Gareth Roberts has been CANCELLED

This is just a fucking joke now. I read this earlier when he tweeted it, and I just can't understand what the hell is wrong with new who fandom anymore. Toxic, poisonous, arseholes.

https://medium.com/@zmangareth/statement-on-bbc-books-and-transgenderism-dd7ad0c9231a

I've read a bit of the threads on Gallifrey base, and honestly - what is point? Nasty little jackbooted ideologues with zero tolerance for any viewpoint outside their own echo chamber.

Absolutely fucking ridiculous. This is where we're at now.


A writer for the BBC franchise 'Dr. Who' says his story was cancelled over a tweet critical of the trans movement. It displays a growing and troubling cowardice. :

https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/04/dr-writer-claims-cancelled-tweeting-trannie/

Regardless of the the fans its equally alarming that the BBC just cave in and appear to offer no resistance to their demands. Part of that would be that they just don't want the bad publicity but also that key individuals are fully signed up to this ideology.

He should sue.

The West grows more like Stalin's Russia every day.

Big Finish writers jumping on the bandwagon...

https://twitter.com/junodawson/status/1136035741677563905

https://twitter.com/MaxCCurtis/status/1135874391802286081

When I was a kid, we were taught not to cowtow to bullies. Now we happily ruin careers and lives at their behest.

The Time Tots, Whovian Feminism and (of course) Paul Cornell getting in on the virtue signalling action...

https://twitter.com/0hMySt4rs/status/1135877851880800256

https://twitter.com/WhovianFeminism/status/1135924480226799616

https://twitter.com/Paul_Cornell/status/1135878490425888769

These people are so full of shit, so wilfully blind to their own hypocrisy, it's unreal. They're seriously suggesting that some silly, off the cuff Twitter joke deleted two years ago threatens to "kill vulnerable people", while being perfectly okay with Moffat directly inserting hateful remarks about the most suicide-prone demographic in society into the dialogue of his episodes? Get fucked.

At least he still got paid.

edgelord wrote:At least he still got paid.

I should imagine their lawyers instructed them to do so, so Robert's didn't have grounds to sue.

OHHH LOOK AT ME I'M PAUL CORNELL. LOOK, OVER HERE, IT'S ME! HEY!!! I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING EVERYONE SAYS. I CARE SO MUCH ABOUT IT I'M LITERALLY CRYING DUHHHHH


I agree with Clockwork. These people/robots can go and get royally fucked. We all know they'd stay completely silent if his comments had been anti-male or anti-straight dude or whatever. I wonder how they'd react if he actually said something threatening...

I've been saying this for years. Since 2014 in fact when Pissy, Kissy, Missy first pranced onto the screen that the show was in thrall of these lunatics, and I've been proven completely 100 percent right since.

I remember when I first came here though a few people didn't believe me that the show was pandering to these people. I understand, as back then it must have seemed ludicrous that even the Fitzroy crowd were so cowardly/stupid that they would sacrifice what was once a popular series, just to keep in with a group of shallow upper middle class idealogues.

It just goes to show never understimate how shallow and desperate to run with the cool crowd the Fitzroy cucks are.

ClockworkOcean wrote:The Time Tots, Whovian Feminism and (of course) Paul Cornell getting in on the virtue signalling action...

https://twitter.com/0hMySt4rs/status/1135877851880800256

https://twitter.com/WhovianFeminism/status/1135924480226799616

https://twitter.com/Paul_Cornell/status/1135878490425888769

These people are so full of shit, so wilfully blind to their own hypocrisy, it's unreal. They're seriously suggesting that some silly, off the cuff Twitter joke deleted two years ago threatens to "kill vulnerable people", while being perfectly okay with Moffat directly inserting hateful remarks about the most suicide-prone demographic in society into the dialogue of his episodes? Get fucked.

Indeed. PS I think Gareth Roberst comments were stupid and ignorant too, but Whovian Feminism defended the ego line in the Moffat era.

See here.

Whovian Feminism wrote:    Let’s briefly address the biggest controversy that erupted after “Hell Bent.” A small but very vocal group insisted that the General’s comment about men’s egos was sexist. Anyone who truly believes this needs to take a seat and shut up, because oh my god did you even watch the episode, are you really that oblivious?!

   The General served two presidents of Gallifrey during his tenth regeneration, Rassilon and the Doctor. The first walked around announcing himself as “Rassilon the Resurrected” and was egotistical enough to think he could trap the Doctor in his own confession dial, torture information about the Hybrid out of him, and then kill him and get away with it. The second was referred to as “The Man Who Won the Time War,” wouldn’t come out of his bedroom unless Rassilon himself marched out to the Dry Lands to see him, deposed the President and the high council, and then was egotistical enough to think he could extract Clara from her time stream and alter a fixed moment without any consequences. I mean, really?! The General served probably the two most egotistical men in Gallifrey’s history. That line didn’t come from nowhere

This is the line, demonising all men as egocentric.



