot of ways. Callisto is a female Joker in a way (crazy archfoe, made by the hero etc)

OK, thanks for highlighting the differences but I don't see how that prevents either one from having their gendered swapped.

On the other hand, James Bond

"'But the Doctor's always been a man' is a fascinating objection, and one worth discussing. I think casting a female James Bond does change the character, in the same way casting a male Wonder Woman would. It matters to the story, I think, that James Bond is male. But not because of the physical stuff - it's just as 'plausible' that a 47 year old woman could jump out of a plane without a parachute, then win a fistfight with a shark as it is that Daniel Craig could. It matters because Bond's always been a relic, an icon of masculinity who doesn't quite fit in the modern world. Ian Fleming's novels written sixty years ago make that clear, and the movies are making jokes about it by the third one. 'James Bond's a sexist reactionary tool of patriarchy and late capitalism'. Er, yes ... that's what it's about, always. James Bond is about James Bond's dick.

Perhaps it 'matters' that Doctor Who is male in the same way. I don't know. There's an interesting storytelling choice to be made by the new team - does it matter or not? Can you write the same script for Whittaker as you can for Capaldi, and let the actor play it? Where does escapism end and naiveity begin with that? A white dude can stride into a palace at any point in Western history and act likes he owns the place. He can sit in a bar on his own and enjoy a quiet drink. A woman can't. Can the Doctor? Can the format survive constant reminders that it's not realistic for a complete stranger to show up and everyone accepts their authority?

Part of me thinks a thirtysomething woman showrunner would be able to articulate this using a middleaged male actor playing the Doctor better than a middleaged male showrunner could using a thirtysomething actress. But, to his credit, Chris Chibnall seems to have gone on a journey with Broadchurch, and it doesn't seem fair to point out that his episode with a Cyberwoman wasn't, um ... well, least said, soonest mended.

What does the show now feel it needs to explain away that it didn't before? That's how we'll see why gender 'matters'.

I nicked that off a friends FB timeline but he gives a very good reason why Bond being male is essential to the character. Sorry, I just don't see that with Xena.

OK, thanks for highlighting the differences but I don't see how that prevents either one from having their gendered swapped.

On the other hand, James Bond
"'But the Doctor's always been a man' is a fascinating objection, and one worth discussing. I think casting a female James Bond does change the character, in the same way casting a male Wonder Woman would. It matters to the story, I think, that James Bond is male. But not because of the physical stuff - it's just as 'plausible' that a 47 year old woman could jump out of a plane without a parachute, then win a fistfight with a shark as it is that Daniel Craig could. It matters because Bond's always been a relic, an icon of masculinity who doesn't quite fit in the modern world. Ian Fleming's novels written sixty years ago make that clear, and the movies are making jokes about it by the third one. 'James Bond's a sexist reactionary tool of patriarchy and late capitalism'. Er, yes ... that's what it's about, always. James Bond is about James Bond's dick.

Perhaps it 'matters' that Doctor Who is male in the same way. I don't know. There's an interesting storytelling choice to be made by the new team - does it matter or not? Can you write the same script for Whittaker as you can for Capaldi, and let the actor play it? Where does escapism end and naiveity begin with that? A white dude can stride into a palace at any point in Western history and act likes he owns the place. He can sit in a bar on his own and enjoy a quiet drink. A woman can't. Can the Doctor? Can the format survive constant reminders that it's not realistic for a complete stranger to show up and everyone accepts their authority?

Part of me thinks a thirtysomething woman showrunner would be able to articulate this using a middleaged male actor playing the Doctor better than a middleaged male showrunner could using a thirtysomething actress. But, to his credit, Chris Chibnall seems to have gone on a journey with Broadchurch, and it doesn't seem fair to point out that his episode with a Cyberwoman wasn't, um ... well, least said, soonest mended.

What does the show now feel it needs to explain away that it didn't before? That's how we'll see why gender 'matters'.

I nicked that off a friends FB timeline but he gives a very good reason why Bond being male is essential to the character. Sorry, I just don't see that with Xena.

Well if you don't see that with Xena., doesn't that kind of make my point about nobody is pushing for a male Xena, but they are for a female Doctor just being anti male hypocrisy?

Anyway as for your friends post whilst I can see where they are coming from ultimately I think changing a characters gender always matters to some extent.

