Sex and The Doctor

Showing 1-95 of 95 messages
Sex and The Doctor Steven Moffat 2/10/96 12:00 AM
What on Earth (or elsewhere) is the fuss about the Dr snogging
his companion?  Nowhere in the series does it *ever*
state that the Doc is asexual (it's purely an assumption on the
part of the fans) and the fact that he has a a grandaughter might
lead the pedants among us to conclude otherwise (and no it wasn't
a term of affection - that's just another assumption and an
entirely baseless one at that.)

We know that humans and Time Lords are mutually sexually
attracted (Susan and Whats-his-name, Leela and Thingummy, The
Doctor and that-Aztec-woman) and that the Dr favours bimbos in
mini-skirts (what, you think he was choosing them for their
brains?)  The most you could conclude from watching the show is
that he's a little reticent about involvement (not surprising
when your inability for commitment extends to your entire home
planet!)

So if the Doc's vow of celibacy is a fan assumption which flies
directly in the face of established continuity, why would you
think a new series would pay any heed to it?

Steven Moffat

P.S.  I mean, the guy has one snog in thirty years of saving our
planet and you're all complaining!  You utter, utter bastards!!

Sex and The Doctor Jonathan Blum 2/11/96 12:00 AM
Very well put, Moffat -- of course, I disagree utterly, but I don't feel
like going into the same old reasons right now.  ;-)

But I would like to point out one additional reason why some of us are
opposed to the Doctor even getting one smooch...  it's because for those
of us engaged in long-distance relationships, if the bloody DOCTOR is
getting more snugglebunnies than we have in several months, then
something is fundamentally wrong with the universe.

Missing Kate,
Jon Blum
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"All this time you two thought you were playing some twisted game of
chess...  when it was just me playing solitaire!"
             D O C T O R   W H O :   T I M E   R I F T

Sex and The Doctor Jennikatra 2/11/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fk4ts$b...@access2.digex.net> jb...@access2.digex.net

(Jonathan Blum) writes:
> But I would like to point out one additional reason why some of us are
> opposed to the Doctor even getting one smooch...  it's because for those

> of us engaged in long-distance relationships, if the bloody DOCTOR is
> getting more snugglebunnies than we have in several months, then
> something is fundamentally wrong with the universe.

Good point. Why does it make me want to giggle? Geez, I must be feeling
cruel. ;-)
--
jenni...@aol.com / j...@sirius.com  
work e-mail: rha...@marinet.lib.ca.us
"Make way! For I am the official keeper of the Emperor's penguins,
and I must hurry because his majesty's laundry basket is on fire."
The Doctor, _Transit_

Sex and The Doctor Leviathan 2/11/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fjaks$jnb$1...@mhafn.production.compuserve.com>,
100043.121@CompuServe.COM says...

>Steven Moffat
>
>P.S.  I mean, the guy has one snog in thirty years of saving our
>planet and you're all complaining!  You utter, utter bastards!!


Quote file!
--
Jonathan Andrew Sheen
Intuitive Information, Inc. Customer Support
http://www.iii.net/users/jsheen/                                              
                 
Leviathan of the GEI (Detached.)
jsh...@levstu.iii.net
Sig? No, thanks. I don't smoke....


Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/11/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fjaks$jnb$1...@mhafn.production.compuserve.com>, Steven Moffat
<100043.121@CompuServe.COM> writes:

>What on Earth (or elsewhere) is the fuss about the Dr snogging
>his companion?  Nowhere in the series does it *ever*
>state that the Doc is asexual (it's purely an assumption on the
>part of the fans)

'Nowhere in the series does it *ever* state that the Doc is sexual (it's
purely an assumption on the part of certain fans).

> and the fact that he has a a grandaughter might
>lead the pedants among us to conclude otherwise (and no it wasn't
>a term of affection - that's just another assumption and an
>entirely baseless one at that.)

According to Cat's Cradle: Time's Crucible Gallifreyans are created from a
sort of loom. If the NA's are canon, that's that.  Time Lords are
impotent.  

Even if we disregard the NA's, the evidence for a completely asexual
Doctor is rampant throughout the series: from "You're a beautiful woman,
probably" to his not even realizing Cameca loved him.  It's everywhere in
the series.  If the Doctor *is* sexual, it's extremely that we haven't
seen even a hint of it, at least.  And it's puts an entirely unwelcome
spin on his relationship to his companions.  As for Susan, it simply never
says.  I tend to think she *is* his granddaughter, but perhaps he had
children before he became a Time Lord.

>We know that humans and Time Lords are mutually sexually
>attracted

Susan was never stated to be a Time Lady.  Andred wasn't a Time Lord, he
was part of the guard (guards implied in The Deadly Assassin not to be
Time Lords).  Not all Gallifreyans are Time Lords - it's implied that most
aren't.  Every Time Lord we've seen has been asexual.  Even the Master,
which is pretty impressive.  The Master seems understand human emotions
(eg. The Time Monster) but not feel them himself.

>(Susan and Whats-his-name, Leela and Thingummy, The
>Doctor and that-Aztec-woman)

The Doctor never loved Cameca or felt an attraction.  *She* fell for *him*
and he tried desperately to get out of the situation.  When he discovered
her father made Yetaxa's tomb, he took advantage of her feelings.  He
never loved her or felt romantic inclinations. If you'd actually *watch*
The Aztecs you'd see that.

> and that the Dr favours bimbos in
>mini-skirts (what, you think he was choosing them for their
>brains?)  

This statement is fairly idiotic.  If you'd look and see how the
companions join him, you'd see that he doesn't *want* Dodo, Ben, Polly,
Zoe, Jo, Leela, Romana, Adric, Nyssa, Tegan or Peri.  They all find other
ways into the TARDIS and the series.  

>The most you could conclude from watching the show is
>that he's a little reticent about involvement

No, that's the most *you* could conclude. . .

>(not surprising
>when your inability for commitment extends to your entire home
>planet!)
>
>So if the Doc's vow of celibacy is a fan assumption which flies
>directly in the face of established continuity, why would you
>think a new series would pay any heed to it?

It's not a fan assumption, and it doesn't fly 'directly in the face of
established continuity.' Are we even watching the same series here?

Patrick

>Steven Moffat
>
>P.S.  I mean, the guy has one snog in thirty years of saving our
>planet and you're all complaining!  You utter, utter bastards!

Sex and The Doctor Nicole Yates 2/11/96 12:00 AM
: In article <4fk4ts$b...@access2.digex.net> jb...@access2.digex.net

: (Jonathan Blum) writes:
: > But I would like to point out one additional reason why some of us are
: > opposed to the Doctor even getting one smooch...  it's because for those
: > of us engaged in long-distance relationships, if the bloody DOCTOR is
: > getting more snugglebunnies than we have in several months, then
: > something is fundamentally wrong with the universe.

let me say that i agree wholeheartedly.
the words "fundamentally wrong" are a vast understatement.

nicole
some kid who should be with gregg
--
==============================================================================
   have you ever gotten on your hands and knees
   and thank god you have access to my dementia?
   -george costanza
                                     http://astro.ocis.temple.edu/~cunningh
len...@netcom.com                              ftp.netcom.com pub/le/lennon
==============================================================================
WATCH DR WHO ON FOX IN MAY!!

Sex and The Doctor Randy/Jean-Marc Lofficier 2/11/96 12:00 AM
Steven Moffat (100043.121@CompuServe.COM) wrote:
: Doctor and that-Aztec-woman) and that the Dr favours bimbos in
: mini-skirts (what, you think he was choosing them for their
: brains?)  

His choice of Adric and Turlough may also lead one to wonder about a more
polymorphous orientation.  But as FU would say, I couldn't possibly comment.

JM

--
Randy & Jean-Marc Lofficier
rjm...@haven.ios.com

Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/11/96 12:00 AM
In article <4flp1q$d...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, pat...@aol.com (Pat1974)
writes:

>If the Doctor *is* sexual, it's extremely that we haven't
>seen even a hint of it, at least.

I meant to put "odd" between "extremely" and "that."

t.o.Patrick, who needs a lot more sleep. . .

Sex and The Doctor Nick Smale 2/12/96 12:00 AM
In article <4flp1q$d...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) wrote:

? According to Cat's Cradle: Time's Crucible Gallifreyans are created from
a
? sort of loom. If the NA's are canon, that's that.  Time Lords are
? impotent.  

Actually, IIRC what "Cat's Cradle" implies is that all Gallifreyans are
*infertile*, not impotent - that's something else entirely. This would stop
them from having children, but wouldn't necessarily prevent them having
sexual relationships (possibly quite the reverse - if there's no risk of an
unwanted pregnancy...)

In humans sex is primarily a social and recreational activity - less than 1
percent of sexual activity is related to reproduction. Take that
less-than-1-percent away and there's still have a whole lot of sex left...


