Time, Space ... and Sexism

[caz963]

I feel like I’m taking my life in my hands by writing this, but it’s been on my mind since I began reading the various reactions to the Comic Relief DW special and I wanted to try to explain why I’m not as “up in arms” about it as some people are.



I am in NO WAY attempting to trivialize the concerns I’ve seen expressed or to say that those are not valid opinions. I hope that anyone reading this will know that’s something I would never do. I try to understand differing opinions, not slag them off.

Okay. So my first impressions, as I wrote here, were more to do with the fact that practically everything in Space and Time is stuff we’ve seen before – either in Moffat’s own Time Crash (where Ten saved the day because he remembered watching himself (as Ten) when he was Five) or in earlier DW stories (the TARDIS materializing within the TARDIS had been done in The Time Monster (Three) and Logopolis (Four)) – AND that it was a very tongue-in-cheek nod to all those moans about the fact that Amy spent most of the last series wearing skirts that were barely long enough to cover her – er – modesty ;-)

I admit I did wince a few times – the stuff about the driving test was in really bad taste, I thought - but mostly I was sniggering at the fact that Moff had let his inner 12 year-old run free and was trotting out some of the most clichéd schoolboy/seaside postcard humour I’ve seen on telly for a while.

I don’t know if it’s a cultural thing; it seems to me, on the whole, that us Brits tend to be a bit more laid back about political correctness and “isms” than some other cultures – and again - I’m not slagging anyone off, just wondering aloud! I mean – *hangs head in shame* - we gave the world Benny Hill after all. A fact for which I feel compelled to apologise profoundly. Oddly, there was an early Carry On film on on Saturday afternoon, in which the humour is very much in the same vein, and I found myself wondering how they could get away with showing it these days. Okay, so I know that it was made in the 1960s - we’ve moved on since then.

Anyway. what I’ve been wondering is whether I’m dim, insensitive or just a bad feminist, because I’m prepared to dismiss it as – admittedly poor - “schoolboy humour” rather than deliberate sexism.

When I first saw the various debates here on LJ which talked about how Moffat’s views on women – ones that he’s not been shy of expressing in a number of interviews – are informing his writing, I was surprised because, as I said, I don’t tend to see things like this unless it’s either a) incredibly, glaringly obvious or b) pointed out to me afterwards.

(As another example. At the risk of opening up another can of worms about another “ism” – I was surprised to discover that the fact that Martha’s family were dressed in servants’ uniform at the end of S3 was widely thought to be racist.

I never saw that at all. My brain doesn’t go – “oh, they’re black so they have to wear servants’ uniforms”. It goes – “oh, they’re servants so they have to wear servants’ uniforms.”

They’d have been wearing them had they been White, Indian, Chinese, Hispanic or whatever, because the point was that the Jones family had been enslaved by the Master. But that’s by the by.)

It was while reading one of those discussions about Moffat that I read an old interview in which he made some spectacularly sexist comments, and I admit I was shocked. Not just at the views expressed, but that fact that he actually SAID THEM OUT LOUD!

For anyone who doesn’t know what I’m talking about, the comments are these ones (thanks to kilodalton for reminding me of them).

There’s this issue you’re not allowed to discuss: that women are needy. Men can go for longer, more happily, without women. That’s the truth. We don’t, as little boys, play at being married – we try to avoid it for as long as possible. Meanwhile women are out there hunting for husbands.

And this –

Well, the world is vastly counted in favour of men at every level - except if you live in a civilised country and you’re sort of educated and middle-class, because then you’re almost certainly junior in your relationship and in a state of permanent, crippled apology. Your preferences are routinely mocked. There’s a huge, unfortunate lack of respect for anything male.

source.

Sounds like a manifesto for Mysogynists-R-Us. And my response to that last quote is – if you’re going to spout crap like that, then I’m not at all surprised.

I don’t think I’m stupid or insensitive – so perhaps it’s to do with the fact that I grew up in the 70s when humour of the type we’re talking about was rife; and while I didn’t particularly like it, I’m used to it? I know that’s not an argument that paints me in a particularly flattering light either, but I can’t think of another reason as to why I’m not more worked up about this.

So yes, I can definitely see what people are talking about when they talk about Moffat being sexist, and I admit his attitude makes me uncomfortable. I mean, sure he’s created a sexy, feisty, independent, clever, kick-arse female character in River Song, but what is she if not the manifestation of what I’ve referred to before as Moffat’s ultimate fantasy – a feisty, sexy, clever woman who is most definitely NOT needy or hunting for a husband? She doesn’t want to tie the hero down because she’s not interested in domesticity herself.

As anyone who’s read my other witterings about DW knows, I’m not Moffat’s greatest fan. I admire his skill and I like his sense of humour (mostly), but I can’t quite bring myself to believe that he’s so bloody stupid and/or insensitive as to allow his personal, unflattering views on women to be seeping into his work. And this was only a six-minute charity thing, after all, probably a bit hastily thrown together.