Gender is a big part of someones personality by default. I will say though the Doctor is the only character whose gender I definitely did not want to see changed as all the different versions of him are the one guy, so it becomes more of a parody at this stage. If there was a female Batman  however I wouldn't care as it wouldn't actually be any previous Batman character who had suddenly just changed.

However still when changing an already existing dynamic you have to take into account various other things that might not even occur to you.

For instance the levels of violence directed towards a female hero. If its a show aimed at a more adult audiences like Buffy or Xena then the female hero can get beaten up just as much. If its a family show like Doctor Who then that will pose a problem. Just to be fair, I am not saying that I want female heroes to go through less than male ones. However sadly the modern oversensitive audience really will not want to see a female Doctor get roughed up as much as a male Doctor.

Look at all the times Jon Pertwee gets tortured and beaten up like in Day of the Daleks, or the Time Warrior, or look at Colin Baker getting smacked around in Revelation, or imagine the uproar if you did a scene like the one in Dalek with Eccelston getting scanned with Jodie Whitaker LOL.

Also this applies even more with changing a villains gender. Like look at Missy. Before the Doctor was always able to kick the Masters ass. Tom Baker punched him down a flight of stairs, Jon Pertwee kicked him over a table, and beat him up with his tie in Frontier in Space.

Capaldi can't do that to Missy however, and instead he ends up snogging her after she has killed Osgood right in front of him. PS that's another change that obviously came about because of the gender change. It didn't need to, but still Peter Capaldi and Michelle Gomez had great chemistry with each other that way, where as Peter Capaldi and say Robert Carlyle obviously wouldn't (also Capaldi could have kicked Carlyle's ass when he threatened his friends too)

Look at this scene from a Batman cartoon aimed at a family audience. Imagine if the Joker were a woman here and Batman smacked him around like this LOL.



Men and women can obviously play the same types of characters, as evidenced by Xena and Callisto alone who are a great Joker/Batman type of villain/hero dynamic. However when taking pre-existing characters you have to take caution. It applies both ways of course, and I am not saying it can never work, but its often taking a square peg and trying to make it fit a round hole.

I don’t see the need to make Xena male because there is already of a plethora of similar characters. That's not to say they can't or shouldn't. The Doctor is a very unique character in a very unique show. Yes, you could change the gender but I don’t see the point.

There are two types of character traits. Those that are a choice and those that aren’t. The actions of the character directly gives us information about the character in the same way that dialogue might. It allows us to see the thought processes of the subject. In a normal character race and gender are not a choice but provide friction against society and challenges for the character to overcome.

This was one of the problems that trivialised Bill’s sexuality. The constant shifting of societies so that she had to very forcedly raise the subject of her preferences started of OK cos if you are going to write a gay character then they have to be shown to be gay at some point – why keep it a secret? Then, by the time we get to Rona Munro’s story it feels tired and has become a joke. I anticipate that there may be a similar problem with the Doctor, I just pray for a bit of subtlety from Chibnall.

Destiny of the Daleks and Breathe Deep both suggest that Timelords have control over their final form. The tone of Romana’s regeneration feels reminiscent of Curse of the Fatal Death. Obviously, that isn’t a good thing. It does suggest that The Doctor’s change of sex may be partly a choice, even if only on a subconscious level.

Nick Briggs at Big Finish did a story in the Unbound range, Exile. Listen to it if only to hear how not to do a female Doctor. Honestly, it’s shit.

Moreover, it forces Chibnall to perhaps reconsider the dynamic between the Doctor and their companion. You may see less of the Doctor getting beaten up but that isn’t particularly prevalent in the new series anyway. The producers hired Ian Marter to play Harry as they thought the Doctor might be played an old man. So if needed certain things get shifted onto the companion

My point being that Doctor Who the show and the character are unique so there is no easy comparison of ‘How about a female character X’? I can see why they did Missy first. Missy and Romana being a peripheral characters or companions has a more limited impact. She isn’t central to the show. With non-female, non-Time Lords gender isn’t an active component of the personality. It’s passive. That may or may not be the case with The Doctor. I am not trying to argue that it’s a good idea, just that your comparison is weak.

I also want to state that my personal preference is for the character to remain male. But that doesn't mean that I hate the idea of the female Doctor. It just isn't my first choice. If Chibnall does something good with her then it's worth it as the writing is the highest priority for me and I just want to repeat casting doesn't fix problems at the writing level. ... KILL THE MOON WOULDN'T BE ANY MORE STUPID WITH A FEMALE DOCTOR.

