sorry but i'm going to have to disagree. rtd's comment SOUNDS innocent and well meaning, but when sacha, an asian villain wore jodie's clothes it was fine and nothing has been said about that, but when its tennant thats unthinkable?? also, jodie specifically went to her designer and asked for an androgynous outfit because she'd seen a gnc person and wanted the doctor to be similar - why wouldn't they be? the doctor's gender is literally fluid. in the most literal sense of the word. i was hoping for some in-universe explanation for the clothes change but if its just that, i'm going to be genuinely disappointed.
i appreciate disliking the choice (i'm not actually a fan of it myself just pointing out some potential thoughts behind it + getting fed up of people spreading lies about what was actually said), but i'll repeat my pov on your points here!
"when sacha, an asian villain wore jodie's clothes it was fine and nothing has been said about that, but when its tennant thats unthinkable??"
thats exactly the point though, right? the subset that WOULD make horrible comments about it, are the type of people who also wouldn't blink twice at a “villain” “crossdressing” lets be real here. a lot of media plays that up. similar to how the reaction to whittaker!doctor and gomez!master was quite different. its different when its the actual lead. RTD would v likely know this (but bear in mind, RTD likely didn't know Dhawan!Doctor was happening in tPotD when he was planning the regeneration scene)
Dhawan almost immediately switched out for a mix of all the Doctor's outfits and eventually gets back to his Rasputin fit, it’s not his ONE look for the episode compared to it would have been 100% of DT’s screentime
with Dhawan Doctor, it was in the middle of an episode which Chibnall wrote apparently thinking the show was being CANCELLED (so like, didnt need to think abt the media reaction as much even if it had OCCURRED to him to do so)
coming out of the episode, what were all the headlines about? the regeneration. Tennant. which is what ALWAYS happens with these eps. RTD probably suspected this was going to be the main chat of the next YEAR before there’s new eps because that’s what ALWAYS gets the attention/publicity.
"also, jodie specifically went to her designer and asked for an androgynous outfit because she'd seen a gnc person and wanted the doctor to be similar - why wouldn't they be? the doctor's gender is literally fluid. in the most literal sense of the word."
Sure and the whole REASON Whittaker herself had to emphasise "these are not women’s clothes they’re the doctor’s clothes" "anyone can wear them" etc. etc. back when she first started is because SHE knew the public/media reaction too and was trying to get ahead of it in the same way as RTD is with this.
RTD hasn't said the Doctor is cis, or can't be played by a woman again, or that cosplayers can't dress as 13 (or whatever people are making up now) it's purely about the REAL WORLD reaction of having Tennant be the last shot of the ep, the ONLY official shot of his Doctor we would have had for a whole YEAR for the vultures to potentially latch on to. The Doctor doesn't exist in a vacuum.
"i was hoping for some in-universe explanation for the clothes change but if its just that, i'm going to be genuinely disappointed."
this still might happen!! the article (that i know of) doesn't say anything about whether it'll play into the plot. i'm hoping it will too, especially as the end of tPotD plays it up as feeling so Wrong/out of place (which... again is probably why RTD didn't want Tennant in Whittaker's outfit here if that was the vibe he was going for!!! the optics there would have been very 😬)
26 notes
·
View notes
James 2
My brothers, do not show favoritism as you hold on to the faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ. For example, a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and dressed in fine clothes, and a poor man dressed in dirty clothes also comes in. If you look with favor on the man wearing the fine clothes and say, "Sit here in a good place," and yet you say to the poor man, "Stand over there," or, "Sit here on the floor by my footstool," haven't you discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?
Listen, my dear brothers: Didn't God choose the poor in this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom that He has promised to those who love Him? Yet you dishonored that poor man. Don't the rich oppress you and drag you into courts> Don't they blaspheme the noble name that was pronounced over you at your baptism?
Indeed, if you keep the royal law prescribed in the Scripture, Love your neighbor as yourself, you are doing well. But if you show favoritism, you commit sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the entire law, yet fails in one point, is guilty of breaking it all. For He who said, Do not commit adultery, also said, Do not murder. So if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you are a lawbreaker.
Speak and act as those who will be judged by the law of freedom. For judgement is without mercy to the one who hasn't shown mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgement.
What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can his faith save him?
If a brother or sister is without clothes and lacks daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well," but then you don't give them what the body needs, what good is it? In the same way faith, if it doesn't have works, is dead by itself.
But someone will say, "You have faith, and I have works." Show me your faith without works, and I will show you faith from my works. You believe God is one; you do well. The demons also believe-- and they shudder.
Foolish man! Are you willing to learn that faith without works is useless? Wasn't Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? You see that faith was active together with his works, and by works, faith was perfected. SO the Scripture was fulfilled that says, Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him for righteousness, and he was called God's friend. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. And in the same way, wasn't Rahab the prostitute also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by a different route? For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.
2 notes
·
View notes