______________________________ .--/O\--. ___
          Nick Smale           | .===. |
   (ni...@smale.demon.co.uk)    |||o o|||
        Manchester, UK          || _ ||
-------------------------------- '___' -----

Sex and The Doctor Ian 'Changeling' McIntire 2/12/96 12:00 AM
pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) wrote:
>In article <4fjaks$jnb$1...@mhafn.production.compuserve.com>, Steven Moffat
><100043.121@CompuServe.COM> writes:
>
>>What on Earth (or elsewhere) is the fuss about the Dr snogging
>>his companion?  Nowhere in the series does it *ever*
>>state that the Doc is asexual (it's purely an assumption on the
>>part of the fans)
>
>'Nowhere in the series does it *ever* state that the Doc is sexual (it's
>purely an assumption on the part of certain fans).

Exactly.  Both interpretations are equally valid, and Segal and Co. are
choosing the more daring one.  Drama 101:  When faced with a choice of
situations, always take the more interesting one.

>> and the fact that he has a a grandaughter might
>>lead the pedants among us to conclude otherwise (and no it wasn't
>>a term of affection - that's just another assumption and an
>>entirely baseless one at that.)
>
>According to Cat's Cradle: Time's Crucible Gallifreyans are created from a
>sort of loom. If the NA's are canon, that's that.  Time Lords are
>impotent.  

Yes, but it's been hinted that the Doctor is more than a Time Lord.  The
incongruity of TLs sterility (note: sterility, not asexuality) and the
very existance of Susan is even brought up in a late chapter of CC:TC.

>Even if we disregard the NA's, the evidence for a completely asexual
>Doctor is rampant throughout the series: from "You're a beautiful woman,
>probably" to his not even realizing Cameca loved him.  

Those instances are hardly proof of a lack of sexuality.  One could make
the argument that it shows a sense of humor on one hand and a slight
naivete' on the other.  (It's interesting to note that although he
doesn't recognize Cameca's attraction to him, he recognizes the
attraction between Susan and Campbell a few stories later.)

>It's everywhere in
>the series.  If the Doctor *is* sexual, it's extremely that we haven't
>seen even a hint of it, at least.  

One word:  Romana.

>And it's puts an entirely unwelcome
>spin on his relationship to his companions.  

Oh, come on!  You mean to tell me that you think of sexuality in purely polar terms?  If an individual has any sex drive at all, it =
entirely controls every single motivation in that person?

>The Doctor never loved Cameca or felt an attraction.  *She* fell for *him*
>and he tried desperately to get out of the situation.  When he discovered
>her father made Yetaxa's tomb, he took advantage of her feelings.  

Actually, I believe that it was Ixta's father who built the tomb.

>He
>never loved her or felt romantic inclinations. If you'd actually *watch*
>The Aztecs you'd see that.

Read the brilliant novelization of "The Massacre."  In it, the Doctor
remembers Cameca and reveals that in retrospect, he'd come to appreciate
her feelings (or words to that effect).

>> and that the Dr favours bimbos in
>>mini-skirts (what, you think he was choosing them for their
>>brains?)  
>
>This statement is fairly idiotic.  If you'd look and see how the
>companions join him, you'd see that he doesn't *want* Dodo, Ben, Polly,
>Zoe, Jo, Leela, Romana, Adric, Nyssa, Tegan or Peri.  They all find other
>ways into the TARDIS and the series.  

Yes, but to use the vernacular, "He didn't kick them out of bed for
eating crackers."

>>The most you could conclude from watching the show is
>>that he's a little reticent about involvement
>
>No, that's the most *you* could conclude. . .
>
>>(not surprising
>>when your inability for commitment extends to your entire home
>>planet!)

Damn good point!

>>So if the Doc's vow of celibacy is a fan assumption which flies
>>directly in the face of established continuity, why would you
>>think a new series would pay any heed to it?
>
>It's not a fan assumption, and it doesn't fly 'directly in the face of
>established continuity.' Are we even watching the same series here?

"'If' is the most powerful word in the universe."

>>P.S.  I mean, the guy has one snog in thirty years of saving our
>>planet and you're all complaining!  You utter, utter bastards!

Yet another damn good point!

Ian "Damned" McIntire
i...@po.cwru.edu

Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/12/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fnl3f$3...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, pat...@aol.com (Pat1974)
writes:

>>Oh, come on!  You mean to tell me that you think of sexuality in purely
>polar
>>terms?  If an individual has any sex drive at all, it =
>>entirely controls every single motivation in that person?
>
>Not in the slightest.  What an inane suggestion.  But do you mean to tell
>me that you think a person can be a sexual being and be happily celibate
>for the duration of the series?  The Doctor has never shown an interest
in
>anyone.  If you make the argument that the Doctor has a sexual nature,
you
>must show instances where he displays one.  You also need to take into
>consideration that the Doctor tends to travel with young, provocatively
>dressed females.  If the Doctor is having hundreds of years of
adventures,
>is surrounded by attractive young girls and boys and never bats an eyelid
>at any of them (or any othe

Aigh!  Sorry everyone - my crap AOL account is cutting off longer messages
even though I type the rest out - I apologize.

What got cut was:

(or any other character on the show).

The was also some stuff where I was pointed to The Massacre novelization
for a take on The Aztecs and Cameca.  To which:  Okay - I'll look at that
book again.  But if the novelizations are canon (which means the actual
series isn't! Some novels contradict televised events) then so are the
NA's.  And Human Nature categorically points out that the Doctor has no
romantic or sexual inclinations whatsoever.  And this is from Paul
Cornell, no less.  So let's stick just to the televised series (and
Shada).  If we use the books, I've already won (not that it's a contest or
anything). . .

I had some other points that I replied to but without the original post I
can't remember what they were. . .

t.o.Patrick

Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/12/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fnmf4$1l...@usenetp1.news.prodigy.com>, NNS...@prodigy.com
(Joe Wesson) writes:

>pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) wrote:
>>According to Cat's Cradle: Time's Crucible Gallifreyans are created from

>a
>>sort of loom. If the NA's are canon, that's that.  Time Lords are
>>impotent.  
>>
>  Maybe in your little 'whoniverse'.
>  Ho hum

Hee hee!  Actually, I went back and reread sections of the book after
seeing some of the responses.  What I meant to say was that the Time Lords
(at least from the Doctor's time until now) are incapable of sexual
reproduction.  Since I hadn't read the book since it was published, I
mixed up the exact reasons. . .

mea culpa and accompanying sobs

t.o.Patrick - and for punishment I'll blurt out: "Oh no!  Not the mind
probe!" in the middle of the office. . .

>                             Buenos TARDIS
>                              jOe WeSsOn  
>                           dokt...@aol.com
>                       "Remember me to Gallifrey"


Sex and The Doctor Joe Wesson 2/12/96 12:00 AM
pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) wrote:
>According to Cat's Cradle: Time's Crucible Gallifreyans are created from
a
>sort of loom. If the NA's are canon, that's that.  Time Lords are
>impotent.  
>
  Maybe in your little 'whoniverse'.
  Ho hum


                             Buenos TARDIS
                              jOe WeSsOn  
                           dokt...@aol.com
                       "Remember me to Gallifrey"


Sex and The Doctor Ian 'Changeling' McIntire 2/12/96 12:00 AM
pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) wrote:

>The was also some stuff where I was pointed to The Massacre novelization
>for a take on The Aztecs and Cameca.  To which:  Okay - I'll look at that
>book again.  But if the novelizations are canon (which means the actual
>series isn't! Some novels contradict televised events) then so are the
>NA's.  

Well, that's a canon debate, and as such, it doesn't have much relevance
here (after all, the TV series contradicts itself in places.  It doesn't
need contradictions from the novels to confirm or refute its
canonicity).

>And Human Nature categorically points out that the Doctor has no
>romantic or sexual inclinations whatsoever.  And this is from Paul
>Cornell, no less.  So let's stick just to the televised series (and
>Shada).  

I see Human Nature as confirming that the Doctor has an interest in romance.  As a Time Lord, he had an interest, but didn't believe=
 himself capable of love.  If he had *no* interest, then why turn himself into a human in the first place?

>If we use the books, I've already won

Debatable in the extreme.

>(not that it's a contest or anything). . .