I don’t see the need to make Xena male because there is already of a plethora of similar characters. That's not to say they can't or shouldn't. The Doctor is a very unique character in a very unique show. Yes, you could change the gender but I don’t see the point.

There are similar characters to the Doctor. Miss Marple for one. A female character who uses her mind to solve problems, non sexualized, then there is Romana herself. Again why not give Romana her own show?

That may or may not be the case with The Doctor. I am not trying to argue that it’s a good idea, just that your comparison is weak.

Its really not. Look at it this way. Xena and the Doctor are both iconic characters who can change shape. In Xena's case even more so as she in the lore can be anyone, where as we know the Doctor can't.

Now with this in mind some people have thought "why not change the gender" and you can make a flimsy argument of "this will give representation for people of both sexes who are marginalized. Women in the Doctors case and I don't know black men, LGBT men, etc.

In both cases however changing the characters sex jars and no longer really feels like the same character, and representation doesn't matter in the modern world, and you can always just create a new character (in Doctor Who's case its already been set up, Romana!)

I also want to state that my personal preference is for the character to remain male. But that doesn't mean that I hate the idea of the female Doctor. It just isn't my first choice

Well I think its a terrible idea, but I admit I might not have had such seething hatred for it if it hadn't been for the nastiness from the people who pushed for it.

We all know that this only happened because the hipster, Rik from the Young Ones style feminists (IE I'm going to claim to be left wing when I'm young to look smart and get laid, but will probably own a publishing company my dad bought me when I was 22 type of "leftist") pushed for it and were the usual fanatical little bullies they always are.

They slandered Steven Moffat viciously for 2 fucking years until by a bizarre coincidence everything in the show became tailored for them.

Peter Capaldi's entire era was wasted, as it wasn't even the Peter Capaldi era. It was just a dry run for the female Doctor basically.

And then there is all the HAHAHAHAHAHA I hope this upsets all of you who didn't want it" which not surprisingly just makes us all hate them even more.

I just want to repeat... KILL THE MOON WOULDN'T BE ANY MORE STUPID WITH A FEMALE DOCTOR. wrote:

Kill the Moon is one of the worst things ever put out under the name of DW so it wouldn't matter if the Doctor were a goat in it.

However it cannot be denied that if it wasn't for all of this feminist pandering shit then the Capaldi era would have been better.

Imagine if they had cast Robert Carlyle as the Master. That alone would have been better. Carlyle would have actually been able to channel the previous Masters whilst doing something new with it. The charm of Delgado, mixed in with the lunacy of Simm and hatefulness of the burned Master.

Peter Capaldi's Doctor would also have been able to be the kick up the arse Doctor we were promised against Carlyle as you could have had really, really vicious, Deadly Assassin, Survival style showdowns between these two actors





Wouldn't that have been better than watching Peter Capaldi snog Missy in a graveyard after she had just butchered Osgood and seemingly murdered Kate the daughter of his oldest and dearest friend right in front of him!

The answer from any DW fan who is being honest is of course that would have been better! However we all know that it only didn't happen because of this gender bending crap. Now fair enough maybe the Jodie Doctor won't be as toe curlingly awful as Missy. But still the point is for characters that have always been male the best people for those characters are not surprisingly men.

So even if you do get a woman who is okay for the Doctor, there will always be a better man out there, same way you could get a man to play a decent Xena, like Tom Ellis, but a woman is always going to be the best for the part of Xena because she'll fit better.

So the point is why bother going down that minefield, particularly when the Doctors are all meant to basically be the same characters anyway?

There are similar characters to the Doctor. Miss Marple for one. A female character who uses her mind to solve problems, non sexualized, then there is Romana herself.

I think there is a huge difference between Miss Marple and the Doctor. Please don’t make me spell it out because I don’t know how to say it without sounding facetious. And Romana, as I have already pointed out, is not the main character so it would have a different kind of impact. TBH, I think that would show a distinct lack of commitment to the idea.

Again …

Again! What do you think I am? Some kind of $5 strumpet!

why not give Romana her own show?

Oh… See my response above.

Its really not. Look at it this way. Xena and the Doctor are both iconic characters who can change shape. In Xena's case even more so as she in the lore can be anyone, where as we know the Doctor can't.

OK, I must have missed this shape-changing aspect of her character, apologises. Though, it does make me wonder why she needs to be reinvented as a male rather than take that form temporally. Then again, may be that is a lack of commitment to the idea on my part.

