MovieChat Forums > Doctor Who (2006) Discussion > Alright, Time Lords don't switch genders...

Alright, Time Lords don't switch genders when they regenerate.

posted 7 years ago by krl97a (5619)
22 replies | jump to latest

It's well established that they reproduce sexually (like most other advanced life), marry, and raise children in nuclear families like humans do. This wouldn't work if they could suddenly switch sexes each time they regenerate.

More fundamentally, being a man is a core part of the Doctor's identity. Sex isn't a meaningless cosmetic trait. Ironically in trying to pander to shallower "fans" and political activists blindly screaming inanities like "Make the Doctor a woman!", Moffat is unwittingly undermining their cause. If gender is merely shallow and cosmetic, then what the hell are "transgendered" people making such a fuss about, and why should tax payers be expected to pick up the bill for frivolous procedures with no deeper meaning to one's identity?

Of course gender isn't cosmetic or shallow. It's an essential component of who someone is. If Doctor Who is to continue without wrecking its entire half century legacy, it would help if the next show runner cleaned this up. After all, the Doctor has joked or lied about stuff before that future writers have dismissed. Remember him saying he was half human? The Doctor's comments were vague, light, and silly in nature this episode (he also equated sentient life to pork at one point; terribly stupid writing). It could also be explained that the Master underwent some aberrational procedure to stay alive, which is how he became "Missy". They still haven't explained how he got off Gallifrey anyway. Some unusual stuff must have happened.

Moffat is leaving none too soon. Hopefully the next guy is better.

[–] horrorfan000 (2149) 7 years ago

Completely agree with you.I'm all for equality and diversity but I don't want to see a female doctor anymore than I want to see a male wonder woman.

[–] krl97a (5619) 7 years ago

Good analogy. Neither do I. If they want a Time Lady, they could bring back an established character like Romana or Susan, or introduce new ones. People certainly aren't opposed to female characters.

[–] Martoto (4467) 7 years ago

There are humans capable of raising healthy families without conventions and prejudicial attitudes of gender and sexuality holding them back. At no point has the human concept of a "nuclear family" been established as a requisite for Timelords and their number.

What's "meaningless" is some people's perceptions and concerns with other people's attitudes toward sex and gender which have nothing to do with them. Those perceptions are often shallow and restricted to personal preference and prejudice. Plus they are utterly redundant since it's none of their business.

Anyway. I would have thought you and folk like you would have been pleased with the way the show pandered to you. What with Bill being "converted" and "fixed".

[–] krl97a (5619) 7 years ago

We aren't talking about people with aberrational disorders adopting, or single parents struggling on. We're talking about biology, and what traits are necessary for the vast majority to have for the species to continue. The only prejudice here is yours, the baggage you carry that blinds you to the scientific realities and the bigger picture.

Time Lords have been established as marrying (one man and one woman in every example I recall us seeing), having sex, and having children. That's ironclad. We've even seen and heard about the Doctor's own parents, male and female, who sounded an awful lot like a typical farm couple. We've heard about other relations he's had, including his granddaughter Susan (not his "grandchild" who could be male or female depending on the decade). Every incarnation of the Doctor has been male, and there's been no indication of any gender switching by any Time Lord or Lady until Moffat's recent "Missy" mess. If gender switching was normal then none of this would be the case.

It's definitely my "business" because I'm a long time fan of the show, and because I and mine have a stake in the future of real life society. The ongoing, dangerously myopic push to pretend gender is somehow just a social construct rather than a vital hard science reality is unhealthy for society, and, as I said, unwittingly undermines "transgendered" people's own argument. They claim to really be a man trapped inside a woman's body, or vice versa, and that this inner sex speaks to who they are. That presupposes that gender identity is an important aspect of defining one's personhood. If that's the case then it must be much more than a minor cosmetic trait. Correct? It must have deep meaning.

The Doctor is a man. That's part of his core identity, unlike the cosmetic traits like hair color that change with regeneration. If transgendered people want their identity respected, then reason demands they acknowledge its importance, and respect others'.

[–] Martoto (4467) 7 years ago

If you love the doctor as a man so much, why don't you marry him?

[–] krl97a (5619) 7 years ago

That's all you've got, lol? At least have the class to admit I've given you some stuff to think about.

[–] Martoto (4467) 7 years ago

What's to think about? You're pushing the same old fallacious arguments, confusing biology with society's attitudes and perceptions.

[–] krl97a (5619) 7 years ago

You've failed to explain how anything I've said is "fallacious" or articulate a counterargument.

What's to think about?

There's the problem.

[–] Martoto (4467) 7 years ago

A "counterargument"?

That would be like a psychiatrist arguing with a plumber about what dreams are in terms of piping.