Good point ;-)

Ian McIntire
i...@po.cwru.edu


Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/12/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fmsan$1...@madeline.INS.CWRU.Edu>, Ian 'Changeling' McIntire
<i...@po.cwru.edu> writes:

>pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) wrote:
>>In article <4fjaks$jnb$1...@mhafn.production.compuserve.com>, Steven Moffat
>><100043.121@CompuServe.COM> writes:
>>
>>>What on Earth (or elsewhere) is the fuss about the Dr snogging
>>>his companion?  Nowhere in the series does it *ever*
>>>state that the Doc is asexual (it's purely an assumption on the
>>>part of the fans)
>>
>>'Nowhere in the series does it *ever* state that the Doc is sexual (it's
>>purely an assumption on the part of certain fans).
>
>Exactly.  Both interpretations are equally valid, and Segal and Co. are
>choosing the more daring one.  Drama 101:  When faced with a choice of
>situations, always take the more interesting one.

I'm still not sure they're "equally valid."  It may just be an IMHO sort
of thing (which I doubt), but the proponents for a sexual Doctor have the
burden of proof. . .

>>According to Cat's Cradle: Time's Crucible Gallifreyans are created from
a
>>sort of loom. If the NA's are canon, that's that.  Time Lords are
>>impotent.  
>
>Yes, but it's been hinted that the Doctor is more than a Time Lord.  The
>incongruity of TLs sterility (note: sterility, not asexuality) and the
>very existance of Susan is even brought up in a late chapter of CC:TC.

As I said in a previous post: we have seen Gallifreyans with
romantic/sexual natures.  We have *never* seen a Time Lord with a
romantic/sexual nature.  There are dozens of possibilities as to why Susan
calls the Doctor grandfather.  I tend to think he is - possibly before he
became one of the few Gallifreyans to be Time Lords?

>>Even if we disregard the NA's, the evidence for a completely asexual
>>Doctor is rampant throughout the series: from "You're a beautiful woman,
>>probably" to his not even realizing Cameca loved him.  
>
>Those instances are hardly proof of a lack of sexuality.  One could make
>the argument that it shows a sense of humor on one hand and a slight
>naivete' on the other.  (It's interesting to note that although he
>doesn't recognize Cameca's attraction to him, he recognizes the
>attraction between Susan and Campbell a few stories later.)

Cameca - okay, I see your point.  However, when he finally does realize
what's going on, he's absolutely embarrassed and disinterested.  In fact,
as far as the series is concerned, he's never been interested in anyone.
The "you're a beautiful woman, probably" line could be attributed to
humor, but then one could use the humor defense to disregard everything
the Doctor says from season 15 through 17!  He honestly seems not to
realize or feel these sort of things.

>>It's everywhere in
>>the series.  If the Doctor *is* sexual, it's extremely that we haven't
>>seen even a hint of it, at least.  
>
>One word:  Romana.

Three words: defend your argument.  When did the Doctor ever display
romantic intentions toward her?  It's possible to argue the opposite to
some extent (eg: Shada), but if you're not even going to support one word
statements. . .

>>And it's puts an entirely unwelcome
>>spin on his relationship to his companions.  
>
>Oh, come on!  You mean to tell me that you think of sexuality in purely
polar
>terms?  If an individual has any sex drive at all, it =
>entirely controls every single motivation in that person?

Not in the slightest.  What an inane suggestion.  But do you mean to tell


me that you think a person can be a sexual being and be happily celibate
for the duration of the series?  The Doctor has never shown an interest in
anyone.  If you make the argument that the Doctor has a sexual nature, you
must show instances where he displays one.  You also need to take into
consideration that the Doctor tends to travel with young, provocatively
dressed females.  If the Doctor is having hundreds of years of adventures,
is surrounded by attractive young girls and boys and never bats an eyelid
at any of them (or any othe

Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/12/96 12:00 AM
In article <AD44B141...@smale.demon.co.uk>, ni...@smale.demon.co.uk
(Nick Smale) writes:

>In article <4flp1q$d...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) wrote:
>
>? According to Cat's Cradle: Time's Crucible Gallifreyans are created
from
>a
>? sort of loom. If the NA's are canon, that's that.  Time Lords are
>? impotent.  
>
>Actually, IIRC what "Cat's Cradle" implies is that all Gallifreyans are
>*infertile*, not impotent - that's something else entirely. This would
stop
>them from having children, but wouldn't necessarily prevent them having
>sexual relationships (possibly quite the reverse - if there's no risk of
an
>unwanted pregnancy...)
>
>In humans sex is primarily a social and recreational activity - less than
1
>percent of sexual activity is related to reproduction. Take that
>less-than-1-percent away and there's still have a whole lot of sex
left...

All right - good point.  But the biological fact that they can have sex
doesn't mean they do.  Someone please point out a "for instance" and then
we can start talking a little more smoothly. . .

t.o.Patrick

Sex and The Doctor Steven Moffat 2/12/96 12:00 AM
Pat1974 writes:
"It's not a fan assumption, and it doesn't fly 'directly in the
face of
established continuity.' Are we even watching the same series
here?"

All I was trying to point out, in a harmless and humourous way,
was that nothing is directly established in the TV show about the
Doctor's sexuality.  There are implications in both directions
(from actual progeny to seeming sexual naivety) but nothing is
ever stated or demonstrated to prove your case or mine.  Either
intepretation (from simple emotional reticence to actual
asexuality) is valid and so both options are open to the new
production team.  

Of course once they've decided that's rather it, isn't it?  

And did you call me idiotic in the middle of an argument among
grown adults about Doctor Who's sex life?  Honestly!!

Steven Moffat

Sex and The Doctor Jen 2/12/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fo4b8$r...@news1.usa.pipeline.com>,
el...@usa.pipeline.com(Elsa Frohman) wrote:
> On Feb 11, 1996 20:02:21 in article <Re: Sex and The Doctor>,

> 'rjm...@haven.ios.com (Randy/Jean-Marc Lofficier)' wrote:
> >His choice of Adric and Turlough may also lead one to wonder about a more
> >polymorphous orientation.  But as FU would say, I couldn't possibly comment.
> EEEEEWWWWWWWW!

Oh, Elsa, I agree!
 
> (This is not a commentary on the suggestion that the Doctor might be
> bisexual.  But Adric and Turlough?)  
> I think I'm gonna hurl!

Yeah, fine with me if the Doctor happens to be bi... but if you're saying
he *wanted Adric*... <muffled scream> And Turlough? Um, I think we'd best
behave ourselves. :-)
--
j...@sirius.com / jenni...@aol.com


work e-mail: rha...@marinet.lib.ca.us
"Make way! For I am the official keeper of the Emperor's penguins,
and I must hurry because his majesty's laundry basket is on fire."
The Doctor, _Transit_

Sex and The Doctor Elsa Frohman 2/12/96 12:00 AM
On Feb 11, 1996 20:02:21 in article <Re: Sex and The Doctor>,
'rjm...@haven.ios.com (Randy/Jean-Marc Lofficier)' wrote:
 
 
>His choice of Adric and Turlough may also lead one to wonder about a more

>polymorphous orientation.  But as FU would say, I couldn't possibly
comment.
>
>JM
>
>--
>Randy & Jean-Marc Lofficier
>rjm...@haven.ios.com
 
 
EEEEEWWWWWWWW!
 
(This is not a commentary on the suggestion that the Doctor might be
bisexual.  But Adric and Turlough?)
 
I think I'm gonna hurl!
 
 
 
--
 
Elsa J. Frohman

Sex and The Doctor R.J. Smith 2/12/96 12:00 AM
In article <4flp1q$d...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, Pat1974 <pat...@aol.com> wrote:

>The Doctor never loved Cameca or felt an attraction.  *She* fell for *him*
>and he tried desperately to get out of the situation.  When he discovered
>her father made Yetaxa's tomb, he took advantage of her feelings.  He
>never loved her or felt romantic inclinations. If you'd actually *watch*
>The Aztecs you'd see that.

Uh-uh.

If *you'd* actually understood The Aztecs, you would have seen that the
Doctor *does* have feelings for Cameca. He doesn't want to marry her, to
be sure, but I don't think anyone can watch that final scene and tell me
he felt nothing for her.

I mean, he spends the whole episode telling Barbara that she cannot
change history and then he takes the bloody brooch!

 - Robert Smith?

Sex and The Doctor Kate Orman 2/13/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fnl3f$3...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, Pat1974 <pat...@aol.com> wrote:

[snip]

>I'm still not sure they're "equally valid."  It may just be an IMHO sort
>of thing (which I doubt), but the proponents for a sexual Doctor have the
>burden of proof. . .

We don't have to "prove" that the Doctor has some kind of romantic or
sexual feelings - only that they might be possible for him. Heck, I
didn't have my first crush until I was sixteen. :-)

It'll be hilarious if there *is* a snog of some variety in the show -
from the howls of outrage from some fans to the fact that the Doctor's
kissability has become CANON. Mwa ha ha...

[snip]

>Cameca - okay, I see your point.  However, when he finally does realize
>what's going on, he's absolutely embarrassed and disinterested.  In fact,

He certainly isn't. Take another look at the story.