Now with this in mind some people have thought "why not change the gender" and you can make a flimsy argument of "this will give representation for people of both sexes who are marginalized. Women in the Doctors case and I don't know black men, LGBT men, etc.

I don’t actually agree with that. If you arbitrarily make a non-black character black then they won’t have an attachment to black culture which is why the Doctor being black wouldn’t be the same as a human being black. He comes from a different society. LGBTs are a bit different, though, I struggle to see how they could do that earnestly.

Kill the Moon is one of the worst things ever put out under the name of DW so it wouldn't matter if the Doctor were a goat in it.

LOL, agreed.
And Robert Carlyle is great and would make a great master (even though, I think the character is shit).

So the point is why bother going down that minefield, particularly when the Doctors are all meant to basically be the same characters anyway?

Because the show needs to do something new to survive. You arugument here seems to be that the Doctor should only change externally cos otherwise he is no longer the Doctor. It’s a tricky area. Yes, he has an essence but something needs to change. If you change him too much he is no longer the same character. So while I am not completely unsympathetic to your argument I think you have a bit too much reverence to the past if you don’t mind me saying so. Mind you when the future has given us a crying Davros…

I think there is a huge difference between Miss Marple and the Doctor. Please don’t make me spell it out because I don’t know how to say it without sounding facetious

Well obviously she is not a shape shifting alien, but what I meant was that she filled the role of the non sexualized cerebral hero the same way you argued that Conan filled the same role as Xena.

OK, I must have missed this shape-changing aspect of her character, apologises. Though, it does make me wonder why she needs to be reinvented as a male rather than take that form temporally. Then again, may be that is a lack of commitment to the idea on my part.

Well okay shapeshifter was the wrong way to put it, but she does within the lore of the show change.

Its established that after she dies, Xena and her partner Gabrielle's souls will be reborn again and again (as will one of Xena's archenemies Alti) Its not a major point in the show as obviously throughout it we just see Xena in the now as Lucy Lawless.

However in a few episodes we do see future lives of Xena and Gabrielle. Here in this clip they say that Alti will always return and fight Xena in a new body throughout eternity. Also Alti's power is being able to make you feel every moment of pain from every life throughout all eternity by looking at you.



LOL you can see how camp Xena was from this clip. I think it might outdo Star Trek TOS. I don't think anything can outdo Star Madains in terms of camp though TBH.

Anyway yeah my point was why not make the new Xena series a sequel involving a future life of Xena, Gabrielle and Alti, but make them all gay men? That way it could actually extend Xena like Doctor Who and make all the different versions of her one person?

Again I don't want that. I'd rather just have a remake with women as Xena, Gabrielle and Alti, but you can see my point that technically every single argument we see in the mainstream media and from people like Paul Cornell, and Whovian Feminism applies to having a male Xena after all.

Its canon, it would offer representation for gay men, and it would be something new. Yet I've never seen even a single one of these pro female Doctor advocates ever even mention casting a man in the upcoming remake of Xena.

That's because Whovian Feminism, Paul Cornell, Neil Gaiman, the SJW fans and the like don't give a damn about female representation, trans people representation, what's good for the show. Its all just about making themselves look great, and a petty, spiteful act against male fans who they see as privileged shitlords and sexists.

And Robert Carlyle is great and would make a great master (even though, I think the character is shit).

Why do you dislike the character just out of interest?

Because the show needs to do something new to survive. You arugument here seems to be that the Doctor should only change externally cos otherwise he is no longer the Doctor. It’s a tricky area. Yes, he has an essence but something needs to change. If you change him too much he is no longer the same character. So while I am not completely unsympathetic to your argument I think you have a bit too much reverence to the past if you don’t mind me saying so. Mind you when the future has given us a crying Davros…

Well I understand why people might think I am too stuck in the past, but TBH I don't think I am. I actually really liked New Who (probably more so than most on here and my blog which has massive articles about how good New Who was from a few years ago attests to that.)

So its not like I couldn't stand any changes in DW, or even if it didn't go the way I liked then I went mad all the time. Again wasn't keen on any of the Doctor/companion love stories, but I got over them.

