You weren't my 'First Doctor', but it is of your tenure as the Gallifreyan in the Big Blue Box that I have the clearest childhood memories. My friends and I would ritually discuss your latest adventures on the bus to swimming lessons, and playing 'Dalek Dodge' in the creepy outside toilet block was a playground favourite. Those memories were fond, and we were sad when Doctor Who came to an end in 1989. I was unimpressed with the 1996 attempt at revival, and mourned the wobbly sets, rubber-faced aliens and dodgy special effects, and bemoaned the attempt to cast a 'sexy' actor in the role (all due apologies to Mr McGann; he just doesn't do it for me).
When the show was again revived in 2005, I approached it with as much caution as excitement, but I'm a big fan of Christopher Eccleston's work so I was always going to give it a chance. And it was incredible stuff. I loved it every bit as much as I'd loved watching you as a child - perhaps more. Then the delectable David Tennant took over and the dynamic between the Doctor and his companion suddenly became very different to what it had been when I was a child. Rose fancied the Doctor (so did I, having had a long-standing crush on Mr Tennant since my early teenage years). She fell in love with him. And he with her. Despite their separation, this shift in the dynamic of the relationship between Doctor and companion to be a romantic one continued, although Martha's love was unrequited. Donna had a more 'traditional' platonic relationship with the Doctor, but suffered the most upsetting, tragic fate ever: becoming the best person she could be, bettering the Doctor, then being forced to forget everything. David Tennant was undoubtedly a sex symbol and I don't complain about the relationship his Doctor had with Rose, or Martha, or Donna, but I hoped things might take a different turn when Matt Smith replaced him. They did, for a while, but only because Amy's heart belonged to another. Clara fell hard, and the Doctor did too. But it's simply not appropriate for an ancient alien to settle down with a twenty-something human now is it? I'm sure that's not the sort of dynamic you're so keen to protect. Step forward, Peter Capaldi.
Now, although I think it somewhat unfair to Mr Capaldi to suggest that his casting was the reason for the cessation of any romance between Clara and her Doctor, but the number of women who grumbled on social media that the Doctor was suddenly "an ugly old bloke" go some way to support the theory. The dialogue between Clara and Vastra in his very first episode, 'Deep Breath', confirms it. Clara fancied Matt Smith's Doctor. She doesn't fancy Capaldi's. And I'm glad. Series 8 marked a turning point when 'new' Doctor Who started being more like it had been when I'd first started watching it. The Doctor, no longer a young, attractive man (sorry, Peter!) was back to being a mentor rather than a mancrush.
When Peter Capaldi initially assumed the role of The Doctor, his concern that Clara was only with him because she fancied him was evident. Throughout his first series, she learns (finally!) how The Doctor was always so much more than that and she starts to appreciate him in new ways. Capaldi's Doctor reminds me so much of yours. It's one of the reasons I've enjoyed the most recent series so much.
One question I've always pondered, ever since my childhood, however is this: why is The Doctor always a man? Female Time Lords exist. Steven Moffat has, through the casting of Michelle Gomez as Missy - The Master or, rather, The Mistress, The Doctor's greatest foe - confirmed that it's possible for a male Time Lord to regenerate into a female form. A female Doctor is something he's seen as being on the cards for some time and he's been very open about it. Why are you so against the idea?
"It would ruin the dynamics between The Doctor and the assistant," you said. Did the dynamics between The Mistress and The Doctor change that much? At all? Missy is every bit the Machiavellian sociopath that Roger Delgado was. She and The Doctor have the same love/hate relationship they've always had. The dynamics between The Doctor and his 'assistants' have already changed since you played the role. It's somewhat ironic that yours paved the way for those who followed (1), given your remarks. What sort of dynamic did your Doctor have with Ace? The Doctor - your Doctor - was manipulative. Though she was by far the most realistic companion The Doctor had ever had up to that point, the first to work things out for herself rather than merely ask questions, the first to fight to protect The Doctor rather than scream helplessly for him to save her... but she was merely a pawn in one of his long games with an ancient enemy. The Doctor can't half be a bastard sometimes.