Here's the reality.



How does he cope with all that ego! Also he should quit making thoughtful speeches because he's a man and it looks weird to see a man think.

PS then there are also RTD's comments calling fans Ming Mongs and his jokes about the Daleks and the Cybermen sounding like Stephen Hawking. Its not like that was acceptable even by the standards of the time. In Extras which came from round about the same time, the agent who is meant to be an utter wanker calls people mongoloids, yet RTD did that for real!

burrunjor wrote:I've been saying this for years. Since 2014 in fact when Pissy, Kissy, Missy first pranced onto the screen that the show was in thrall of these lunatics, and I've been proven completely 100 percent right since.

I remember when I first came here though a few people didn't believe me that the show was pandering to these people. I understand, as back then it must have seemed ludicrous that even the Fitzroy crowd were so cowardly/stupid that they would sacrifice what was once a popular series, just to keep in with a group of shallow upper middle class idealogues.

It just goes to show never understimate how shallow and desperate to run with the cool crowd the Fitzroy cucks are.

It is undoubtably annoying that this sort of cant and gibberish has crept into the Dr Who world but isn't it a bit harsh to accuse writers etc.., of being cowards? At the end of the day its their quality of life on the line - their job security, their mortgage, their standard of living and their peace of mind. Its them who have to choose between a principled stand for either  old style writing, drama and entertainment and the brick bats that come with it or knuckling under and writing books / scripts that the BBC want to produce.

I do find Cornell's comments stomache churning. Hes probably trying to protect his career but a moment of silence from him might have been a better approach. I always thought all the former Virgin New Adventure writers were BFFs - "one for all and all for one" and all that. Makes me wonder whats buried in his internet history waiting for some nut-case to dig up and find ....

stengos wrote:It is undoubtably annoying that this sort of cant and gibberish has crept into the Dr Who world but isn't it a bit harsh to accuse writers etc.., of being cowards? At the end of the day its their quality of life on the line - their job security, their mortgage, their standard of living and their peace of mind. Its them who have to choose between a principled stand for either  old style writing, drama and entertainment and the brick bats that come with it or knuckling under and writing books / scripts that the BBC want to produce.

Frankly, I couldn't care less about their quality of life, their job security, their mortgage, their standard of living or their peace of mind. Why should I? Neither the franchise nor the license fee payers who've spent the better part of sixty years funding it owe these people a livelihood. Doctor Who doesn't belong to them. They're merely the temporary custodians of something that wasn't theirs to destroy. When they found themselves incapable of fulfilling that role, they ought to have done the honourable thing and resigned. Instead, they've taken a once beloved show and turned it into a horribly written, horribly acted hate project enjoyed exclusively by a tiny minority of bigoted extremists. That's unforgivable.

It is undoubtably annoying that this sort of cant and gibberish has crept into the Dr Who world but isn't it a bit harsh to accuse writers etc.., of being cowards? At the end of the day its their quality of life on the line - their job security, their mortgage, their standard of living and their peace of mind. Its them who have to choose between a principled stand for either old style writing, drama and entertainment and the brick bats that come with it or knuckling under and writing books / scripts that the BBC want to produce.

I do find Cornell's comments stomache churning. Hes probably trying to protect his career but a moment of silence from him might have been a better approach. I always thought all the former Virgin New Adventure writers were BFFs - "one for all and all for one" and all that. Makes me wonder whats buried in his internet history waiting for some nut-case to dig up and find ....

Not really. If they all take a stand then the bigots have no power. What are they going to do? Fire Steven Moffat, Peter Capaldi, Jenna Coleman in one swoop? Steven Moffat surely would have held some sway and could have reached some kind of compromise like a Romana spin off, or even if he had to have a female Master, he could have done it a lot better.

He could have had the Master snatch a woman's body like Tremas, not written her wanting to shag the Doctor, not just cast his mate and rewritten the character to be like the characters she always plays etc.

Similarly if Moffat made a stand, and the Big Finish lot and writers like Paul Cornell all make it clear that he is being leaned on by a political agenda and that we should never stand for that regardless, then that would be that. All the cowards who adopt the "Doctor Who is all about change crap" on IMDB and youtube and Planet Mondas would have to admit that it was hijacked.

Also I'm not exactly going to worry about Steven Moffat's income considering he was a multi millionaire before 2014. He could easily get work elsewhere.