[–] krl97a (5619) 7 years ago

So far you've just shown yourself to be a juvenile moron. And for what it's worth, I haven't seen anyone else make the precise argument I did about the transgendered activist's position inherently assuming that gender is a major component of personal identity, and I seriously doubt you have either. For such an activist to support something like seeing Time Lords casually switch sexes just for the visual of a male character becoming female is myopic and inconsistent as it diminishes the importance of sex to identity, undermining everything such an activist is supposedly fighting for. A more intelligent, less hypocritical transgendered activist would acknowledge the importance of gender to identity, not seek to cheapen it into something casual or cosmetic.

[–] Martoto (4467) 7 years ago

An intelligent person is not likely to try and argue with you at all.

[–] pankoeken (469) 7 years ago

Because they know he's right? That doesn't explain why you're not trying to argue with him though.

[–] Martoto (4467) 7 years ago

Right about what? His opinions on what attitudes other people should possess and be allowed to express about their own sexuality and their own gender?

[–] krl97a (5619) 7 years ago

Martoto walked into that one.

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

It was established well before Moffat came along that Time Lords can change gender.

For instance the Fourth Doctor once said to Romana II that she should meet up with the Corsair sometime, referring to the Corsair as both male and female when he did so (1979 written by Douglas Adams). That was further expanded with: Most Time Lords disapproved of the Corsair. The Doctor, on the other hand, got to drink with him (in the Corsair’s Fourth and Eighth incarnations) and with her (in her Fifth).

Yes it has come up more in recent times like how the Eleventh Doctor says how the Corsair took on different sexes throughout many incarnations and he was a very bad girl. Plus in The Night of the Doctor the Eighth Doctor is offered a controlled regeneration by the Sisterhood of Karn, in which Ohila offers that he can choose to be a man or woman.

Also: http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Regeneration

Cliff Note version, due to character restraints.

In the early days of regeneration, it was possible for fragments of other DNA to be incorporated into the new incarnation if, for example, a Time Lord had recently eaten or spent a great deal of time around other species; the early Gallifreyan priest I.M. Foreman suffered from this problem throughout his regenerations, each incarnation becoming more and more inhuman as more foreign DNA was incorporated into the process. (1999).

Also Time Lords have regenerated into other things, Ganda became a kind of human-Silurian hybrid in appearance when he regenerated in the realm of Avalon mere hours after his previous change (2000). While Time Lord, Cardinal Zero, regenerated into an avian life form as a result of the poison which triggered the regenerative process (1999).

Not all Gallifreyan's are able to regenerate, Cardinal Rassilon intended this mechanism only for the Gallifreyan elite. The cells of a Gallifreyan body would be repaired, restored and re-organised, resulting in a wholly new physical form.

[–] Martoto (4467) 7 years ago

[–] krl97a (5619) 7 years ago

So all you've got from outside of New Who is one line from a Douglas Adams story that was never completed or broadcast as an episode. The novels aren't canon and contradict each other all over the place in huge ways. Even that throwaway line about the Corsair could have meant all sorts of things. The Doctor could have been playfully saying the guy was a transvestite at times (same with Matt Smith's brief Corsair reference; btw, his own "Am I a girl?" comment can easily be explained as resulting from normal confusion following regeneration; he's said or done all sorts of crazy stuff in that state). Or maybe he did switch sexes somehow, but there's certainly nothing to indicate that's common. There are humans who supposedly change sexes too through surgery and hormone treatment (if not at a genetic level), but that's not the norm is it?

In fact the Doctor spent more time discussing himself supposedly being half human than he has any of this gender switching stuff, and the former was delivered in a more sincere, less playful tone, yet later dismissed as untrue. In New Who he also once said he could have up to 507 generations, something that was implicitly dismissed as a joke later when the show dealt with the well established 13 incarnations fact instead. The Doctor tosses out throwaway lines all the time that are later dismissed and sometimes lies for various effects.

So no, it's not "well established" at all. And remember, I'm not talking about what's possible with some aberrational event here or there (the Karn offer obviously wasn't a typical regeneration), but what's normal for the Time Lord species. It'd be better if the Missy thing was explained as the Master possessing another's body to escape or survive, which he's done before.

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

Fair enough, for the reasons mentioned above it is why it wouldn't bother me, each to their own, however it should not be a female swap for the sake of it and should be handled in a nonchalant way if it does. For instance, I haven't minded Bill, though would have been much better if she was just another companion who happened to be a lesbian without the constant reminders, a female Doctor should be female and still just the Doctor.

