h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

*why am I doing this? I know it's pointless*

Gayed up? Why, because it features a character with an open mind when it comes to sexuality? So what? Tell you what, if you can find say, 8 bona fide references to homosexuality in series 1, then I'll accept that it's been 'gayed up'.

You're complaining about gadgets, and Jon Pertwee is one of your favourite Doctors? The one that uses gyrocopters, hovercraft, the sonic screwdriver (to, amongst other things, detonate landmines and hypnotise monsters) and puts remote controls in his car.

<<>

I'm not a prude and I'm not a homophobe but: eww! >

That's not a homophobic or a prudish reaction: It's a good taste reaction.

I'm no prude and I'm, well, won;t mention that again here but, blimey, that's not a pleasant image.

To answer the original question:

No, the Doctor's not gay. He's mischievous amd possibly bi but, as someone pinted out earlier, he's also an alien and may have a very different sexual perspective to us.

And he's fictional, so his sexuality is in the hands of the writer at the time.

<>

Good point... The 3rd Doctor and the Brig weren't exactly pretty.

<>

Oh, yes, I know, but this Ecclestone doctor has so far used it in every ep to get out of trouble. It's not only a bit tedious, but as my son said the other night - it makes everything too easy!

I mean, t'other night, 'Empty Child', the doctor was fully using it like Beverley Crusher would use a medical tricorder. We got the impression this writer Stephen wossname was a frustrated Trekkie... sad!

As RTD said, the sonic screwdriver is used because the plots should be driven by genuine danger, and not held up by trivia such as The Doctor trying to open a door (although RTD out it much better than that).

Well, no it doesn't make everything easy because, crucially, it's still not a weapon. It still doesn't stop the bad guy pointing a gun at you. It still can't stop the bad guy- that's what the Doctor's job is.

You're forgetting three important things.
1) The sonic screwdriver hasn't done exactly what it says on the tin since the War Games.
2) Docs 3 and 4 used it so much I'm amazed he didn't brush his teeth with the thing.
3) This is clearly a new and improved sonic screwdriver and when you consider the *sonic* element and the fact that *ultra-sound* is used to scan the insides of people's bodies the medical application seems a lot more plausable.

If anyone want to find said slash incidently, you need to find the homepage of group called 'S.A.D.W.A.N.K'.

The Society for the Appreciation of Doctor Who Actress/actors, No Kidding.

Oh, what do you want me to say about the farting aliens? It was stupid, but there were logical reasons revealed.
Oh - you think my problem is with humour? Not this time! Silliness isn't humour, and as for atmospheric? Give me a break - Captain Jack and his ego dragged so bad!

You have an evident issue around me, KA, which means having any kind of discussion with you is futile. (If you feel inclined to dispute that, I refer you to your own space! Namely "Or unless you're Della April: Cat Woman. , in which case you're not allowed to disagree with me *ever*.")

So, I will continue to discuss Dr Who with other people, even if you personally have had enough...

I always thought the point with the Doctor is that he was effectively asexual.

When "Doctor Who" started back in 1963 it was an educational children's show and so sexuality of any sort was basically a no-no. Even when the show's audience grew-up and it moved towards "family" viewing sexuality was still pretty much out of the picture. I think you had companions who would have chaste semi-relationships with characters of the opposite sex but that was about it.

However, the fact that the Doctor always seemed to travel with female companions led to the inevitable speculation about him being sexually active (and a lot of dirty fan-fic) and this has been a constant of Who mythology. Some fans are quite picky about the Doctor remaining completely asexual and intellectual and when Paul McGann's eight Doctor kisses his companion (not even for a "good reason" as the ninth Doctor did) it caused something of a fuss.

The show has a large gay following which suggests that gay men feel some sort of affinity with the Doctor, although this might be down to the flamboyance and eccentricity of many of the Doctors.

RTD has certainly added a great deal of sexuality to the show but it's wrong to accuse him of "queering up" the series. The show has always been quite camp. All RTD has done is made explicit an aspect of human (if not Gallifreyan) nature that was always hidden (or only implied) in the old series.

Everyone sees their nickname there, love. It's the tag.

"I always thought the point with the Doctor is that he was effectively asexual."

Then why introduce his *granddaughter* as one of the main characters? A grand daughter means a daughter/son. A daughter/son means (gasp) at some point, sex.

<>

You make a good point here, but one of the producers in the 1980s, had the Doctor *lose* the SS because it made everything too easy!

Really? Forgive my ignorance then, I never heard of a tag. But even so, you do seem to have a bit of an issue with me. Or is it everyone?

Script Editor Eric Saward. To be fair, he was script editor when the series was structured very differently. A larger regular cast, much slwoer plotting (although typical for the time), so of course he's going to have different scripting requirements.

That would have been JN-T who was, to be perfectly frank, a pillock.

Are you sure, Mr. D? I could've sworn it was Saward...

No, you're right. Saward wrote it out, but under JNT's instruction.

It could have been Saward... it's just that Della specifically said 'producer' which automatically made me think of JN-T and his bad decisions.

You all know what I want to say about post 54, but to keep the thread flowing I wont.

Russel T Davis cant have made Dr. Who the show or character anymore gay unless he cast Julian Clary as the new Dr. and sent him on a quest to discover the missing episodes of "Sex in the City".

It is a show made by the BBC where a disproportiante number of out and proud homosexualists have been making programmes for years. Past Drs. have worn clothes that Graham Norton would have turned down for being too camp.

The real question is does the latest series reflect modern comfortability with same sex interaction?

I think the answer is yes.

Saying he's made it more gay is like saying he's made it more modern.

one love