Commentary to Controversy
So: I wrote an article over on Kasterborous that was decorated with a headline that upset some people.
“Get Over It, Fangirls” was intended as a generalised “have a word with yourself!” piece aimed at the annoyingly vocal subset of Doctor Who fandom who believe that the series can’t go on beyond David Tennant and Russell T Davies.
I’m pretty certain I made the point within the article - no one seems to be too bothered by that, there are no references to “silly girls” or anything else that can be construed as sexist within it. I’m happy with the article.
I’m not happy about the title.
First things first - I am totally blown away by the response to this piece. There have been links aplenty flowing to it, the majority of which (initially) were of the “hear, hear!” variety.
In the last few days however, it has become clear to me that some have possibly taken me too seriously. That’s fine, this is the internet. The problem is, I probably took me too seriously as well.
Before I go on, some context. This isn’t me making excuses, this is me saying who I am. I live and work in the north east of England, I’ve lived and worked here all my life with steelworkers, maintenance crews, crane drivers, bulk haulage drivers, chemical workers… it’s a very old school industrial setting (which if you’re aware of the UK news, you’ll know is slowly dying) and it’s a culture that I’m a part of.
Calling someone a “girl” is part of everyday life. It’s as natural as taking the piss out of “Geordies” and “Mackems” and “southern softies” (and this type of banter isn’t restricted to the north east. I can’t count the number of times I, a Yorkshireman, have been called a “Geordie” whenever travelling south of York).
I’m not setting myself up as some sort of proto Gene Hunt here, what I’m attempting to explain is that regardless of what is considered politically correct, fair and just across the more enlightened parts of the country and industry in the UK, it doesn’t really exist in my immediate sphere of day to day work. This doesn’t mean I’m a sexist, rascist, fighting on a Saturday night ape - it means that for 2 hours last week I was unable to distinguish between what would be acceptable amongst a few friends and what is acceptable for publishing online on a popular website.
Kasterborous recently has been the subject of some change, with the power moving from two founders to just myself. While I wouldn’t at any point suggest that at any time in the past 5 years I’ve required anyone to hold me back or say “Whoa! What are you doing?! You can’t say that!” it’s more than likely I’ve got a bit over-excited with the autonomy and a shiny new interface to run the website from.
I’ve agreed with one correspondent not to divulge any of their concerns. I had planned to reword them and address them one by one; a misguided attempt to divert attention away from the “Get Over It, Fangirls” title with a footnote resulted in that particular conversation going absolutely nowhere, so instead of that I’m just going to make it clear that I was wrong. It was shortsighted of me to refuse to change the title of the article at that stage, especially for the reasons given.
That same correspondent also speculated that I wouldn’t be sorry to miss anyone who stopped reading Kasterborous because of the article. Well, frankly, they were wrong. I wouldn’t want anyone to stop reading over an opinion, and certainly not one with an ill-conceived title.
Calling the article “Get Over It, Fangirls” was not only sexist and misogynistic, it was also bloody stupid.
I’m genuinely sorry.
While it evidently struck a chord, people don’t usually email to say “you’re right!” They usually get in touch to tell you you’re wrong, such as what has happened here.
What is particularly galling is that the title has affected the contents of the article. The title has influenced any reader to believe that I was addressing a bunch of female David Tennant-ites and identifying them as the sole cause of the bizarre phenomenon.
As a writer, I should know how a headline works; I should know how words work! 99% of the time I would say that I do. I deal with SEO on a daily basis, I fine tune articles and write content on Kasterborous so it is both user and search engine friendly. In hindsight, this whole issue shouldn’t have come as such a surprise.
In hindsight I would have used a different title.
I’ve avoided publishing this commentary on Kasterborous - there is a link at the foot of the now retitled “Get Over It!” opinion piece - in order to avoid any further unnecessary negative attention.
Kasterborous is my “baby” as it were - we’ve been going for 5 years now, but I have noticed, looking around at the regular contributors, that we’re a bunch of 30 something fanboys - mostly northern, too.
Changing the title of the article is only really the first step in what has been set in motion here.
[...] Commentary [...]
I read the article without knowing of the controversy. Probably a good call to change it because the anti-Smith behavior seems to be coming from both sides of the DNA pond. Otherwise, though, your article was indeed bang-on accurate. The only thing I’d add to it is the fact that this is also a replay of the Daniel Craig situation when he was cast as Bond. At least I haven’t seen any “Mattsmithnotdoctor” websites yet.
Matt Smith is entering during a difficult period in SF fandom (if not society in general) where it seems to many people’s behavior has only 2 settings: utter apathy and complete over-the-top psychosis. Back in 2005 you had people grumble about Tennant - and Daniel Craig - but they got over it fairly quickly and moved on. Now you have so-called fans shouting from the rooftops that they’ll never watch Doctor Who again, on the basis of 30 seconds of Matt Smith. It’s insane. Couple that with the fear and loathing about a possible US Torchwood, and much as I don’t want to think about it, Doctor Who could be entering its most danger period (in terms of survival) since Michael Grade put Colin Baker in the penalty box for 18 months back in 1985.
I’ve not read the article, but I did hear about and and rolled my eyes at the title. You did well in changing it to remove the sexism, but the title you’ve left isn’t all that great either. Trashing Matt Smith is not good and is reprehensible, but fans are allowed to be upset by the Tenth Doctor leaving and telling them to “get over it” isn’t helping anyone. People can be upset but still feel goodwill towards Matt Smith and end up as his most enthusiastic supporters. It just takes time.