In some ways, many of The Doctor's modern companions have much in common with the 'sacrificial lamb' Bond Girl - the woman who falls hopelessly in love with Bond (usually the one already in a relationship with the bad guy) who ends up dying as a direct result of her encounter with Bond. Ace's fate depends on which version you prefer. Rose ended up trapped in a parallel universe, Martha risk her life in almost every episode. Jack was forgotten, left behind. Repeatedly. Donna saved everybody and was forced to live in a world where she was the only one who could never know about it. Amy was shot back through time. River died. People might forget that, since her last meeting with The Doctor was the first for both him and us viewers. But he showed every single one of them how to become better people. And they him. And it's here that I stop using gendered pronouns to refer to The Doctor. Because the qualities The Doctor possesses that allow that to happen aren't exclusively male.
As a long time fan of Doctor Who, the relationship between The Doctor and his (oh OK, one more time) companions has always intrigued me. It's possibly because I appreciate the insignificance of humans in the vastness of space. The idea that there is more out there beyond the solar system that we know, and the potential that we are therefore not alone. That this was not and is not the only planet capable of sustaining life. What might those other lifeforms be like? Would they wish to harm us? Despite The Doctor's tendency to be highly manipulative of them, he (last one, promise!) has a particular fondness for them. The Doctor wants to protect Earth (before it's inevitable death) and the continued existence of the human race. The Doctor's companions aren't naive, but they consistently arrive with a complete lack of awareness of their significance. Rose was a shop assistant, bored with her mundane existence. Martha didn't believe she was good enough. Donna knew she wasn't. The Doctor helped them all realise their own worth. Is that something only a man is capable of?
You describe yourself as supporting feminism but you believe that only a man is able to teach a woman (for The Doctor's companions are mainly female) her true value? Feminism challenges the very fact that men have been defining the value of women for millennia. We don't need men telling us how we can be better. This isn't to say that women can't be inspired by men, can't learn anything from men, just a plea for you to recognise that the role of teacher, mentor is not a solely male one. Perhaps your concern is harm to the romantic dynamic between Doctor and Companion? Is it the possibility that a female Doctor might form a romantic relationship with a female companion that concerns you? Or is it that you're uncomfortable with the idea of a young man forming a romantic attachment to a much older woman? Does the prospect of The Doctor being portrayed by a young, attractive by patriarchal standards woman bother you more than the role being filled by an older one? Or one not deemed attractive?
This isn't about a "cultural need" for a female Doctor, whom you compare to James Bond. You'll note that I don't say there are no comparisons between the two but I completely disagree that the characteristics of either character are exclusively male - the difference is how such characteristics are perceived in women. In the case of Bond, substance abuse, having multiple sexual partners, disobedience etc are seen as negative behaviours in women but Bond is lauded as a hero and such things are encouraged in men who wish to assert their 'maleness'. The Doctor's personality changes with each regeneration but remains broadly that of an individual in a highly privileged position who fights to protect the oppressed. As someone who claims to support feminism, you should realise that it is the fight of women against oppression and, whilst I personally welcome the support of male allies who can help break down the system of patriarchy from within, it is women's fight and we don't need (indeed many feminists do not want) men to help us. Since The Doctor's ultimate aim is to fight oppression, I wonder why you are so adamant this is something a woman couldn't do.
Steven Moffat said that "you cast a person, you don't cast the gender". That's why women have been playing Hamlet for centuries (2). What personality traits is it that you see in The Doctor that couldn't be portrayed by a women, bearing in mind that The Doctor's fundamental reason for existence is entirely unrelated to gender? Bearing in mind that The Doctor's personality is prone to change with each subsequent regeneration in any event? Peter Capaldi, who has been a fan of Doctor Who since - ooh - forever, sees a female Doctor as a possibility. Why can't you? Perhaps you share the same concerns that I do, that a female Doctor would be stereotypically female. Take The Doctor's costume, for example. Each has adapted it to fit their personality. To reflect the fact the producers wished to present the character as more enigmatic, yours wore a jumper emblazoned with question marks and carried an umbrella with one for a handle. Initially a light, casual outfit that reflected the Seventh Doctor's whimsical nature, it became darker in colour as the darker aspects of The Doctor's personality were revealed. On that evidence I don't baulk at the possibility a female Doctor might go through regular costume changes but then there's no reason why another male Doctor couldn't do this. Would a female Doctor pick a highly impractical designer frock and a pair of Jimmy Choo's as her preferred garment? Or would things take a comic turn, where someone whose entire lived existence as a man would result in series of clueless attempts to dress a body with hips and boobs? Would she rummage through The Doctor's absolutely enormous wardrobe of clothes or - horror! - make the TARDIS' first stop the nearest branch of New Look? As a woman who wears whatever the fuck she likes, I'd like to see a female Doctor who dressed a bit like me. Jeans and a t-shirt with biker boots one day, a patterned blouse and trousers with trainers the next, a vintage dress and Doctor Marten's the one after that. Heck, there are even days when I wear Converse with a massive, stripy knitted scarf and a trilby (like the Tenth, Fourth and Third Doctor's respectively). We can dress for the occasion or we can dress to suit our mood or we can do both - who says women have to wear dresses to weddings? Oh yes, men.