By selling the show out to this ideology he has affected the income of future writers and producers however. He is enabling their racist policies against hiring white people, hiring men etc, by not taking a stand.

Moff was a coward and a sell out and IMO the real villain of DW more than anyone. He is completely to blame for the situation the show is in.

The BBC is committed to this form of egalitarian politics. Its produced a policy document on it. If senior figures wanted Dr who to go in this direction they would have insisted or, if Jenna, Peter or Moffat "took a stand", cancelled the show and revamped it with a different show runner. Maybe a more compliant chap such as Chibnall.

As for the positive discrimination line - I don't like it either. To me its the complete opposite of my own sense of justice. But suggesting Moffat, Peter or Jenna could have resisted that to any significant effect is a bit over optimistic. Positive discrimination is a trend that has been gathering pace for some decades in this country and speeded up somewhat in recent years. I don't see how Moffat could have stopped it in the context of Dr Who.

stengos wrote:The BBC is committed to this form of egalitarian politics. Its produced a policy document on it. If senior figures wanted Dr who to go in this direction they would have insisted or, if Jenna, Peter or Moffat "took a stand", cancelled the show and revamped it with a different show runner. Maybe a more compliant chap such as Chibnall.

As for the positive discrimination line - I don't like it either. To me its the complete opposite of my own sense of justice. But suggesting Moffat, Peter or Jenna could have resisted that to any significant effect is a bit over optimistic. Positive discrimination is a trend that has been gathering pace for some decades in this country and speeded up somewhat  in recent years. I don't see how Moffat could have stopped it in the context of Dr Who.

Thing is if it became known that that was why all 3 had been fired then it would be a scandal. Also I doubt they'd have gotten rid of them in a oner.

As it is a lot of the people only supported the identity politics crap because Moffat was for it.

Tanman will back me up on this. He's a refugee from the DW imdb page, that's where we both first got to know each other.

On that board pre Missy everybody hated the SJWs. We all used to take the piss out of them for their treatment of Moffat, because back then he had a bit more backbone and stood up against the SJWs.

As soon as he brought Missy in however they ALL switched and became SJW apologists, because they were Moffat fans first and DW fans second. Criticising the SJWs meant that they would have to criticise Moffat so they all became pro female Doctor, thought Missy was great etc. These people had slagged off John Simm for being too crazy, too like the Joker, and for the gay subtext with David Tennant because it was out of character for the Doctor and the Master.

When Moffat did all of those to a much greater degree then suddenly they were all for it.

This is also why so much more people are against Jodie because its Chinballs not Moffat.

He could have swayed a lot more of the fanbase against these cretins but he bent over backwards for them.

burrunjor wrote:

stengos wrote:The BBC is committed to this form of egalitarian politics. Its produced a policy document on it. If senior figures wanted Dr who to go in this direction they would have insisted or, if Jenna, Peter or Moffat "took a stand", cancelled the show and revamped it with a different show runner. Maybe a more compliant chap such as Chibnall.

As for the positive discrimination line - I don't like it either. To me its the complete opposite of my own sense of justice. But suggesting Moffat, Peter or Jenna could have resisted that to any significant effect is a bit over optimistic. Positive discrimination is a trend that has been gathering pace for some decades in this country and speeded up somewhat  in recent years. I don't see how Moffat could have stopped it in the context of Dr Who.

Thing is if it became known that that was why all 3 had been fired then it would be a scandal. Also I doubt they'd have gotten rid of them in a oner.

As it is a lot of the people only supported the identity politics crap because Moffat was for it.

Tanman will back me up on this. He's a refugee from the DW imdb page, that's where we both first got to know each other.

On that board pre Missy everybody hated the SJWs. We all used to take the piss out of them for their treatment of Moffat, because back then he had a bit more backbone and stood up against the SJWs.

As soon as he brought Missy in however they ALL switched and became SJW apologists, because they were Moffat fans first and DW fans second. Criticising the SJWs meant that they would have to criticise Moffat so they all became pro female Doctor, thought Missy was great etc. These people had slagged off John Simm for being too crazy, too like the Joker, and for the gay subtext with David Tennant because it was out of character for the Doctor and the Master.

When Moffat did all of those to a much greater degree then suddenly they were all for it.

This is also why so much more people are against Jodie because its Chinballs not Moffat.

He could have swayed a lot more of the fanbase against these cretins but he bent over backwards for them.

No i don't think it would be widely regarded as a scandal. It would be spinned as the BBC updating one of its flagship programmes so as to conform with the spirit of various Equalities statutes enacted over the last 13 years. Its a scandal to me, but not wider society. Whose gonna be upset by it? Dr Who fans? The disdain shown for them when they feminised the lead role suggests that wouldn't matter much to the BBC hierarchy.

