Gender Bending and Doctor Who: The Ruination of a Sci-Fi Legend (by ContraSuggest)

The British Sci-Fi television show Doctor Who has been an enduring cultural phenomenon for the last 50 years.  Beginning as a children's serial back in the early 1960s, producers engineered a clever way for the show to continue when its original lead actor became too ill to continue in the role.  The character of the Doctor, an alien scientist and explorer who travelled the universe in his time machine helping those in need, was able to regenerate his body when it became worn out or damaged.  So thorough was this regeneration, that it even affected his personality, facial features, height, weight and outward age.  This allowed the producers to cast new actors in the lead role at semi-regular intervals, allowing the show to go on potentially indefinitely.  The show had the distinction of being the longest running sci-fi based TV program in history.  Finally, after nearly 30 years, the BBC chose to stop producing the show.  Then in 2005, to the delight of heartbroken fans the world over, the show was revived by the BBC, proved to be immensely popular, and continues going strong to this day.

While harkening back to the spirit of the original series, the new series also blazed a trail of its own with new concepts and storylines.  Some of these changes were well-received by fans; others were not, but overall there was much enthusiasm for the reboot, which brought in high ratings thanks to a whole new generation of fans.  For the first several years the storylines were mostly fresh, bold, and interesting, but the show has long since lost its edge, descending into a sad mediocrity, despite its continued popularity.  Seemingly grand storylines are often convoluted, forgettable, and ring hollow as the closing credits role.  Amid all of this trite, worn-out fare, has been an almost ubiquitous radical social commentary, continuously glorifying many precepts of radical cultural chic.  As a huge fan and defender of the show for 35 years, I have been relegated to hanging on in quiet desperation, patiently waiting and hoping for the show to improve and recapture at least some of its former glory.  But now the unthinkable has happened; it seems that the dreaded rumors are true.  Current show runner Steven Moffat, perhaps using the foil of regeneration as a means, appears to be leaning towards changing the gender of the Doctor.        

Let’s put aside for a moment the show’s aforementioned blind acceptance and eager embrace of nearly every socio-cultural aberration that comes down the pike.  Let’s put aside for a moment that the show has long since abandoned some of the roots of the original series, those roots which successfully endeared it to millions of fans worldwide, and made the character of the Doctor into a legend.  If the gender change rumors are true, Mr. Moffat appears to have run out of creative ideas, and is attempting to fill that void by fundamentally changing one of the foundational pillars of the show.  To the original show’s creators, the Doctor’s gender was not an accident, nor did the various creative teams that worked on the show ever dream of changing it; nor would the show’s millions of fans have wanted them to.  However, in the “Lady Gaga culture” of 2014, it's considered vogue (and the pinnacle of sophistication) to see men and women as no different from one another.  Gender, once immutable in all but rare cases, is now freely interchangeable and can be chosen by people (even children) like picking out a flavor of ice cream, regardless of nature’s determinations at conception.  The influential  managers of the entertainment industry either agree with this deeply flawed notion, or go along with it, out of fear of reprisals from the radical cultural mafia.  In fact, men and women are essentially different from one another, and those differences have everything to do with why writers chose particular genders for their characters.

The Doctor’s “maleness” is just as much a part of his character as femaleness is part of any great female character.  The Doctor has always been a strong, reliable, protective male role model; throughout the years he's been alternatively cast as a wise grandfather, favorite uncle, and protective big brother; ever respectful, loyal, and ethical.  Mr. Moffat has reportedly said that he has been easing his audience into slowly accepting this absurd change because he recognizes that part of that audience is conservative.  That's no doubt true.  But does he believe that only so-called conservatives will object to this insanity?  How would fans of the X-Files, Buffy The Vampire Slayer, or Star Trek: Voyager have reacted to gender changes in the female lead characters of those shows?   What if the producers of those shows had used some sci-fi-fantasy-based plot device to transform Dana Scully, Buffy Summers or Captain Kathryn Janeway into men?  The women's lib community, hardly conservatives, would have been up in arms, and rightfully so!  This proposed move doesn't just violate tradition, it violates basic common sense, which is shared by most fans up and down the spectrum of opinion.       

Before the advent of the current series, the Dr. Who universe shared a rich history that spanned nearly 40 years, which included well over 150 storylines worth of material (between TV installments and full length feature films).  While it is the prerogative of any producer of the current series to add to the show's lore, there's clearly been a wonderful tradition of using the original series as a touchstone when doing so.  That tradition has proved popular, as evidenced in the exuberance of fans and the increased viewership that accompany the occasional return of any of the original series' legendary villains.  Fans have always griped over actual or perceived violations of continuity in the storylines.  Transforming the Doctor into a woman would be the single biggest continuity flub in the history of the program.  There is simply no precedent anywhere in the show's wide-ranging mythos that points to timelord regeneration effecting gender change.  The only precedent in the new series was Moffat's  own disastrous recasting of the Master as a woman.  There was apparently no good reason for this move, other than its cheap shock value.  Imagine the disappointment of a long-time fan who thought this woman might be the Rani until it was revealed to be the Master (oh, the pain!).  It seems that the current series' producers are more concerned with infusing the show with radical socio-political commentary than they are with emulating the imaginative excellence that brought the show to its past heights.