As for gender reassignment in real life, always find it difficult to compare real life to Sci - Fi, I mean in real life we don't have a guy flying around in a police box who has had 13 different faces and bodies. There are no Daleks, Cybermen, Cassandra is an impossibility as is the face of Boe and etc., etc. However if in a Sci - Fi you can have lizard like humanoid aliens (Silurians), then a gender swapping alien isn't that far fetched, not when in real life we have clownfish, wrasses, moray eels, gobies and other fish species that do swap gender. Then look at the Guevedoces in the Dominican Republic who are born female and become male at puberty (12), when their testicles descend and they grow a penis (same happens in parts of PNG).

So yeah if the Time Lords are the aliens that swap gender then no biggie for me, as I said each to their own thought not going to get into a huge debate about it. As I said it has to be for a fair reason though, if that comes from the Doctor having spent so much time with female companions I'd accept that, as I would with it being because of a poisoning or being in to close proximity to something that affects the regeneration.

I'm not against them taking bits and pieces from the books and mini eps, a bit like Gotham taking bits and pieces from the 56 different DC universes and putting it one big pot, a Doctor Who rebirth right now may be a good thing (whether male or female).

[–] krl97a (5619) 7 years ago

Except the people who advocate for that kind of thing happening on the show, including Moffat himself, seem to be doing so for real life social/political reasons. I don't think they've thought it through, for reasons I've laid out above. There are lots of other sound reasons for not doing it that people have advanced. I saw one big blogger fan compellingly argue that it would constitute the loss of one of the few heroic but relatively non-violent male role models on tv (he even argued the Doctor was the only such good male role model of any prominence). And the few examples we have of gender switching in the animal kingdom are with simpler life forms. Time Lords are advanced. They also have a very stable society that prides itself on traditions and has been around for billions of years.

I don't dispute that they can mutate into bizarre looking creatures, but that appears to be aberrational. We've seen lots of Gallifrey over the years (especially in Classic Who) and lots of Time Lords, and almost all of them have been humanoid. It's hard to picture one in avian form mating with one in slug form, procreating, and building a life together. Mutations are deviations from the norm by definition.

Mutations are also different from sex determination, which happens on a more fundamental chromosomal level. Even in the rare cases where a Time Lord may be mutated by "foreign" biological material corrupting the regeneration process, that means he might become a slightly different species. It doesn't mean he'll adopt whatever the sex of the foreign creatures happens to be.

Gotham is only canon for itself, not for the comics or any Batman movie franchise. With Doctor Who the primary canon, the only one that really matters, is the tv show. Hopefully they don't wreck its legacy.

[–] peter_t_2k3 (1017) 7 years ago

I've had many debates about this and been called by a few people sexist for my belief that in my opinion the doctor should always stay male. I really hate those who claim anyone with this belief is sexist because it's not.

The way I see it is there's no real right or wrong answer. On a doctor who disqus channel I run I kept getting attacked often by a user claiming I was closed minded and sexist due to my belief. I even stated there's no right or wrong answer, but my belief is that the doctor should stay male and mentioned surely the fact you couldn't accept this belief and the fact others had this belief made you the actual closed minded person.

There's one important question that I ask for anyone who calls this sexist - if the doctor had been female from the start until right now, would you be doing the same thing and demanding a male doctor? Most would not and that's the issue here - you don't see people demanding a remake of Buffy with a male lead - if someone did that there would be an uproar and feminists would claim this is sexist as we where taking a popular female role model character and changing it to a male. You don't see anyone complaining that the new Xena is still a women.

But I don't have any issues with people who think the doctor could be either sexes, my issue is with those demanding it, claiming the show is sexist. I don't believe the show is sexist, hell the show's female assistants take up much bigger roles than they often did in classic who, often saving the doctor and in lots of cases getting more airtime than him. If the only thing that makes the show sexist is the lead always being male then again we come to shows like Buffy and Xena which must be sexist by this logic. Hell there's evidence in my opinion the show is sexist to males - Rory for example didn't really get used as much as anyone else and when the female time lord in last series 9's finale regenerated to a female there was the sexist line about male testosterone.

[–] horrorfan000 (2149) 7 years ago

I agree.If this idea for changing the doctors gender came from some creative standpoint I could maybe understand it.But there's no good reason to change the Doctors gender other than to cater to a particular social agenda.And I have no problem with that agenda.But Doctor who is a sci fi tv series meant to entertain.It's not a soapbox meant to further anyones personal political or social movements.

Also you would be verbally attacked and labelled a sexist pig at the mere suggestion of taking a strong female character and making them male.Why is it ok to defend strong female character but your sexist if you defend a strong male character.

The Doctors worked just fine as a male for over 50 years.Like the old saying goes.If it aint broken don't fix it.

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

Is there a real demand for the doctor to become a female or is it just a sensationalist headline?
I'm often suspicious that this kind of thing is put out there deliberately by the programme makers in order to create controversy and keep interest in the show.
Anyway I'm with you,the Doctor should be male.