Doctor Who is one of the longest running television shows in the UK. Now in the seventh season of its revival, the Doctor is as popular as ever, but is the programme sending out some controversial messages?
The Doctor that each generation has known and loved has always been male, and possibly always will be, but is this a bad thing? The Doctor may be kept male purely because that is what the viewers are comfortable with, however some viewers and contemporary feminist writers from the website www.thefword.org.uk have suggested that people should be able to accept the Doctor if the BBC cast a female actor. The gender issues that accompany the profession of medicine may be reflected here as, although it is not the case, stereotypically Doctors are male and nurses are female. The nurses who act as their helpers may be related to the Doctor’s numerous companions.
In Russell T. Davies’ time as head writer for “DW”, the companions he has created have often been criticised for their weakness and conformity to female stereotypes. The term companion itself is fairly sexist, as they are obviously assisting the Doctor, and female characters get pushed to the back and become a necessity in Doctor Who, the closest anyone does come to being an “equal” to The Doctor in DW is “The Master.” Rose for instance was an unsuccessful young girl who did not have much of a life before the Doctor and seemed to be lost when she was left without him. The suggestion that Rose is “defined by the Doctor” seems to be a fair analysis here, as without him she has nothing.
Davies combated this archetypal character with the Doctor’s next companion – Martha Jones. This companion is a successful young woman, a medical student who has her own purpose and path in life and ability to make decisions. Throughout the series, particularly towards the end of series 3, Martha is shown to be a strong character capable of fighting for herself, and for the Doctor. However, Martha’s rather obvious love interest in The Doctor weakens her completely and makes her from a critical perspective an uninteresting whiny character that most “whovians” were keen to see gone.
Now in the era of Steven Moffatt (new head writer for DW and writer for the fantastic series “Sherlock”) has introduced the world to Amelia Pond. It appears that Moffatt has tried to subvert the traditional role of The Doctor’s companions by introducing a character in a committed relationship that cannot fall under the Doctor’s charm with a strong personality and many abilities. However, Amy Pond’s introduction was disappointing wearing a Police Officer’s uniform she appeared on our screens legs first, “Fantastic” we thought, another companion in a profession that removes the stereotype of the Doctor’s other companions, however disappointment was blatant when Amy revealed herself to be “A Kissagram” a demeaning job that set up for a complete change in opinion over this new character.
There is so much more to write about this issue, but ultimately does it matter? People around the world enjoy this programme unconditionally so why change now?
I’d like to leave you with a couple of questions to get you thinking about sexism in modern pop culture…
Would “Harry Potter” have been as popular if it was “Harriett Potter”?
Would you still watch Doctor Who if the next Doctor was a woman?




