There is no equivalence between a gay male Xena and a female Doctor as a gay male Xena is primarily aimed at the gay community which according makes up 10% of the population (although, I usually hear it’s closer to 5%), whereas, women make up approximately 50% of the population.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/05/10-per-cent-population-gay-alfred-kinsey-statistics
Yes, feminism ignores minorities both inside and outside its barriers but its primary concern is bettering society for women so why would they be pushing for a gay male Xena and ignoring their primary concern? It just doesn’t follow that there should be a one in one out policy to maintain the ratio of male-to-female characters in general.
In terms of narrative and intended demographics, it doesn’t sound worthwhile. Xena is a show that is built around idolising the female form judging by the numerous scantily clad women in those clips so you would lose a huge section of the audience as it is designed for men.
In its current form, Doctor Who has a much wider demographic. And has run for much longer meaning it has to try harder to stay fresh. There are numerous Xena-type characters but the Doctor is vastly different from Ellen Ripley who as a combative female is probably closer to Xena than the Doctor. Xena, Buffy, Ripley are all American.
The Alien films are a good example of a character that shouldn’t change gender because of the various Freudian and feminist horror themes. Bond is a symbol of masculinity. Xena is designed to attract men who want to look at scantily clad women which isn’t a narrative reason to have her remain female. Conan manages alright. Buffy is subverting hero expectations, Ben the Vampire Slayer just doesn’t sound the same. But outside of the Doctor has always been a man, what narrative reason does he have to be a man in the first place?
A character that solves problems in a non-violent way by thinking around the problem.
Why let the dominant patriarchal ideology of 50 years ago affect the casting decisions of the 21st century?
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/05/10-per-cent-population-gay-alfred-kinsey-statistics
Yes, feminism ignores minorities both inside and outside its barriers but its primary concern is bettering society for women so why would they be pushing for a gay male Xena and ignoring their primary concern? It just doesn’t follow that there should be a one in one out policy to maintain the ratio of male-to-female characters in general.
In terms of narrative and intended demographics, it doesn’t sound worthwhile. Xena is a show that is built around idolising the female form judging by the numerous scantily clad women in those clips so you would lose a huge section of the audience as it is designed for men.
In its current form, Doctor Who has a much wider demographic. And has run for much longer meaning it has to try harder to stay fresh. There are numerous Xena-type characters but the Doctor is vastly different from Ellen Ripley who as a combative female is probably closer to Xena than the Doctor. Xena, Buffy, Ripley are all American.
The Alien films are a good example of a character that shouldn’t change gender because of the various Freudian and feminist horror themes. Bond is a symbol of masculinity. Xena is designed to attract men who want to look at scantily clad women which isn’t a narrative reason to have her remain female. Conan manages alright. Buffy is subverting hero expectations, Ben the Vampire Slayer just doesn’t sound the same. But outside of the Doctor has always been a man, what narrative reason does he have to be a man in the first place?
A character that solves problems in a non-violent way by thinking around the problem.
Why let the dominant patriarchal ideology of 50 years ago affect the casting decisions of the 21st century?