Sherlock - BBC [4]

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Moffat has ''done more than any other to promote the role of females within the shows mythology'' which is frankly absurd.- Figg

Ok - in terms of mythology- first Moffat introduced as cannon the notion that a time-lord can at regeneration change sex- he did this by adding in the character of the Corsair, and old friend of the Doctors whom the Doctor had known as both male and female.
The next step taken by Moffat was during the regeneration of the 8th Doctor, in which the Sisterhood explicitly offer the Doctor the choice between male and female. Displaying that it was possible and known about wider than Time Lord society and was something the Doctor could do.
Thirdly he then took the second longest established character in the show besides the Doctor, the Master and after 50 years and many showrunners, none of whom did it before him, he made the Master regenerate into a woman.
Thus introducing the audience, who he has carefully prepared, to accept the moment and by exposing the audience to Missy (who despite what you say the AI's indicate was very popular, all the episodes she is in scored well) they get used to accepting a female as the same character as a former male.
We all know the next step, whether Moffat himself takes it or not, will be for there to be a female Doctor- and the reason it will happen at all is because Moffat has made it happen. Moffat. Not RTD. Not any of the classic show producers, not even Verity Lambert. Moffat has put all the necessary steps into the canon and him alone.
Even when its as blatant as this you still cant bring yourself to give Moffat any credit at all as you cannot see him beyond your view of him as sexist.

ok. Firstly Missy being a woman is down to fan pressure and compromise, he didn't want a female Doctor so he gave people the next best thing to shut them up. Secondly just listing the number of female characters isn't an argument. Thirdly, fucking around with canon isn't an argument, fourthly, it doesn't matter how many female characters you have if they are written badly.

'This is not a sweeping generalisation but based on actual facts.'

Which you seemingly cant and haven't produced any of- you have blogs, youtube rants- until you can provide me with a set of figures in some fashion comparable to the BBC AI's which demonstrate exactly the opposite result to the AI's- or produce a poll of more than 1000 people who all say its awful instead of that they are enjoying it, I will not consider what you say about the show anything at all vaguely resembling facts. Its just opinion- and I haven't even been arguing my opinion in this, I've been arguing there is no evidence to show everyone hates the show, and that what evidence there is says the opposite. And I am arguing this point because that's what the evidence says!

and I will not consider your false facts that come from rabid fan sites. and I have never said everyone hates the show.

'The 'bile' comes from intense and justified dislike of being misrepresented by a man who seems smug and dismissive.'

So what is it you have the issue with- the person or the writing? Because that sounds like a personal attack on the man himself, a man I hasten to add that as far as I am aware you have never actually met.

absolutely not, that's your twisting the meaning. again. you have no qualms about personal attacks on the people complaining by using the word 'bile' you are judging and dismissing peoples views. You would love it if I attacked him personally, but I am afraid I didn't attack him personally, I went of his actual words. he did it to himself and does himself no favours calling women 'needy'. and other such rubbish. if he acts like a jerk he is going to get a backlash.

'I think that's a pretty lame way of trying to silence peoples concerns.'

No its genuine bafflement why someone would argue so strongly that the show is doing terribly and everyone hates it when the evidence of the AI's and large polls indicate the opposite.

there is no evidence. you cling to this poll like its the Ten Commandments set in stone. its just a small poll, its meaningless.

If there was good evidence, or any in fact, to show that the majority of those watching hated it then I could understand you making the point that it was unpopular- but when the evidence not just of the polls and the AI, but the ever growing number of countries its exported to is that it is in fact doing better than it ever has in terms of reach as well.

I have never said everyone hates it, why continue this argument. its pointless.

Nagual wrote:You two still bickering like an two kids in the play ground? Well daddies home, so stop it. Opinions are all valid and it looks as you two are holding on to your own opinions like a dying man and his straw. Stop trying to change the others opinion or justify your own, it's childlike.

I don't post often in this forum, and I know you have no reason to either think about my comment (or opinion if you like) however I suggest you be at peace with the fact someone else disagrees with you. Facts and figures are just as meaningless as opinions. Neither of you actually care if the other likes or dislikes something, all it seems is that you care about making yourself right in the eyes of others (the forum users) and that is your ego taking charge.

Now, go to your rooms and don't come out till you are ready to at least act like adults. Assuming you are in fact adults, as the anonymity of the internet is wonderful at disguising us, isn't it?

Nagual wrote:Now, go to your rooms and don't come out till you are ready to at least act like adults. Assuming you are in fact adults, as the anonymity of the internet is wonderful at disguising us, isn't it?

Mrs Figg wrote:half of me wishes it was always set in the 19th c. looks good.