And really, the reason any person may have to watch a show is their own prerogative. I’m sure Matt Smith and the new series will be a treat for fans of the show as a whole, but if David Tennant was the major draw for someone, and they won’t watch Doctor Who anymore without him, that’s their decision. Better than watching a show they don’t enjoy and ragging on about it.
well. Was so annoyed at the title that i was just about to post something about it on twitter when i saw your mea culpa here. However, the current title isn’t really any better, especially since for me at least it’s the “get over it” part, not the fangirl part that pisses me off.
I can understand some Who fans may feel Matt Smith isn’t being given a chance, and i agree there are immature annoying fangirls, but i believe they are in the minority.
what i don’t understand are the folks who don’t get that it’s possible to be upset over and mourning the departure of Tennant’s Dr. while also 1) still being a fan of DW and 2) looking forward to seeing what the new season will hold. Humans are complex; emotions aren’t always black and white.
And your article also makes it seem like fans have been weeping for years, which is really disingenuous. you state that it’s been over a year since Tennant’s departure was announced so get over it already. Um, there’s a big difference between Tennant announcing his departure and then actually seeing that very emotional departure fulfilled on screen, and that happened less than a month ago, even less from your article date.
look, i’ve been a fan of your site for a while, which was one reason why the article annoyed me, plus i can’t stand the “you’re not a true fan if ” arguments that tend to erupt in all sorts of fandoms but scifi in particular. But your current article title just makes the site seem as immature as the fangirls you’re railing against.
any actor who followed Tennant was going to have his work cut out for him. I’ve never seen an actor and a role so well-matched as Tennant and the Dr., and by your own admission he did a brilliant job and millions of people feel the same. it’s a simple fact that many many people will be mourning Tennant for some time…while also enjoying the new series. believe it or not it can be done. but telling people to “get over it”? that’s not helping one bit.
Coming rather late to this party, but I did just want to say thanks for this explanation.
As an old skool female Who fan, it didn’t even occur to me that you were using “fangirls” there in the derogatory (and, yes, misogynistic) sense of calling men who act weak or silly “girls.” I had assumed that you were genuinely referring to the (much larger now than it was back in The Proverbial Day) female sector of the fandom. Since I’d been seeing both men and women expressing resistance to Matt Smith’s incoming tenure as the Doctor in roughly equal proportion, I did find it rather annoying that you seemed to be identifying it as a primarily female response — not only because it seemed somewhat sexist, but also because I thought it *wildly* inaccurate. Your explanation, while hardly reassuring on the sexism front, at least makes the title make more sense!
One of the more interesting effects of the growth of the internet, in my opinion, has been its role as a catalyst in forcing people to realize just how problematic or parochial our language choices can sometimes be. It’s certainly happened to me. It’s good for us, really, if sometimes rather painful. Apology accepted.
Here, here. I agree. But change is something that none of us really embrace. I remember watching “Rose” in the summer of 2005, a lousy copy with the old Tom Baker era music shoehorned in over the opening credits and I have to say, it wasn’t the finest moment of Who I’d ever seen. It certainly wasn’t Murry Gold’s if indeed that synth-pop soundtrack over it was in fact his. I was unimpressed. Who was this guy in his leather jacket as the Doctor. But I gave it a chance. “The Unquiet Dead” actually impressed me, and that summer watching “Father’s Day” where Rose’s doomed dad showed up actually got to me because my own father was dying of cancer at the time. The futuristic “Weakest Link” thing started to loose my interest, but “Parting of the Ways” moved me and made me angry, just when I’d warmed to CE and here he was jumping ship. Barcelona? Well, I thought, it was nice while it lasted. But then by the time “School Reunion” rolled around I was hooked.
But I’m old enough to remember watching Tom Baker merge with a harlequin in the most WTF in Who-history and turn in a nice fellow dressed in the most ridiculous outfit ever, well, until JNT unleashed the Sixth Doctor as Mr Jekyll in outfit rejected from The Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat. It’s hard to have criticism of modern Who when one can remember watching JNT drive the whole thing into the ground with a whimper.
I have to say despite how the new series have won me over, it hasn’t been all good. All one has to do is watch the weekly wank-fest that was “Doctor Who Confidential” where RTD couldn’t stop talking about every script he wrote was BRILLIANT! could wear on a person. I wish I could unsee the moment Elton was insinuated to get a blowjob from a face embedded in a paving stone. I want the censor who let that one by sacked and fed to Monty Python’s mØØse.
As much as I came to like Tennant, I’m not sorry to see him go. It’s entirely reasonable that he would jump ship with Davies and his band of sycophants. As much cringe-worthy input he injected into the show, at least we owe him a debt for rescuing Who from the trashcan of history.
I was always wowed enough by Steven Moffat’s writing to be overjoyed with him taking over. If you watch tv long enough you know that while movies are a director’s medium, tv is a producers. All one has to look at the horrid JNT era of Who and the uneven era of RTD to know that’s never more true than with Who. I get the whining. After 2 Doctors looking hip, here comes a geeky looking guy in a bow tie and braces. To quote the Brigadier from so long ago when entered Tom Baker “Oh no, here we go again.”
I say relax, enjoy the ride. I can’t wait to see River Song show up again, nor the Weeping Angels and whatever else Moffat has in store. It’s not going to be the same; it never was and it never will be. I’m sure that there’ll be things I and others won’t like, but I bet it will better than ever before. Bog knows the bar hasn’t always been that high to begin with.
Allons-y!