A female Doctor and Master however I think is too big a change, and again if it wasn't for the nastiness and hatred from the pro female Doctor side (not all, but most) maybe I wouldn't be so angry.

https://we.tl/dGoh2lrtif

Click on that link, I have uploaded issue 48 of a fanzine called Matrix. On P. 26 is a two-page article called 'So we meet again, Doctor' by Daniel O'Mahony. From memory, he sums up the character perfectly.

I will get back to the rest of your post later.

That was rather camp and oddly left me yearning for Farscape. Lots of female characters in that clip. If Xena became male presumably they would have to become male also to avoid lots of scenes of men beating women. Or is that clip not really representative of the series? I still haven’t seen Star Trek the TOS.

You could have an all-male spin off if you thought there was a market for it but why would you have them all gay? I can't see how that would aid any narrative.

Again I don't want that. I'd rather just have a remake with women as Xena, Gabrielle and Alti, but you can see my point that technically every single argument we see in the mainstream media and from people like Paul Cornell, and Whovian Feminism applies to having a male Xena after all.

Its canon, it would offer representation for gay men, and it would be something new. Yet I've never seen even a single one of these pro female Doctor advocates ever even mention casting a man in the upcoming remake of Xena.

That's because Whovian Feminism, Paul Cornell, Neil Gaiman, the SJW fans and the like don't give a damn about female representation, trans people representation, what's good for the show. Its all just about making themselves look great, and a petty, spiteful act against male fans who they see as privileged shitlords and sexists.

Could it not just be that they have no interest in Xena as a programme so it hasn’t occurred to them?

Did you get that fanzine article about the Master alright or shall I try and sum it up?

Peter Capaldi was much better in The Thick of It than DW.

That was rather camp and oddly left me yearning for Farscape. Lots of female characters in that clip. If Xena became male presumably they would have to become male also to avoid lots of scenes of men beating women. Or is that clip not really representative of the series? I still haven’t seen Star Trek the TOS.

You could have an all-male spin off if you thought there was a market for it but why would you have them all gay? I can't see how that would aid any narrative.

I'd say that clip pretty much sums up the series. Xena is totally female dominated. The two leads are women, the main supporting characters (the Amazons) are women, and her two most vicious and dangerous enemies, Callisto and Alti are women.

Here are some camp fights to show you that is pretty much what you're in for LOL.





This one is when Xena is evil.

.

Now again I do NOT want an all gay male spin off or remake of Xena. The point I am trying to make here is that you could use all of the same arguments for a gay male Xena as you could for a female Doctor.

1/ Its canon that the character changes for reasons we have been over.

2/ If you care about representation then you should want Xena to be a gay man. That's the main reason the feminists and that traitor Colin Baker give for a female Doctor "there aren't as many women heroes as male ones and little girls need someone to look up." Okay little gay boys need people to look up to as well, so rather than create a new hero, lets just hijack an existing iconic one (PS if you don't agree you automatically HATE all gay people and think they should be rounded up an killed)

3/ Its a change and rather than take each change on a case by case basis all change is fabulous because Xena had some glaring continuity errors and some things changed in the past.

So again why are people not pushing for a gay male Xena? Why was it only a female Doctor?

Simple because again there is a double standard against male fans and male led franchises.

You act puzzled as to why I would want to change the sexof Xena, Alti and Gabrielle and their sexuality. What would it bring to the narrative? Well I agree, but by the same logic why change the Doctor and the Masters sex and sexuality? What possible advantage did that bring the to the narrative of DW?

Could it not just be that they have no interest in Xena as a programme so it hasn’t occurred to them?

Well yes but I wouldn't let them away with being so ignorant of Xena or indeed other female led franchises, because their whole thing is that they care about representation for female heroes, and they never show even the slightest bit of interest in anything with a female lead.

Now again I wouldn't care if they preferred male led things, but the problem is that they ALWAYS go on about wanting more female heroes.

Look at this letter Whovian Feminism wrote to Sylvester McCoy for daring to say he didn't think a female Doctor was a good idea.

An Open Letter To Sylvester McCoy

On top of that these people often tell everyone else how they can't stand women on tv which gets REALLY annoying when THEY are actually the ones who practically haven't even heard of fucking Xena of all things never mind lesser known female led shows. They don't like or review any of them.

So again all of this makes me think that its just either an ego thing or a nasty spiteful thing against male fans.

burrunjor wrote:
You act puzzled as to why I would want to change the sexof Xena, Alti and Gabrielle and their sexuality. What would it bring to the narrative? Well I agree, but by the same logic why change the Doctor and the Masters sex and sexuality? What possible advantage did that bring the to the narrative of DW?