[snip]

>Not in the slightest.  What an inane suggestion.  But do you mean to tell
>me that you think a person can be a sexual being and be happily celibate
>for the duration of the series?  The Doctor has never shown an interest in
>anyone.  If you make the argument that the Doctor has a sexual nature, you
>must show instances where he displays one.  You also need to take into
>consideration that the Doctor tends to travel with young, provocatively
>dressed females.  If the Doctor is having hundreds of years of adventures,
>is surrounded by attractive young girls and boys and never bats an eyelid
>at any of them (or any othe

Hey, this means that no-one goes to the toilet in the "Doctor Who"
universe. :-)

Maybe the Doctor's never found the right girl, boy, or model train set.
Or maybe he doesn't want to involve someone else so permanently in his
hazardous wanderings... it would be very easy indeed to make such a
little expansion of the character seem like a natural progression.


--
__
kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au | http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au:80/~korman
Kate Orman - "A broad too deep for the small screen"

Sex and The Doctor Kate Orman 2/13/96 12:00 AM
In article <AD44B141...@smale.demon.co.uk>,

Nick Smale <ni...@smale.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <4flp1q$d...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) wrote:
>
>? According to Cat's Cradle: Time's Crucible Gallifreyans are created from
>a
>? sort of loom. If the NA's are canon, that's that.  Time Lords are
>? impotent.  
>
>Actually, IIRC what "Cat's Cradle" implies is that all Gallifreyans are
>*infertile*, not impotent - that's something else entirely. This would stop
>them from having children, but wouldn't necessarily prevent them having
>sexual relationships (possibly quite the reverse - if there's no risk of an
>unwanted pregnancy...)
>
>In humans sex is primarily a social and recreational activity - less than 1
>percent of sexual activity is related to reproduction. Take that
>less-than-1-percent away and there's still have a whole lot of sex left...

This is an *excellent* point.

We've never seen inside a Gallifreyan *home*, let alone a bedroom - who
knows what these folks do for fun?

--
__
kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au | http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au:80/~korman
Kate Orman - "A broad too deep for the small screen"

Sex and The Doctor Steve Leahy 2/13/96 12:00 AM
In the oration <4fokr4$9...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, the orator known only as
kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au (Kate Orman) orated thus to this newsgroup:

> We've never seen inside a Gallifreyan *home*, let alone a bedroom - who
> knows what these folks do for fun?

Make up silly titles for themselves? Regenerate into a succession of
elderly bodies? Wear large, totally impractical collars? Put the Doctor on
trial every now and then, before making him President? Pontificate on the
infallibility of the Matrix?

--
Steve Leahy (Steve...@anu.edu.au http://modjadji.anu.edu.au/steve)
Dept. Geography, ANU 0200 Australia    

Plot hole, n:  A device which allows an author to avoid the
               difficult task of writing coherently...

Sex and The Doctor Steve Leahy 2/13/96 12:00 AM
In the oration <4fokkf$7...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, the orator known only as

kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au (Kate Orman) orated thus to this newsgroup:

> Maybe the Doctor's never found the right girl, boy, or model train set.

> Or maybe he doesn't want to involve someone else so permanently in his
> hazardous wanderings... it would be very easy indeed to make such a
> little expansion of the character seem like a natural progression.

Of course, the Doctor's propensity to regenerate at unexpected moments
would probably put a dampener on any permanant relationship, giving new
meaning to such trite lines as "You're not the man I married." :-)

--
Steve Leahy (Steve...@anu.edu.au http://modjadji.anu.edu.au/steve)
Dept. Geography, ANU 0200 Australia    

Plot hole, n:  A device which allows an author to avoid the
               difficult task of writing coherently...

Sex and The Doctor Ian 'Changeling' McIntire 2/13/96 12:00 AM
pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) wrote:
>In article <AD44B141...@smale.demon.co.uk>, ni...@smale.demon.co.uk
>(Nick Smale) writes:
>
>>
>>Actually, IIRC what "Cat's Cradle" implies is that all Gallifreyans are
>>*infertile*, not impotent - that's something else entirely. This would
>stop
>>them from having children, but wouldn't necessarily prevent them having
>>sexual relationships (possibly quite the reverse - if there's no risk of
>an
>>unwanted pregnancy...)
>>
>>In humans sex is primarily a social and recreational activity - less than
>1
>>percent of sexual activity is related to reproduction. Take that
>>less-than-1-percent away and there's still have a whole lot of sex
>left...
>
>All right - good point.  But the biological fact that they can have sex
>doesn't mean they do.

Doesn't mean they don't either.

>Someone please point out a "for instance" and then
>we can start talking a little more smoothly. . .

I think that when one is talking about a species that once used to
reproduce sexually (something that Time's Crucible definitely proves)
the burden of proof lies with your argument.  Time's Crucible, ISTR,
portrayed the pre-Time Lord Gallifreyans as relatively similar to
humankind.  If the entire human race were to be rendered sterile at this
instant, and sex could no longer be used to produce children, do you
expect that the sex act would die out altogether?  

Clearly they retain the notions of gender (differentiation between Time
Lords and Ladies) and marriage (while unions like Leela and Andred's,
and Susan and Campbell's does not prove that Time Lords have sex, it
does prove that the notion of marriage is still retained by some segment
of the Gallifreyan population).  Sexual relations are merely a hop, skip
and a jump further.

Ian McIntire
i...@po.cwru.edu


Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/13/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fnuj3$d...@madeline.INS.CWRU.Edu>, Ian 'Changeling' McIntire
<i...@po.cwru.edu> writes:

>I see Human Nature as confirming that the Doctor has an interest in
romance.
>As a Time Lord, he had an interest, but didn't believe=
> himself capable of love.  If he had *no* interest, then why turn himself
>into a human in the first place?

I took it to mean he had an academic interest, which isn't the same thing
as wanting a good shag.  Who are these fascinating beings he's always
surrounded by?  Human Nature was just that, an experiment in human nature,
of which romance and sex are merely a small part.

But the distance to which the Doctor removes himself from Smith at the end
of the novel led me to believe it really wan't anything he felt naturally.
 He is an *alien* after all.

Paging Mr Cornell. . .

t.o.Patrick

Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/13/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fo91k$5...@mcmail.CIS.McMaster.CA>,
g952...@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA (R.J. Smith) writes:

>In article <4flp1q$d...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, Pat1974 <pat...@aol.com>
>wrote:
>
>>The Doctor never loved Cameca or felt an attraction.  *She* fell for
*him*
>>and he tried desperately to get out of the situation.  When he
discovered
>>her father made Yetaxa's tomb, he took advantage of her feelings.  He
>>never loved her or felt romantic inclinations. If you'd actually *watch*
>>The Aztecs you'd see that.
>
>Uh-uh.
>
>If *you'd* actually understood The Aztecs, you would have seen that the
>Doctor *does* have feelings for Cameca. He doesn't want to marry her, to
>be sure, but I don't think anyone can watch that final scene and tell me
>he felt nothing for her.

But the feelings aren't romantic in nature!  Are you playing Devil's
Advocate, do you have something against me ( :-) ) or did you
misunderstand the scenes?  I just rewatched the story last night to
confirm some points - by this time in the series (thanks to the closeness
of Barbara and Ian to the crew) the Doctor has mellowed and begins to
understand human feelings.  I can't say he felt nothing for her, because
that's not true.  But you're trying to paint it as though he had romantic
feelings, which he didn't.  He knew the pain she would go through when he
left, and tried to allay it somewhat.  He's not a cruel man (anymore).

>I mean, he spends the whole episode telling Barbara that she cannot
>change history and then he takes the bloody brooch!

Okay, Jill.  ; )  Taking a brooch can hardly be construed as changing
history.  Someone is always taking odd socks from my dryer, but it's not
changing history.  But leaving the wheel or posing as a god and issuing
moral commands that would alter the society are different matters
entirely.  I'd ask for a refund on your Jillogic chip. . .

Now, if you had said he took the brooch out of consideration for her
(non-reciprocated) feelings, and *then* began wearing it again in the NA's
in preparation for Human Nature (implying he'd been planning the change
for some time), then we'd be getting somewhere interesting.  But you
didn't.  

> - Robert Smith?

t.o.Patrick

Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/13/96 12:00 AM
In article <4foe1f$5fq$1...@mhade.production.compuserve.com>, Steven Moffat
<100043.121@CompuServe.COM> writes:

>Pat1974 writes:
>"It's not a fan assumption, and it doesn't fly 'directly in the
>face of
>established continuity.' Are we even watching the same series
>here?"
>
>All I was trying to point out, in a harmless and humourous way,
>was that nothing is directly established in the TV show about the
>Doctor's sexuality.

