Alex Kingston gives her two cents in one of the great debates of Doctor Who.
A day before Radio Times reported that Peter Capaldi does not want to have a male companion with his incarnation of the Doctor (we reported on that here), Digital Spy reported that Alex Kingston does not think that the Doctor should ever be a woman.
"“It’s difficult – I would imagine that, if anything, the [next] Doctor might be of a different race than gender. I can’t imagine, myself personally, the Doctor being a different gender. I just think that too many men have played that role. If one goes back historically, Doctor Who has been a little boys’ show. Women are going to hate me for this! But I do think the Doctor has to be a guy – I do. Though it might be very interesting for River if it was a woman!”"
While I love Alex Kingston and acknowledge that she is entitled to her opinion, I do not agree that the Doctor should never be a woman. Let us dissect her train of thought: I understand that because, over the decades, we have always canonically seen the Doctor as a male, it is outside of some people’s comfort zones to imagine the character as a woman. This appeal to tradition, however, is purely based on feeling, not any logical reasoning. How would the concept of the Doctor being a woman truly hurt the dynamic of the show? Of the many people from whom I have heard this argument, I have yet to receive a satisfactory answer to this question.
More from Doctor Who
- Ncuti Gatwa’s Doctor Who Christmas special is a “complete reinvention”
- Ncuti Gatwa is “so nervous” to take on Doctor Who role
- The Doctor and Donna are better than ever in “Wild Blue Yonder”
- Take the Black: House of the Dragon season 2 trailer hints, the Fallout show, and more
- Jodie Whittaker didn’t pick up on any of the hate for her version of the Doctor
The average difference in personality traits between men and women is not any greater than men differ from one another on average. With the right female actor, the character could still easily remain the Doctor. Just because a Time Lord’s body changes does not mean that their basic essence is necessarily drastically altered. Missy is still the Master and the General is still the General (cheeky comments about ego aside). The fact that everyone adjusted to these regenerations relatively easily is a strong indication that it would go just as smoothly with the Doctor.
As for Doctor Who historically being “a little boys’ show,” I find that highly questionable. Just look at the droves of female fans, not just new ones, but ones that have been watching the show since the Classic days. And even if the fans were largely male, why would they not be able to handle a female Doctor? You do not have to be the same sex as someone to identify with them. We have six-year-old twins, one girl and one boy. They each identify with and respect both male and female main characters of various shows and movies. This is what we as a society should be encouraging in our youth (as well as going beyond the gender binary, but that’s a tangential topic).
I do agree that it would be good to see the Doctor eventually played by an actor of a different race than usual. Of course, in the show, the Doctor’s race would not change, just the skin color. He (or she) would remain Gallifreyan. In the case of skin or other body parts, these traits are largely irrelevant when it comes to the Doctor’s personality. If an actor would do the role justice, let them, regardless of them breaking an unnecessary and unofficial tradition.
(Article continues after the next post box.)
Next: Has Jamaal Charles Lost a Step?
What is your opinion in the decades-long debate of whether or not the Doctor should ever regenerate into a woman? Let us know in the comments.