For Missy, nothing at all. OK, it changed the dynamic of her relationship with the Doctor from loathing to lusting, but the less said about that the better.

As for the Doctor, I don't know. It's all guess work at this stage.

Going off on a bit of a tangent. Missy killed Osgood and a couple of bodyguards in the Witch's Familiar or what ever but for the best part of three years that's it? That's worse for the character than being a woman (I prefer Davros anyway).

I think the other big flaw was the wacky/zany streak. Simm could pull it off in moderation, but Gomez should have gone down the Machiavellian route and she would have done a much better job.

Also, I was more querying why the whole cast had to be gay in your Xena remake. I said earlier if a passive quality doesn't provide friction with other characters there is no drama. OK, maybe romance but that just requires one other gay character, not a raft of them. Is this going to be a musical?

Mr. Happy wrote:

burrunjor wrote:
You act puzzled as to why I would want to change the sexof Xena, Alti and Gabrielle and their sexuality. What would it bring to the narrative? Well I agree, but by the same logic why change the Doctor and the Masters sex and sexuality? What possible advantage did that bring the to the narrative of DW?

For Missy, nothing at all. OK, it changed the dynamic of her relationship with the Doctor from loathing to lusting, but the less said about that the better.

As for the Doctor, I don't know. It's all guess work at this stage.

Going off on a bit of a tangent. Missy killed Osgood and a couple of bodyguards in the Witch's Familiar or what ever but for the best part of three years that's it? That's worse for the character than being a woman (I prefer Davros anyway).

I think the other big flaw was the wacky/zany streak. Simm could pull it off in moderation, but Gomez should have gone down the Machiavellian route and she would have done a much better job.

Also, I was more querying why the whole cast had to be gay in your Xena remake. I said earlier if a passive quality doesn't provide friction with other characters there is no drama. OK, maybe romance but that just requires one other gay character, not a raft of them. Is this going to be a musical?

I completely agree about Missy. She is obviously crap as the Master, but even just as a villain good god is she lame.

She zaps Osgood which she is only able to do because she suddenly gained teleporting powers. It wasn't even as though she tricked Osgood or hypnotized her. The only reason she killed her was because she popped up halfway across the room.

And even then it didn't matter. Osgood was in twice as many eps next year.

Oh sorry I forgot to mention I didn't get to see the Master article. The link just led to an empty site. Maybe it didn't load, but sadly I couldn't read it.

Missy was still the worst though regardless.

And I was only suggesting that all of the leads be gay in the Xena remake was because again the whole reason they wanted a female Doctor because they said it was for representation, so that was my angle, though again I definitely do not want a male Xena, its just showing that these silly arguments apply equally for this show.

And Xena did actually have a musical. Much like the Buffy musical it was utter shit. I'm amazed RTD and Moff never did a DW musical to be honest.

burrunjor wrote: I'm amazed RTD and Moff never did a DW musical to be honest.

If they ever did, it would never have beaten Big Finishes "The Pirates".

You made an astute observation on PMF that the Master only has three motivations: seeks destruction, to lengthen his own life, or just trolls the Doctor. The overall point of that article is that the Master is nothing more than a plot function. Something to push against the Doctor. Delgado’s charisma made the first Master essential viewing and, like Troughton, he could raise any story with his presence.

Both the Doctor and the Master suffer from having to be mysterious, and therefore, we know little or nothing about them. The Doctor in the old series would often explain stuff and then offer a solution and save the day. Tom was one of the few that really gave the character of the Doctor some depth. Hartnell's Doctor was the only one that had genuine mystery apart from Troughton early on.

Colin obviously wanted to with his never fully realised transition of Six going through a kind of Hartnell-esque journey and Cartmel actually started the lonely god business cos as he says many times in his book Script Doctor (which is great) that the Doctor being the underdog was an awful idea. Bollocks to that! I loved the character as the underdog and hope they will return it to that one day.

The Master is a one note irritant. And over used. Saying that, I like Davros because he is such a bastard and so totally ruthless, never zany. He does lessen the menace of the Daleks and does bugger all in Remembrance.

Anyway, gives us your pitch for this Xena the Warrior Princess: The Musical. I know you are playing Devil's Advocate but it's all pointless if there is no demographic. Only 5% of the population is LGBT so who is going to be the primary demographic? Sell it to me. Show me the money!