I understand this - that's why I modelled my statement directly on yours :
)

>  There are implications in both directions
>(from actual progeny to seeming sexual naivety) but nothing is
>ever stated or demonstrated to prove your case or mine.  Either
>intepretation (from simple emotional reticence to actual
>asexuality) is valid and so both options are open to the new
>production team.  

I see your point, but I think that a sexual or romantic nature is
conspicuous in the absense of examples. . .  Technically, you're right.
But the totality of the series just doesn't seem to support that.

>Of course once they've decided that's rather it, isn't it?  

Sadly. . .

>And did you call me idiotic in the middle of an argument among
>grown adults about Doctor Who's sex life?  Honestly!!

I didn't call you idiotic - I'm not *that* rude.  I called one of your
arguments idiotic, which a different thing entirely.  Besides, I think we
can accept that a sense of humor is inherent in the argument/discussion
becuase you're right - it's just a TV show!

>Steven Moffat

t.o.Patrick, who honestly didn't mean offense. . .

Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/13/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fokkf$7...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au
(Kate Orman) writes:

>If you make the argument that the Doctor has a sexual nature, you
>>must show instances where he displays one.  You also need to take into
>>consideration that the Doctor tends to travel with young, provocatively
>>dressed females.  If the Doctor is having hundreds of years of
adventures,
>>is surrounded by attractive young girls and boys and never bats an
eyelid
>>at any of them (or any othe
>
>Hey, this means that no-one goes to the toilet in the "Doctor Who"
>universe. :-)

Sigh. . .  ; )  Point taken.

Actually, I have to confess that my position is somewhat hypocritical -
I'm not averse to this addition to the Doctor's character as long as it's
done well.  I'm just somewhat shocked by everyone else seemingly taking
this in stride.  Jon Blum's Lucifer Rising example with the gun is a
perfect one - it's as if r.a.dw finds this totally within character and
even possibly overdue.  

t.o.Patrick, who knows there's a lot of Devil's Advocacy in his posts and
suspects there's a great deal in the others. . .

Sex and The Doctor Elsa Frohman 2/13/96 12:00 AM
On Feb 12, 1996 22:13:03 in article <Re: Sex and The Doctor>, 'Steven

Moffat <100043.121@CompuServe.COM>' wrote:
 
 
>And did you call me idiotic in the middle of an argument among  
>grown adults about Doctor Who's sex life?  Honestly!!
>
>Steven Moffat  
 
Quote File!
--
 
Elsa J. Frohman

Sex and The Doctor R.J. Smith 2/13/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fp76q$m...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, Pat1974 <pat...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <4fo91k$5...@mcmail.CIS.McMaster.CA>,
>g952...@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA (R.J. Smith) writes:

>>If *you'd* actually understood The Aztecs, you would have seen that the
>>Doctor *does* have feelings for Cameca. He doesn't want to marry her, to
>>be sure, but I don't think anyone can watch that final scene and tell me
>>he felt nothing for her.

>But the feelings aren't romantic in nature!  Are you playing Devil's
>Advocate, do you have something against me ( :-) ) or did you
>misunderstand the scenes?  

Nope, it's definitely something personal :-)

Yeah, it's Devil's Advocate time...

I just rewatched the story last night to
>confirm some points - by this time in the series (thanks to the closeness
>of Barbara and Ian to the crew) the Doctor has mellowed and begins to
>understand human feelings.  I can't say he felt nothing for her, because
>that's not true.  But you're trying to paint it as though he had romantic
>feelings, which he didn't.  He knew the pain she would go through when he
>left, and tried to allay it somewhat.  He's not a cruel man (anymore).

Well, I think we can debate the interpretation a bit. I mean, he could
well have had romantic feelings for her, but known the hazards of taking
her with him or, equally, settling down. I always tend to think that he
*did* have some very slight romantic feelings for her (the best he could
do), but refused to allow himself to do anything about them.

But your interpretation is equally valid.

My main point actually was just to say that he had *some* feelings for
her, not necessarily romantic ones.

>>I mean, he spends the whole episode telling Barbara that she cannot
>>change history and then he takes the bloody brooch!

>Okay, Jill.  ; )  

Oh, so we're playing nasty then are we? :-)

Taking a brooch can hardly be construed as changing
>history.  Someone is always taking odd socks from my dryer, but it's not
>changing history.  But leaving the wheel or posing as a god and issuing
>moral commands that would alter the society are different matters
>entirely.  I'd ask for a refund on your Jillogic chip. . .

No, I think that he definitely goes against his own preaching on that
one. Even a small change can change history and who knows what future
role that brooch might have played had the Doctor not taken it.

To dismiss it as you do is to really undersell the power of that final
scene.

And my Jillogic chip is working fine! :-)

>Now, if you had said he took the brooch out of consideration for her
>(non-reciprocated) feelings, and *then* began wearing it again in the NA's
>in preparation for Human Nature (implying he'd been planning the change
>for some time), then we'd be getting somewhere interesting.  But you
>didn't.  

Well, clever as I usually am, I didn't think of that one. But it's pretty
good...

 - Robert Smith?

Sex and The Doctor Jonathan Blum 2/13/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fokr4$9...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>,

Kate Orman <kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> wrote:
>We've never seen inside a Gallifreyan *home*, let alone a bedroom - who
>knows what these folks do for fun?

Time Lords on Gallifrey have fun?

Regards,
Jon Blum
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"All this time you two thought you were playing some twisted game of
chess...  when it was just me playing solitaire!"
             D O C T O R   W H O :   T I M E   R I F T

Sex and The Doctor Kate Orman 2/13/96 12:00 AM
In article <4flp1q$d...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, Pat1974 <pat...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <4fjaks$jnb$1...@mhafn.production.compuserve.com>, Steven Moffat

><100043.121@CompuServe.COM> writes:
>
>>What on Earth (or elsewhere) is the fuss about the Dr snogging
>>his companion?  Nowhere in the series does it *ever*
>>state that the Doc is asexual (it's purely an assumption on the
>>part of the fans)
>
>'Nowhere in the series does it *ever* state that the Doc is sexual (it's
>purely an assumption on the part of certain fans).

Assuming that there *is* some kind of lip-mashing in the script, then
it's going to have been an assumption on the part of the writer. :-)

>> and the fact that he has a a grandaughter might
>>lead the pedants among us to conclude otherwise (and no it wasn't
>>a term of affection - that's just another assumption and an
>>entirely baseless one at that.)
>
>According to Cat's Cradle: Time's Crucible Gallifreyans are created from a
>sort of loom. If the NA's are canon, that's that.  Time Lords are
>impotent.  

Ah, but you see... no, I'm not supposed to say anything about that. "Shh,
shh..."

>Even if we disregard the NA's, the evidence for a completely asexual
>Doctor is rampant throughout the series: from "You're a beautiful woman,
>probably" to his not even realizing Cameca loved him.  It's everywhere in

But his affection for Cameca is underlined in "The Aztecs" - there's a
lovely scene where he's obviously disturbed about having to leave her,
and then the punchline with her brooch.

>the series.  If the Doctor *is* sexual, it's extremely that we haven't
>seen even a hint of it, at least.  And it's puts an entirely unwelcome
>spin on his relationship to his companions.  As for Susan, it simply never
>says.  I tend to think she *is* his granddaughter, but perhaps he had
>children before he became a Time Lord.

We simply don't know. This is one of the difficulties of debating what is
and isn't true about Gallifrey and Time Lords - we still know so little
about them. For all we know, they're shagging like bunnies.

>The Doctor never loved Cameca or felt an attraction.  *She* fell for *him*
>and he tried desperately to get out of the situation.  When he discovered
>her father made Yetaxa's tomb, he took advantage of her feelings.  He
>never loved her or felt romantic inclinations. If you'd actually *watch*
>The Aztecs you'd see that.

If you'd actually *watch* the Aztecs, you'd see it isn't so
cut-and-dried. See above.

[much aggro from Pat snipped]


--
__
kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au | http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au:80/~korman
Kate Orman - "A broad too deep for the small screen"

Sex and The Doctor David Versace 2/13/96 12:00 AM
Ian 'Changeling' McIntire <i...@po.cwru.edu> writes:


>>And Human Nature categorically points out that the Doctor has no
>>romantic or sexual inclinations whatsoever.  And this is from Paul
>>Cornell, no less.  So let's stick just to the televised series (and
>>Shada).  
>I see Human Nature as confirming that the Doctor has an interest in romance.  As a Time Lord, he had an interest, but didn't believe=
> himself capable of love.  If he had *no* interest, then why turn himself into a human in the first place?

Interesting point, but don't forget that the one of the Doctor's
main instructions to Benny is to not allow Smith to fall in love.
I interpret this as meaning he knew that Smith would be both capable
of and prone to romance, but that the Doctor saw this as just getting
in the way of his experiment. His specific goal is to learn what it
feels like to be human, but he recognises that such a romantic
engagement will only lead to disappointment and will probably stuff
the experiment up into the bargain.

