I put it out there fairly often that I’m not Steven Moffat’s biggest fan, especially when it comes to his portrayal of women on Doctor Who. And this topic usually comes up on my blog every couple of weeks, so instead of having to repeat myself over and over explaining why, I’e decided to write down all the reasons why I’m not his biggest fan into a sort of big, essay-ish thing. Bearing in mind that I’ve always been a maths nerd and not a writer, here we go. 

My aim here is just to explain why I have problems with Moffat’s writing of women in Doctor Who. And I think the best way of explaining why I have issues with women in Doctor Who is by exploring each character individually. 

So first of all we have Amy Pond. I think Amy’s story becomes a real issue for me in series 6, when the storyline of her time-head, Schrodingers pregnancy came about. Amy and Rory get it on in the TARDIS, resulting in their baby, River Song, being half Time Lord or something. Firstly I think that the idea that sex in a TARDIS results in Time Lords to be a rather sloppy idea to begin with. But the more troubling thing is that Amy didn’t even know about her pregnancy. The Doctor tested her without asking, and knew that there was a possibility of her being pregnant, and an abnormal, upsetting pregnancy at that, and didn’t tell her any thing of his suspicions. And consequently Amy had no choice whether or not she wanted to continue with the pregnancy. Whether she could have terminated her pregnancy or not is relevant, because control over her own body had been taken away from her. 

An experience like that would be really fucking traumatic on its own, but then Amy also got her baby taken away from her. Not once, but twice. Then she has to come to terms with the knowledge that she’ll never get to see her child grow up. Her child will be taken from her, raised in a military brainwashing facility, be trained to kill her best friend, be killed twice and then spend the rest of her days in prison. And there is nothing anyone can do to stop that because of timey wimey shit. Amy should be completely heart broken for her daughter. She should be furious at the Doctor for letting this happen. I don’t know, in her position I’d probably lash out at Rory too even though he doesn’t really deserve it. But we don’t see her be heart broken. She’s not furious. She barely even mentions it. We get no emotional development from Amy at all. We briefly see Amy experience some emotion over this when killing Kovarian, but sorry, that’s really not enough. For most of the second half of series six it’s all fine and dandy with the Ponds and their stolen daughter. 

And what you have to deduce from this complete lack of emotional development on Amy’s part is that she’s not the important one here. The only reason Amy is introduced is to bring River Song into the world. Amy is reduced to nothing more than a baby factory. And that is what I have a problem with. Was this the plan from the beginning? Were we introduced to brilliant little Amelia, to mad, impossible Amy Pond, just so that she could give birth to The Great Love of the Doctor’s Life™? Treating women as nothing more than plot devices with no emotional development for the sole reason to further the story of a man is Not Okay. 

And this brings me onto the woman herself, River Song. I have a problem with River’s story because her whole life revolves around the Doctor. Everything she does is because of the Doctor. She was born to kill the Doctor. Then her childhood was spent training how to kill the Doctor. Then as an adult her life was spent loving the Doctor. And finally she “dies” to save the Doctor. She even starts studying fucking archaeology because of the Doctor! We don’t find out about a single element of River’s life that isn’t about the Doctor! River Song overcame fucking military brainwashing and you never see her angst about it even a little. And because of this you get the idea that River is just another character created by Steven Moffat whose whole existence is just to further a man’s character arc. River is there to be The Great Love of the Doctor’s Life™ and that’s it. 

Another worrying part of River’s story is that, like Amy, she has no control over her life. River’s whole life is a paradox. Everything she does has to be written down and documented, nothing can be changed otherwise bad timey wimey stuff happens. She can’t chose not to fall in love with the Doctor. She has to, because it’s already happened. She can’t choose not to kill the Doctor. She can’t even choose whether or not she wants to go on a picnic because of terrible, picnic related paradoxes. I’ve written in more detail about this here and why I find her relationship with the Doctor troubling.

Women having no choice about their lives is a reoccurring theme for Moffat and this really isn’t right. 

Madge: When watching the 2011 Christmas Special (I can’t remember the name it’s too long) I really felt like Moffat was trying to prove that he’s not sexist by being so explicit in his adoration of women. But he just ended up being offensive again. 

You and I Cyril, we’re weak. But she’s female! More than female! She’s mum! 

The message, the really shouting in your face message of this episode was that Madge is strong because she is a mother. Madge isn’t strong because she is caring or resourceful or determined. She is strong because she is a mother. Not even that she is a particularly good mother, just that she has the correct organs to bear children and then did so. 

I mean, we can see from the episode that she is a good mother. We can see that she has all those qualities that make her strong, that she is caring and resourceful and determined. But we’re given the very obvious and glaring message that she is strong because she’s a mother and nothing else. Women have been reduced down to baby factories. Again. 

Madame de Pompadour: The thing is with Reinette is that she’s a historical figure. She’s not just this character Moffat made up for the Doctor, she was an actual person. But in the Girl in the Fireplace she was turned into yet another character whose whole life is for the Doctor. 

I’ve done some research on the real Reinette, and this is briefly what I’ve found out about her

• She was involved in a whole range of issues over the running of France, including the military and foreign affairs
• She developed one of the most famous porcelain manufacturers in Europe, which also provided a lot of skilled jobs
• She was interested in literature
• She was a member of the French Court
• She was very well educated
• She created new trends in design and had an interest in art
• She planned buildings like the Place de la Concorde with her brother
• She arranged other (lesser) mistresses for the King to replace herself, and even after she stopped being his mistress they remained friends
• She was a real fucking person with ambitions and a family and a life

In Doctor Who all this was described in one, throwaway line. After that, Reinette is portrayed as a woman who spent her entire life pining for the Doctor, her “love”, having known him for at most a couple of HOURS of her ENTIRE. LIFE. 

If I were Madame de Pompadour I’d be really fucking annoyed about that. 

So, in conclusion I have two main problems with how Steven Moffat treats his female characters

1. They exist solely to further the plot and emotional development of the Doctor
2. They have all any power to make choices about their lives taken away from them. 

Well done if you read all of that. I really love discussing Doctor Who in detail so drop by my ask box if you want :)