In closing, I implore Mr. Moffat to reconsider the direction in which he's purportedly going.  I believe him to be a thoughtful, talented man, but if his creative well is running a bit dry in terms of a fresh direction for Dr. Who, then he should pass the baton to a successor with fresh ideas.  Confusing innovation  with changing the lead character's  gender would be a lamentable mistake.  If this much talked-about change comes to pass, this diehard fan of 35 years will be permanently tuning out.  And I would ask my fellow fans to seriously consider this issue.  I obviously disagree sharply with those of you who support the proposed gender change.  But I have a message for those of you who do not: don't be bullied by the forces of social conformity who claim to be champions of inclusiveness while they attempt to exclude you from the debate.  We must present our opinion cogently and respectfully, but also with tenacity.  The integrity of a science fiction legend hangs in the balance.

America's Last Best Hope: An Article V Convention Of The States (by ContraSuggest)

In the end, only the truth matters, and I'm going to continue to tell the truth as I understand it, no matter the resistance I encounter.  None of the conventional methods and instrumentalities will be effective in saving the American people from the tyranny that our founders feared.  That tyranny is here now.  The old methods have been used over and over and over again, while the situation just gets worse by great orders of magnitude.  And if something effective isn't done soon to counter the powerful forces arrayed against us, the country will devolve into a primordial stew of decadence, decline, and irrelevancy.  We're no longer at the precipice; we've slipped over the edge of the cliff and are on the way down to destruction and oblivion.  However, even at this late hour, we still have one chance to pull ourselves back, but we do not have much time.  There is only one last card for constitutional conservatives left to play, and if we don't draw it soon, our Constitution will unravel completely and all will be lost.  This isn't exaggeration, disinformation, pessimism, alarmism, negativity, deception or doomsaying - it's the God honest truth.  There's no room in the conservative movement for the weak-kneed; we're not a bunch of porcelain dolls who will simply shatter when faced with the hard, cold truth.  If you can't handle the heat of the truth, then get the hell out of the kitchen.  Sugarcoated fantasies have no place in this war for the heart and soul of the nation. 

 Electing more Republicans is not the answer. 

 The Republican Party is not the party of conservatism.  That's not to say that there are no conservatives in the party, but rather that conservatives amount only to a small minority.  Most of the GOP is made up of big government technocrats who have been, and continue to be, complicit in the loss of our liberties that comes with a massive expansion of federal power.  This group remains in firm control of the party, and instead of shielding the American people from the abuses of a rapacious federal government, it willingly colludes with the Democrats to obliterate what's left of our liberty.  The Republican establishment shares the same goals as the Democrats, they just aim to achieve them at a slower pace.  That's why the establishment Republican's hearts are not in the fight against Obama; they eventually want most of what he wants.  The Walking Dead have just finished electing overwhelming majorities of Republicans to both houses of Congress.  Many who are concerned about Obama's unlawful executive actions and his continued expansion of Mordor's power are rejoicing.  On the eve of the election I predicted that a Republican victory would do nothing to halt Obama's dictatorial advance.  Was I correct?  In a word, yes.  Once again the Republican leadership has rolled over for our half-a-commie president and handed the Democrats, who they just crushed in the November election, everything that they wanted in the form of a pork filled, waste laden Omnibus bill that will spend your money through September of next year!  Hear this- Republicans have just annihilated the Dems, yet have allowed them to decide the budget for the next nine months!  If that's not incomprehensible and idiotic enough, the Republican leadership has unilaterally disarmed Congress by relinquishing its constitutional power of the purse, allowing Obama to illegally legalize millions of illegals.  Name one aspect of Obama's agenda that has been curtailed by the election of Republican majorities in Congress.  You cannot name one.  Remember, over the course of the past 25 years we have had some periods of Republican majorities in Congress, as we have had Republican presidents.  Where has it gotten us?  The government now spends more, taxes more, regulates more, and is in more debt than it has ever been in our history, and Mordor is becoming more and more powerful, regulating and micro managing every single aspect of our lives.  Yes, I would rather have a wishy-washy Republican in office rather than some outright socialist Democrat, but in the end the difference is negligible.  Let me finish this point with the following analogy: a Democrat Party victory is like the nation getting a pancreatic cancer diagnosis; a Republican Party victory is like the nation getting a colon cancer diagnosis.  They're both cancer; one is just more treatable.  How sad that our elected officials are so contemptuous of our constitutionally granted liberties that they can accurately be compared to a cancer.                  

 How An Article V Convention Would Work

Our Constitution provides two methods for amendment.  In the 227 years that document has been in effect, one of those methods has never been used.  It was purposefully conceived by the Founders so that the states and the people would have a peaceful means of recourse in the event that the federal government became oppressive.  Embedded in Article V, this provision allows for the state legislatures to call for a convention of the states to discuss and propose amendments to the Constitution.  In the event that two-thirds of the state convention delegates agree to the proposed amendment(s), then the 50 state legislatures would vote them up or down; if three-fourths agree, the amendment(s) are automatically ratified as part of the Constitution.  It's important to note that the federal government, (the president, Congress, and the courts) are shut out of this process and can only observe as it unfolds; they are not in any way legally empowered to intervene.  With a lawless president in office, the federal government carrying out unconstitutional acts on a daily basis, and a majority of state legislatures in the hands of Republicans, the time for an Article V convention is now!  An organization called The Convention Of The States Project is laboring hard to start the process by providing legal informational council to state legislators who're committed to the process.  Legislatures in several states have formed exploratory committees to get the ball rolling.  I know that some feel that this process is too much of a long shot, that it could be co-opted by leftists, that it's too risky.  My answer to those fears is that this is the only option open to us, short of unconstitutional actions and open, armed rebellion.  Since the alternative is a massive bloodbath, I chose the Article V convention process.  Put simply, we cannot save our Constitution by violating it.

Thanks to the great Mark Levin, who taught me most of what I know about this subject, I hope I haven't misrepresented his wisdom.