Dave (who realises that, yes, he then promptly proceeds to have a
tragic romance and stuff up his experiment, but at least he learns an
important lesson about life :)

Sex and The Doctor Ron O'Dell 2/14/96 12:00 AM

In <4fokr4$9...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au (Kate Orman) writes:

>Nick Smale <ni...@smale.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>In humans sex is primarily a social and recreational activity - less than 1
>>percent of sexual activity is related to reproduction. Take that
>>less-than-1-percent away and there's still have a whole lot of sex left...

>This is an *excellent* point.
>We've never seen inside a Gallifreyan *home*, let alone a bedroom - who
>knows what these folks do for fun?

Well, we do know the Doctor keeps straps in the TARDIS (cf. Timelash)...
and one only has to look at the console in motion -- that time rotor
is so >suggestive<, isn't it... in and out, nice and slow, mmm....

Oh, er, hi. Sorry. Carry on... Just don't wake the other companions with
all that carrying on; it's more polite to wake them beforehand and invite
them to join in. (Waking a third or fourth bedmate by carrying on tends
to cause "Why not me?" problems, as does not waking them and having them
find out later.)

(Why d'y'think K9 called the women "mistress," anyway?)
--
Ron O'Dell `Keeper' kee...@circus.com kee...@armory.com kee...@gorn.evolve.com


Sex and The Doctor Paul Ian Harman 2/14/96 12:00 AM

In article <4fq772$4...@access2.digex.net>, jb...@access2.digex.net (Jonathan Blum) writes:
|>In article <4fokr4$9...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>,
|>Kate Orman <kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au> wrote:
|>>We've never seen inside a Gallifreyan *home*, let alone a bedroom - who
|>>knows what these folks do for fun?
|>
|>Time Lords on Gallifrey have fun?

Sex on Gallifrey can't be that great, after all, or else why did the Doctor
leave?

        Ozzy.

--
+-+ p...@doc.ic.ac.uk -+-+-+-+-+-+-+- Ozzy -+-+-+-+-+ pa...@panews.press.net -+-
-+- Paul "Ozymandias" Harman +-+-+-+ http://www-students.doc.ic.ac.uk/~pih/ +-+
 "It may be irrational of me, but human beings are quite my favourite species."
        - Tom Baker, The Ark in Space

Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/14/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fp65n$5...@madeline.INS.CWRU.Edu>, Ian 'Changeling' McIntire
<i...@po.cwru.edu> writes:

>I think that when one is talking about a species that once used to
>reproduce sexually (something that Time's Crucible definitely proves)
>the burden of proof lies with your argument.  

I think that when one is talking about a character that doesn't think
romatically/sexually (something that Human Nature definately proves) the


burden of proof lies with your argument.

I think it's just eventually got to boil down to a matter of personal
interpretation of the character, and how we each regard the series.  I
don't think it's an issue that can really be thrashed out in discussion.
Although personally I find it interesting that even the people arguing
pro-romance are using lots of caveats (eg. how it's handled - I think even
Kate at one point said it should take his past into account, which is what
I've been trying to say). . .

t.o.Patrick


Sex and The Doctor R.P. Augood 2/14/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fp76q$m...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, pat...@aol.com (Pat1974)
wrote:

>Someone is always taking odd socks from my dryer, but it's not
>changing history.  

Well, if they hadn't, then you wouldn't have written that and I wouldn't have
written this. And now I'm in a bad mood about the theft of your socks, so
I'll slam the door on the way out of my office, possibly so hard that it'll
cause lasting structural damage to the building which may subsequently fall
down, killing all occupants, many of whom are water treatment experts who
spend a lot of time creating water purification systems in third world
countries, so thousands of people will die of thirst, cholera and dyphtheria.
AND ALL BECAUSE SOME BASTARD CHANGED HISTORY BY STEALING YOUR SOCKS!

<rubs eyes and looks around>

Where am I?

Rich.

"He's tall and blond. He smokes a cigar. And he's a pig!"

Sex and The Doctor Spigi Fligi Hertlemeyer 2/14/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fq8kt$7...@news.mel.aone.net.au>,

David Versace <dav...@gbrmpa.gov.au> wrote:
>Ian 'Changeling' McIntire <i...@po.cwru.edu> writes:
>
>Interesting point, but don't forget that the one of the Doctor's
>main instructions to Benny is to not allow Smith to fall in love.
>I interpret this as meaning he knew that Smith would be both capable
>of and prone to romance, but that the Doctor saw this as just getting
>in the way of his experiment. His specific goal is to learn what it
>feels like to be human, but he recognises that such a romantic
>engagement will only lead to disappointment and will probably stuff
>the experiment up into the bargain.

I thought that Benny was the one who scrawled in that last bit
about not allowing Smith to fall in love.

I like by the way how when she shows him that list he just says
something like "oh. well too late there." Woah was Smith such
a silly person in love. [:

Now of course this is making me really want to read Human
Nature all over again.  After the sweet stench summer of Ian
McEwan, reading Human Nature would be like returning to windy
coastal spring with everything feeling so damn nice. Like
reading A Midsummer Night's Dream oddly not in midsummer
but in midspring.


-SpiGi, burbling just a bit
"breaking the binds of a sexuality this dread finds pleasure
in dispassion" - Vishnu's Secret

Sex and The Doctor Alden Bates 2/14/96 12:00 AM

In article <4fokr4$9...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, Kate Orman (kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au) writes:
>We've never seen inside a Gallifreyan *home*, let alone a bedroom - who
>knows what these folks do for fun?

Wasn't there a scene in Invasion of Time where the Sontarans
stumble across a room in the TARDIS which has various leather
straps scattered around and torture devices and....

No wait, sorry wrong episode.  It was Timelash where the Doctor got
out the leather straps.

Alden Bates.

--  
  /~~~|_|~~~\ "Is lower the lofty tone no enormously end, monkey-hominids
 / _   _  _ <  going shit sod bugger all the sodding time." - Unnamed Sloathe
/_/ |_| |___.'                       - Dave Stone, Doctor Who: Sky Pirates!
Alden Bates: al...@bates.wn.planet.gen.nz

Sex and The Doctor Michael Lee 2/14/96 12:00 AM
In message <4fnl3f$3...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, pat...@aol.com (Pat1974)
writes:

>I'm still not sure they're "equally valid."  It may just be an IMHO sort
>of thing (which I doubt), but the proponents for a sexual Doctor have the
>burden of proof. . .

Actually, if Segal, Jacobs & company are proponents for a sexual Doctor, they
have the rights, and they can do what they want and they make the proof.   They
are the ones making Doctor Who, after all.

>>>It's everywhere in


>>>the series.  If the Doctor *is* sexual, it's extremely that we haven't
>>>seen even a hint of it, at least.  
>>
>>One word:  Romana.
>
>Three words: defend your argument.  When did the Doctor ever display
>romantic intentions toward her?  It's possible to argue the opposite to
>some extent (eg: Shada), but if you're not even going to support one word
>statements. . .

Shada?  They spend the entire first scene (the one repeated in Five Doctors)
flirting with each other.  They go to Paris willingly, at great potential risk,
and run around the city holding hands, with Romana dresses as a school girl!

And obviously, we can't use only on screen footage -- we don't see much sign
that the companions are sexual beings either; after all, I don't think we see
Sarah Jane Smith fall in love either.  How many companions have shown romantic
intentions? Not all of them, and not even all of the long-serving ones.  

Michael Lee
http://www.execpc.com/~michaell


Sex and The Doctor David Headman The Mad 2/14/96 12:00 AM
> t.o.Patrick--
A: I dissagree with you that the Doctor has no sex drive, but both I and
others have already given the reasons. No further bickering is going to
change anyones mind on the subject (only those undecided-everyone else is
too entrenched in thier positions)

B: Lets assume for the moment that you are right. The Doctor is totaly
celibate and always has been.  Susan is a clone, and neither she nor Andred
were realy in love. The Doctor can't be turned on at all, even if Alicia
Silverstone did a lap dance for him. Now, does this necessarily mean he has
no interest in romance? Just because the Doctor does not want a "good shag"
doesn't necessarily mean he isn't prone to falling in love.  ESPECIALY after
Human Nature. He is, after all seen crying at the close of the book, (by
Wosley, only of course) which seems to discredit your interpretation IMHO.
Can't two people be madly in love with out consumating it? Can't it be
innocent? Or more fun, cant they be in love, and Grace wanting to get if
off, while the Doctor says something like "I love you, but I'm realy not
interested in that sort of thing." Romantic love that doesn't involve sex is
not necessarily the same thing as platonic love.  Sure, it might be a little
tense, but in the words of the Doctor "for some people, small beautiful
things are what life is all about".  Can't they merely be hopelessly in love
with each othere without once having the Doctor get doen and dirty? Sure,
you can say that some physical attraction is necessary for the Doctor to
notice her in the first place, but there are those who would dissagree, I
among them.  Personaly, I simply couldn't be involved with a girl who I
didn't have profound respect for intelectualy and emotionaly.  Maybe this
Grace is totaly brilliant, and utterly charming, and the Doctor can't help
but be taken in?  I mean, he certainly seemed to feel that way about Romana
II, even if they never got *physicaly* involved. Only human emotions are
necessary for the Doctor to fall in love, not testosterone.  And he
certainly seems to be developing those, as time goes by.