Moffat and Capaldi left at the same time. It seems to me Capaldi was most likely pushed. So they got rid of two in one go. Three if you want to count Pearl (who i thought was a better actress than Mandip Gill).

I fully appreciate what you say about the fans attitudes expressed on IMDB. I dont doubt it for one second. I just think even without Moffat things would have moved in this direction. More of a jolt maybe but it would have happened anyway.

Don't get me wrong, what Gareth has said was pretty questionable, but it was still an opinion, it wasn't that bad to the point of me being glad that he's gone, or even him being attacked. He never presented it as a fact. SJW'S attacking Gareth is just pitiful to look at.

People just attacking others for their own opinions I find ludicrous. Remember the Peter Davison Twitter situation, anyone? I'm also in another fandom/franchise I love as much as Classic Who called Steven Universe and there was this incident where this fan artist got massively cyberbullied (by Tumblr, because of course Tumblr would do something like this) for drawing one character in a slightly different shape. It was so bad to the point that she had to be hospitalized for attempted suicide. And the SJW'S kept on attacking her, even attacking the creators of the show when they sent their support for the fan artist. The same thing is happening here with Gareth Roberts, hoping that he doesn't head down a dark path after this.

I tend to be a "separate art from the artist" guy anyway (I mean I like a good amount of Kevin Spacey films, despite him being a monster). If I wasn't, that means that I can't enjoy the majority of the Sarah Jane Adventures (something that I think I prefer to NewWho, controversial as that sounds) or some of the BBC books that he's written.

I've always had this fantasy about having my arsehole stretched by a cute trans lady. Anyone else?

Commander Maxil wrote:I've always had this fantasy about having my arsehole stretched by a cute trans lady. Anyone else?

Bend over, pretty boy!
\

ClockworkOcean wrote:

Commander Maxil wrote:I've always had this fantasy about having my arsehole stretched by a cute trans lady. Anyone else?

Bend over, pretty boy!
\

I was thinking more:









YUM

Commander Maxil wrote:I've always had this fantasy about having my arsehole stretched by a cute trans lady. Anyone else?

I can't decide whose posts are more revolting yours or Boofer.

SomeCallMeEnglishGiraffe wrote:Don't get me wrong, what Gareth has said was pretty questionable, but it was still an opinion, it wasn't that bad to the point of me being glad that he's gone, or even him being attacked. He never presented it as a fact. SJW'S attacking Gareth is just pitiful to look at.

People just attacking others for their own opinions I find ludicrous. Remember the Peter Davison Twitter situation, anyone? I'm also in another fandom/franchise I love as much as Classic Who called Steven Universe and there was this incident where this fan artist got massively cyberbullied (by Tumblr, because of course Tumblr would do something like this) for drawing one character in a slightly different shape. It was so bad to the point that she had to be hospitalized for attempted suicide. And the SJW'S kept on attacking her, even attacking the creators of the show when they sent their support for the fan artist. The same thing is happening here with Gareth Roberts, hoping that he doesn't head down a dark path after this.

I tend to be a "separate art from the artist" guy anyway (I mean I like a good amount of Kevin Spacey films, despite him being a monster). If I wasn't, that means that I can't enjoy the majority of the Sarah Jane Adventures (something that I think I prefer to NewWho, controversial as that sounds) or some of the BBC books that he's written.

Great post and very true. I too found Roberts comments in the article and the tweet to be wrong. There is a growing body of evidence that some people are trapped in the wrong body. Men and women do have different brains after all, (that's no indication that one sex is smarter than the other BTW.)

According to recent studies a lot of trans people have brains that match the opposite gender which leads to them feeling trapped in the wrong body and feeling depressed. Changing sex therefore is the best option.

Just look at Blaire White. Blaire White alone I think is proof that a sex change operation is better for some people. She's clearly a lot happier as a woman than if she had stayed as a man.

However I do feel that transgenderism is being fetishized by the left and a lot of young people are going in for it, and then regretting it years down the road. It needs to be seen as just a thing that people do, not an achievement.

Still that doesn't meant Roberts isn't entitled to his opinion.

Incidentally about the seperating the art from the artist thing I must admit that sometimes I can and sometimes I can't.

Kevin Spacey is an easy one because as vile as he is, he often plays villains and bastards. Allison Mack meanwhile has made it very hard for me to watch Smallville. Her character is meant to be the cute, lovable, Osgood type nerdy girl that the young male audience are meant to fall in love with. Given what she has done in real life it feels kind of inappropriate to say the least to view her that way LOL.

I think it really depends on the art, the person and obviously their crime.