Perhaps the problem is that I’m too naïve.

I can certainly see why there are people out there who are incensed by what was supposed to be a bit of fun for a charity event. But I think I’m more disappointed by the fact that it wasn’t all that – you know, funny.

Out of interest – what are the more pro-Moffat-DW-than-I people saying about it?

This post is public because I'm interested in what others beyond my f-list have to say. But I know this is a contentious issue, and if I feel I have to, I'll lock it.

Comments

[solitary-summer.livejournal.com]

I can't really weigh in on the current debate because I haven't watched or downloaded the special, and I don't like talking about something I haven't seen myself. But what you're saying about Martha...

I never saw that at all. My brain doesn’t go – “oh, they’re black so they have to wear servants’ uniforms”. It goes – “oh, they’re servants so they have to wear servants’ uniforms.”

It was the same for me. I understood why people were angry once they explained it, but personally I didn't see/feel it. Until a while later I was watching the first series of Being Human, and I viscerally hated how they wrote Annie with her endless cups of tea and her invisibility and her abusive boyfriend who killed her. I just didn't want to see a dead, scared, abused, invisible, female character, regardless of the point they were trying to make with this story or the direction they might be taking it. And when I was discussing this with someone on my friendslist, I had one of those lightbulb moments where it suddenly struck me, That's (probably, I should perhaps add) how people feel about Martha as a maid, and her family in a servants' uniforms. It may not be intentionally, objectively racist, it may not be unintentionally racist, it can even be written to point out racism, but it's an image that can bring up bad associations and reactions regardless, strong enough to override context.

[hooloovoo_42]

Martha as a maid was about the only way she, as a female, could have been employed in a boys' school in the early 20th century. The exception being the matron and they already had one of those. There were white female servants, too.

We in the UK watch all kinds of US TV shows and have to live with the way things are portrayed as everyday occurrences. We have our own history with racism, but we don't need have to worry about being politically correct on behalf of somebody else's bad associations.

[solitary-summer.livejournal.com]

I never said you had to. I'm neither from the US nor the UK, so I'm really just an outside observer in this debate. I just think it generally helps to understand why people react a certain way.

As far as LotTL is concerned, though, a touch of racism was definitely part of the Master's characterisation, since he at different times brings up both Martha's race and Jack's sexuality. I don't think RTD was unaware of the race issues involved, but made an attempt to work them into the plot, which kind of backfired.

[caz963.livejournal.com]

touch of racism was definitely part of the Master's characterisation

Oh, I'd definitely agree with that. Because he's a baddie and therefore espouses all sort of Ideas That Are Wrong.

Like the Daleks - the biggests racists in the universe!

[caz963.livejournal.com]

You're right about the effect that associations can have, and as I said somewhere upthreat, I do understand that it's a more contentious issue in the US than perhaps it is in the UK.

The CR special must be on You Tube somewhere.

[solitary-summer.livejournal.com]

I just watched it, but I'm still a bit hesitant to say something, since I'm not exactly one of SM's biggest fans and probably biased... I think '70ies humour' isn't far off, though. It felt kind off old-fashioned to me too. I can't say I'm deeply offended, it's almost too infantile for that, but the thing with the skirt went on for way too long, and, really, Jack was more subtle about his threesome fantasies in Journey's End. I'm not sure how I can say this without coming off as a prude or possibly misogynist, but the whole thing feels like a male sexual fantasy from start to finish. Is it deliberately tongue-in-cheek? Hard to tell. If that's what it was aiming for it fell a bit short off the mark as far as I'm concerned.

[caz963.livejournal.com]

I'm not deeply offended either. I think my attitude is more along the lines of - "oh, come on, Moff! You know you can do better than this!"

The skirt thing was waaaaay overlong.

I'm more bothered about the fact that it wasn't all that funny :(

[nostalgia-lj.livejournal.com]

Jack was more subtle

Unpossible!

[teresadivicenzo.livejournal.com]

I get the arguments that people made at the time, but the one thing that I can't move past is that this is a UK show, written within the UK's historical context. If I'm writing something, am I supposed to check with every nation, every culture out there, whether it may offend someone? That's a crazy expectation to put onto writers.

[crossoverman.livejournal.com]

Exactly. It's just not possible. But even within a single culture, it's hard to be aware of how everyone will receive something. RTD took a lot of strides putting queer characters into his series of Doctor Who, almost to the point of Gay Bingo in every episode, but he's still admonished for some troublesome implications on how race was depicted. The biggest problem, of course, is the show is mostly written by middle-aged white men - if it had more people of colour and women on its writing staff, we'd see a better depiction of everyone. That sounds like a cop out, sure, but I don't think any writer can be expected to appeal to everyone's sensitivities on all subjects without looking at the bigger problem - white male dominance EVERYWHERE in the entertainment industry.