Relieved to get all that off his chest,
David Headman The Mad  

David HeadmanTM's(gali...@fast.net) new SHORT sig, (for all who complained)
"You know,the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common
they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit
the  views, which can be uncomfortable, if you  happen  to be one of the
facts that needs altering."
- Doctor, THE FACE OF EVIL =:-)(the problem with monarchies AND republics)

Sex and The Doctor Kate Orman 2/14/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fq8kt$7...@news.mel.aone.net.au>,
David Versace <dav...@gbrmpa.gov.au> wrote:
>Ian 'Changeling' McIntire <i...@po.cwru.edu> writes:
>
>
>>>And Human Nature categorically points out that the Doctor has no
>>>romantic or sexual inclinations whatsoever.  And this is from Paul
>>>Cornell, no less.  So let's stick just to the televised series (and
>>>Shada).  
>>I see Human Nature as confirming that the Doctor has an interest in romance.  As a Time Lord, he had an interest, but didn't believe=
>> himself capable of love.  If he had *no* interest, then why turn himself into a human in the first place?
>
>Interesting point, but don't forget that the one of the Doctor's
>main instructions to Benny is to not allow Smith to fall in love.

Oops! No, it wasn't. Take another look at that scene.

[snip]

--
__
kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au | http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au:80/~korman
Kate Orman - "A broad too deep for the small screen"

Sex and The Doctor Kate Orman 2/15/96 12:00 AM

I wonder how much of that distance was the inability to connect with
Smith's feelings, and how much was denial on the part of the Doctor? He's
obviously been changed by the experience. Question is, how much? Enough to
make a leetle smoochie seem like character development instead of cliche?

--
__
kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au | http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au:80/~korman
Kate Orman - "A broad too deep for the small screen"

Constipation and The Doctor Peter Anghelides 2/15/96 12:00 AM
In <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, The Macra Terror <m...@mcs.com> writes:
>>A new low, even for this group...
I'd like to propose the motion: "The Plasmatons were clearly designed to
look like turds".  That's why so many of us affectionately refer to that
story as "Time-Shite".  Isn't it?  

>"Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or does temporal grace take care of
>that, too?"
She's a medical doctor, not a janitor.  Don't you follow this newsgroup?

Peter Anghelides

Sex and The Doctor Kate Orman 2/15/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fpak9$n...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, Pat1974 <pat...@aol.com> wrote:

[snip]

>Actually, I have to confess that my position is somewhat hypocritical -


>I'm not averse to this addition to the Doctor's character as long as it's
>done well.  I'm just somewhat shocked by everyone else seemingly taking
>this in stride.  Jon Blum's Lucifer Rising example with the gun is a
>perfect one - it's as if r.a.dw finds this totally within character and
>even possibly overdue.  

I dunno - if you look back over the thread, you'll find quite a variety
of comments. Even those of us who think it could be groovy have
reservations - will it be a cliched hero-heroine thing? Will it be
character development, or the obligatory hint of sex? Is he gonna get the
tongue in? :-)

The ghastly truth is there's not a lot we can do about it. :-) I guess
we'll have to sit back and wait to see what May brings...

--
__
kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au | http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au:80/~korman
Kate Orman - "A broad too deep for the small screen"

Sex and The Doctor Jason A. Miller 2/15/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fp6b3$l...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) writes:
>In article <4fnuj3$d...@madeline.INS.CWRU.Edu>, Ian 'Changeling' McIntire
>>I see Human Nature as confirming that the Doctor has an interest in
>romance.
>>As a Time Lord, he had an interest, but didn't believe=
>> himself capable of love.  If he had *no* interest, then why turn himself
>>into a human in the first place?
>
>I took it to mean he had an academic interest, which isn't the same thing
>as wanting a good shag.  Who are these fascinating beings he's always
>surrounded by?  Human Nature was just that, an experiment in human nature,
>of which romance and sex are merely a small part.

        Paul himself doesn't think there's any good reason for the Doctor
to have decided to become human for three months, but I'd submit to you
that falling in love is an integral part of this -- the sexual urge is
a heavy distinguishing factor between Earthlings and Time Lords, and this
book coming right after Bernice's unfortunate love affair, I would suggest
that the Doctor is trying to better understand his companion's feelings
better (bearing in mind that he's stepped on her before).
        See below.

>But the distance to which the Doctor removes himself from Smith at the end
>of the novel led me to believe it really wan't anything he felt naturally.
> He is an *alien* after all.

        I totally disagree.  I'm not in the "HN was *brilliant* camp, but
one of the few scenes that really shook me up and made me *feel* for the
Doctor (something that Paul, among few others, is able to do with any
regularity) is:

(pg. 254-255) [POSSIBLE spoilers for Sancutary & HN]:

The Doctor slipped the white poppy into his buttonhole.
"So, where do you want to go?" he asked Bernice[...].
"Somewhere that sells hot chocolate and crumpets."
"After that."
"Perhaps we could go and do something good.  Help somebody."
"We could go back to Guy."
"We could go back to Joan."
They looked at each other, and they might have looked sad.
But instead they smiled.
The Doctor took Bernice's arm.

        Love *is* something the Doctor is capable of feeling naturally --
in part, because he's learned so much from the experience (and because he
has Paul giving him words, which is a wonderful thing to read).  The
affair is over -- but the Doctor is *hurt* by this.  No other NA, I submit
to you, has hurt him as much.

The cat could see that the man was weeping.
But there was nobody he could tell.

Paul Cornell, _Human Nature_ at 246 (1995).

-Jason A. Miller
"some human guy"

Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/15/96 12:00 AM
In article <3122AF...@fast.net>, David Headman The Mad
<gali...@fast.net> writes:

>A: I dissagree with you that the Doctor has no sex drive, but both I and
>others have already given the reasons.

All you've shown, and I agree with this, is that he *once* had a sex
drive. . .

>B: Lets assume for the moment that you are right. The Doctor is totaly
>celibate and always has been.  

I have never said this.  From the start I assumed Susan was his biological
daughter.  What I have tried to say is that once the Doctor became a Time
Lord, he lost these feelings.

>Susan is a clone, and neither she nor Andred
>were realy in love.

?  Never said either of these. . .  Andred was probably in love, but I
think he's just a normal Gallifreyan.

>The Doctor can't be turned on at all, even if Alicia
>Silverstone did a lap dance for him.

I agree with this. . .  He does seem as though he'd be into romance for
the mental aspects. . .

>Now, does this necessarily mean he has
>no interest in romance?

Nope.  Haven't said this either.  I said that the show has developed an
asexual Doctor.  I said that the NA's have questioned this.  I said that
to go from the show to the new film (if it has a sexual, romantic Doctor)
would be inconsistent for his character.  However, I also said that to go
from the show to the NA's (should they have a few more Human Nature-esque
books) to the film would be fine.

>ESPECIALY after
>Human Nature. He is, after all seen crying at the close of the book, (by
>Wosley, only of course) which seems to discredit your interpretation
IMHO.

Okay, IYHO.  I saw it as though he truly was anguished by events.  But
he's still not human, he still doesn't truly understand what's going on.
To suggest he is and does makes Human Nature pretty trite.  But if Human
Nature can be seen as the beginning of a gradual shift in character, that
would be impressive and believable.  Besides (and no one has answered this
yet), if the Doctor (as opposed to Smith) really loved Joan, why *not*
take her with him?  And why agonize for the final chapters, crying that
once he became the Doctor he wouldn't love her?  Intellectually, he
understands the pain he has caused Joan, and perhaps even to Smith.  But I
submit that he was crying because he doesn't really understand it
emotionally.

>Can't two people be madly in love with out consumating it? Can't it be
>innocent?

I suppose (sheesh, this makes me sound like some sex-crazed lunatic,
doesn't it?).

> Or more fun, cant they be in love, and Grace wanting to get if
>off, while the Doctor says something like "I love you, but I'm realy not
>interested in that sort of thing." Romantic love that doesn't involve sex
is
>not necessarily the same thing as platonic love.  

