This post infuriates me: http://gallifreyfieldsforever.tumblr.com/post/16416278911/why-i-have-a-problem-with-moffats-portrayal-of-women… along with many other opinions of the sort. My points following are rebuttals to the points made in the linked post.
Throughout your analysis of Steven Moffat’s “sexist” portrayal of women, you seemed to be straying away from the point. You described the misfortunes of their lives and then said it was sexist of Moffat to give them those story lines.
1. This quotation, to which I sadly only add simple dialogue tags, is shared by Amy and the Doctor and it represents what happens in most depressing Doctor Who plots:
“Was it worth it,” asked the Doctor.
“Shut up. Of course it was,” responded Amy.
2. It seems like you do not comprehend “sexism.” The dictionary definition is as follows: “discrimination or devaluation based on a person’s sex, as unrestricted job opportunities; especially, such discrimination directed against women.”
Amelia “Amy” Pond
1. Amy did know about her pregnancy. The Doctor did not know the child would be part Time-Lord.
2. As a female, she is the only sex that can give birth! I had to reread your paragraph because I could not understand how in hell it was sexist. Amy is more than a “baby factory.” The fact that you think she was painted that way means you are the one with narrow, sexist points of view, because most people see Amy as an overwhelming stupendous woman.
3. Guess what; Rory had his child taken away from his as well. You say it is sexist that Amy had her baby stolen? No. Amy and Rory, female and male, both lost their child.
4. The Doctor was not just “letting this happen.” He went to war.
5. We do see a traumatized Amy, and I think it became a part of her personality. We do not see her lash out frequently because her life has become enigmatic and frustrating, so I believe that shaped her personality. Whenever we see a “normal” Amy, we are seeing the enraged Amy. When you see her angry, it is when she cannot hold it any longer. Besides, Amy has had these shenanigans intertwined in her life since she was seven-years-old. Another possible reason as to why we do not see her the way you expect to see her is because she has still not made sense of the situations. I can definitely say that these things made her stronger. They had made an effect, oh yes, but it is not just her lashing out, it is her being strong.
River Song/Melody Pond
1. If a female character falls in love, you cannot necessarily deem the author as misogynist. Take Mickey Smith for instance. He was not created by Steven Moffat, but he still remained as a male character emotionally attached to a woman for whom he traveled through Universes to find and help; along with saving the rest of the world. He does so much more— and what do you know— he is a male consumed with love!
2. “River Song overcame fucking military brainwashing and you never see her angst about it even a little.” First of all, she was brainwashed. She was unable to angst, she had no idea what was happening. Secondly, it made her psychotic, which is far more than releasing angst.
3. River does have control over her life. You are not fathoming the way time works. You say that she has to fall in love with the Doctor because it already happened, but no, she fell in love with the Doctor within her own personal timeline. When the Doctor first met her, he was not in love but she was, so where are you even getting your idea?
4. You essentially described how River suffers. So do other women in Doctor Who. So do males. I do not see where sexism enters the situation.
5. How many times did the male Doctor also have no choice? There are plenty of women and men in the show who have no choice!
Madge Arwell/”The Doctor, The Widow, and the Wardrobe”
1. How do you not remember the name? It was a reference to Narnia. The whole setting was Narnia.Narnia.
2. Again, you are perceiving charisma incorrectly! Madge’s sole power is not only present because she is a mother; that is a factor. Also, do not dismiss the fact that she used her love, determination, and mental and physical strength to drive two vessels back to her home.
3. The whole episode was a salute to the female population! It showed that women have power! Women have potential, just as men! Our human biology prevents the potential from always being in the same area, but that is just a physical thing that we cannot change. As I said in my previous point, Madge showed a range of her female capabilities; whether they were spiritual or physical. A female can measure to be as strong as a male and vice versa; so thank you, Steven Moffat, for saying that in the Christmas special.
Madame de Pompadour
1. Madame de Pompadour is clearly a tremendous historical figure. Why else do you think Steven Moffat used her in Doctor Who? Right there he voices that there is a woman who affected the world so deeply.
2. As I understand things, you did your research on her after watching the episode. Interesting. It seems like Steven Moffat did introduce to you quite a meaningful, powerful female.
3. He did not turn her into a lusting woman. He added emotional depth. He thought of all her achievements and decided to represent her as a human in this episode— capable of love, sorrow, fear, and longing. If anything, it represents that the historical records we read in textbooks are those of actual people, and that they had lives just as we do.
4. If you sat with the Doctor for ten minutes, how would you feel? I expect that would not even be able to contain yourself enough to sit. I know that you would feel ecstatic, to say the least. It is not said that she fell in love with him, albeit she may have. It does not take long to become fascinated by the Doctor. What Steven Moffat did was realistic: someone would want to travel with the madman after only knowing him for mere hours!
If anyone would care to express to me their opinions against Steven Moffat concerning his misogynous personality, whether it be an accurate trait or not, I will reply as lief.