Doctor is a title that has no gender. Despite having been played by a man since it began, Doctor Who is not bound by the rules of gender, only the personality of the person playing the role and the imagination of the writers. The Doctor would not fundamentally change, only people's perceptions of the The Doctor. Your belief that The Doctor "is a male character" says more about your attitude than your claim to "support feminism". I note that comment was followed by the word "but". It seems all to common that anyone claiming to support anything then saying "but" doesn't really support it at all - rather like people saying they support breastfeeding "but not in public", or "but only if the mother covers up", which isn't supportive at all. It's not difficult to draw parallels between this and what you said.
I might draw a similar parallel between your argument and that against a black James Bond but at least Rush Limbaugh had the good sense to realise that he was being racist to suggest that was a bad idea. To argue that The Doctor is a "male character" is sexist. Plain and simple. You acknowledge the existence of the "glass ceilings" for women but then speak of "drawing the line" - where is the line for men? Men played Shakespeare's female roles because women were forbidden to act. Suggesting that there is ought now to be a limit on the roles women play simply because they are women is archaic and downright offensive.
You aren't the only person who seems to believe that the casting of a female Doctor would be solely to serve the interests of "political correctness" - that seems to be the feeling of a large number of people if the surveys I've seen at the end of various articles regarding your comments are anything to go by. I refer back to Steven Moffat's comment, "you cast the person, you don't cast the gender." Comments like yours, like all those who pooh-pooh the idea of a female Doctor citing "political correctness", show you don't see women as people, but just as women, with all of the associated gendered limitations. Feminism seeks to free women from those limitations. Saying The Doctor shouldn't ever be female is imposing a limitation on women. So please don't keep saying you support us, because those comments show that you don't.
Do I want you to apologise? Say you would back the casting of a female Doctor? No. You don't have to do that. If you believe it's a bad idea, then you believe that, for whatever reason and it doesn't matter if I or anyone else disagrees with you. Just don't try to defend your sexist comments by claiming to support feminism. Be Rush Limbaugh and own your prejudice.
Helen Mirren said she could name "at least ten wonderful British actresses who would absolutely kill" as The Doctor. I doubt Ms Mirren would be so self-important to include herself on that list but she'd certainly be on mine. Maxine Peake would be brilliant. Olivia Colman would too - and continue the newly established tradition of casting actors who have previously appeared in smaller roles like Freema Agyeman, Karen Gillan and Peter Capaldi (the latter two in the same episode. How awesome is that?!) Don't get me wrong, I'm not sitting here, typing away with the notion that the next Doctor should or must be female. I'm just not discounting it is a possibility like you are. Eddie Izzard would be an amazing Doctor. Phil Davis is fabulous (and he also appeared in 'The Fires of Pompeii' alongside Gillen & Capaldi, which would make for some spookily spectacular casting). But it isn't up to me to influence the process any more than it is you. I suspect Steven Moffat has an idea of where he wants The Doctor to go and he will cast the right person to take The Doctor there. That person may well be a woman. So be it. Line crossed, glass ceiling shattered. And I'll still watch Doctor Who because the nature of the relationship between Doctor and companion doesn't have to be based on the Doctor's ownership of a penis (3).
So we disagree. And that's OK. You don't have to change your opinion just to suit me. But that does mean you're not a feminist (4). So please don't say that you are or that you support us again unless you are prepared to revise your opinion. Just one final thought... what if the next Doctor is ginger? A ridiculous question, you might say. But arguing against a ginger Doctor makes about as much sense as your argument against a female one in my opinion, i.e. none at all.
Yours sincerely,
Samantha Reilly (age 36)
(3) Or penises. Two hearts... anything else he's got two of?
(4) If men do behave in ways and express views that are supportive of feminism, I don't personally take issue with them describing themselves as 'feminist', although 'feminist ally' is preferable, I understand there are circumstances when it's easier not to. Like when your Tweet is four characters too long ;)