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.  Don't know about this, but I'm tempted to agree with you.

>Sure, it might be a little
>tense, but in the words of the Doctor "for some people, small beautiful
>things are what life is all about".  Can't they merely be hopelessly in
love
>with each othere without once having the Doctor get doen and dirty? Sure,

>you can say that some physical attraction is necessary for the Doctor to
>notice her in the first place, but there are those who would dissagree, I

>among them.  Personaly, I simply couldn't be involved with a girl who I
>didn't have profound respect for intelectualy and emotionaly.

Me, too.

>  Maybe this
>Grace is totaly brilliant, and utterly charming, and the Doctor can't
help
>but be taken in?  

Utterly massive "perhaps" here. . .

>I mean, he certainly seemed to feel that way about Romana
>II, even if they never got *physicaly* involved.

Here I have to disagree.  The Doctor seemed not at all broke up when she
left in Warriors' Gate.  Even in Shada, it appears as though *perhaps* she
fancied him, and he was oblivious. . .

> Only human emotions are
>necessary for the Doctor to fall in love, not testosterone.  And he
>certainly seems to be developing those, as time g

Constipation and The Doctor The Macra Terror 2/15/96 12:00 AM
>A new low, even for this group...
>
>: 'Nowhere in the series does it *ever* state that the Doc goes to the
>bathroom (it's : purely an assumption on the part of certain
>fans).
>
>Remembrance of Milk of Magnesia.
>
>The Curse of Cod Liver Oil.

One question that was much better than its answer was at one of the
Chicago cons (TARDIS 21, I think).  "Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or

does temporal grace take care of that, too?"
 
I think that may have been the same panel where someone asked Sarah
Sutton, "If Nyssa takes off her skirt when she has a tummyache, what
does she do when she has a chest cold?"
 
But as for contextual evidence that the Doctor has somewhat different,
uh, needs...  When K-9 tells the Doctor in "The Invasion of Time" that
Leela has gone to the "bathroom," the Doctor seems shocked that there IS
such a thing on the TARDIS.  (Then, of course, it turns out it's an
indoor pool, not a loo.  On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if
it served double duty for Leela.)

Constipation and The Doctor Randy/Jean-Marc Lofficier 2/16/96 12:00 AM
Peter Anghelides (anghe...@vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
: I'd like to propose the motion: "The Plasmatons were clearly designed to

: look like turds".  That's why so many of us affectionately refer to that
: story as "Time-Shite".  Isn't it?  

Which reminds me...  Were the Vervoids designed to look like Giant-Size
Man-Thing(s)  ((c) 1974, Marvel Comics, all rights reserved), a little
like in that adult animated feature, (TARZOON) SHAME OF THE JUNGLE?


 --
Jean-Marc Lofficier
rjm...@haven.ios.com

Constipation and The Doctor The Macra Terror 2/17/96 12:00 AM
>>>A new low, even for this group...
>I'd like to propose the motion: "The Plasmatons were clearly designed to
>look like turds".  That's why so many of us affectionately refer to that
>story as "Time-Shite".  Isn't it?  

I think mostly it made Peter Grimwade and JN-T look like turds.

Sex and The Doctor Ian 'Changeling' McIntire 2/17/96 12:00 AM
nrd...@nrd.ups.com (Brian) wrote:
>
>
>The Doctor's too smart for sex, it would be a step down.

Ah, so you feel that one's appreciation of sex decreases with one's
intelligence?  

I pity you.

Ian "Gourmet/Gourmand" McIntire
i...@po.cwru.edu

Sex and The Doctor Eva W Jacobus 2/17/96 12:00 AM
Brian wrote:
>
> The Doctor's too smart for sex, it would be a step down.

Too *smart* for sex?  In that case, natural selection presents a hell of
a lot of problems, my dear.

--Eva

Sex and The Doctor Daniel Frankham 2/17/96 12:00 AM
pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) spake unto us thusly:

>In article <AD44B141...@smale.demon.co.uk>, ni...@smale.demon.co.uk
>(Nick Smale) writes:

>>In humans sex is primarily a social and recreational activity - less than
>1
>>percent of sexual activity is related to reproduction. Take that
>>less-than-1-percent away and there's still have a whole lot of sex
>left...

>All right - good point.  But the biological fact that they can have sex
>doesn't mean they do.

As others (especially Kate, IIRC) have noted: I wonder what the
Gallifreyans are fans of?  }:-p

> Someone please point out a "for instance" and then
>we can start talking a little more smoothly. . .

Two words: "Time Tots"

Some more words: In Brain of Morbius the Doctor says "I was born
in these parts" (or words very like that - and certainly including
the word "born").

If he was incubated, or grown, or cultivated, or something, why
say "born"? That suggests human-style sexual reproduction to me...

Daniel, who doesn't really care, but will always take advantage of
an opportunity to remind people of those cute li'l Time Tots }:-p

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Frankham                                       dan...@senet.com.au
WE'RE ALL IN THE GUTTER BUT SOME OF US ARE LOOKING AT THE STARS  (O.WILDE)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The remainder of this sig has been deleted - all except this line, that is


Sex and The Doctor Kate Orman 2/17/96 12:00 AM
In article <4g2ovr$p...@casey.nrd.ups.com>, Brian <nrd...@nrd.ups.com> wrote:

>The Doctor's too smart for sex, it would be a step down.

He could think about something else during so as not to waste his brain
power...


--
__
kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au | http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au:80/~korman
Kate Orman - "A broad too deep for the small screen"

Constipation and The Doctor Jen 2/17/96 12:00 AM
In article <4g0rs6$o...@news.ios.com> rjm...@haven.ios.com (Randy/Jean-Marc

Lofficier) writes:
> Were the Vervoids designed to look like Giant-Size Man-Thing(s)  ((c)
> 1974, Marvel Comics, all rights reserved), a little like in that adult
> animated feature, (TARZOON) SHAME OF THE JUNGLE?

AFAIR, the Vervoid drawing on the cover of the novelization sort of
resembles... well, a vulva? (Apart from the green, at least.) Gah, it's
censor-bait, pardon me... :-) Maybe I should look at the televised story
again to see if that's true and not just a sick mind at work... <ulp>
--
j...@sirius.com / jenni...@aol.com
work e-mail: rha...@marinet.lib.ca.us
"Make way! For I am the official keeper of the Emperor's penguins,
and I must hurry because his majesty's laundry basket is on fire."
The Doctor, _Transit_

Constipation and The Doctor Jen 2/17/96 12:00 AM
In article <4g4mvv$p...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au
(Kate Orman) wrote:
> In article <4fv96v$12...@zen.hursley.ibm.com>,

> Peter Anghelides <anghe...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >In <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, The Macra Terror <m...@mcs.com> writes:
> >>"Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or does temporal grace take care of
> >>that, too?"
> >She's a medical doctor, not a janitor.  Don't you follow this newsgroup?
> GROAN
> I suppose we're going to be putting up with "grace" jokes for the rest of
> the year...

By the grace of the gods, we won't be. ;-)


--
j...@sirius.com / jenni...@aol.com
work e-mail: rha...@marinet.lib.ca.us
"Make way! For I am the official keeper of the Emperor's penguins,
and I must hurry because his majesty's laundry basket is on fire."
The Doctor, _Transit_

Constipation and The Doctor Kate Orman 2/18/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fv96v$12...@zen.hursley.ibm.com>,
Peter Anghelides <anghe...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>In <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, The Macra Terror <m...@mcs.com> writes:

[snip]

>>"Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or does temporal grace take care of
>>that, too?"

>She's a medical doctor, not a janitor.  Don't you follow this newsgroup?

GROAN

I suppose we're going to be putting up with "grace" jokes for the rest of
the year...


--
__
kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au | http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au:80/~korman
Kate Orman - "A broad too deep for the small screen"

Sex and The Doctor Randy/Jean-Marc Lofficier 2/18/96 12:00 AM
Kate Orman (kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au) wrote:

: We simply don't know. This is one of the difficulties of debating what is
: and isn't true about Gallifrey and Time Lords - we still know so little
: about them. For all we know, they're shagging like bunnies.

Even though we can argue endlessly about the fictional context, we also
have to consider the real world: WHO was designed as a children's show,
the TV equivalent of, say, Enid Blyton's Famous Five.

Obviously, this means no sex *in the book*/*on screen*.  But does that
mean that the characters aren't making love off-page/off-screen?  I don't
think so.  The Famous Five (to continue my analogy) aren't test tube
babies.  And neither is Susan.

So when Pat says we haven't seen any evidence of sex on WHO, IMHO it
proves nothing.  It is, on the contrary, much more likely that a society
patterned after Oxford like that of the Time Lords is awash in vice.  
(I'm for vice, to quote Dan Quayle.)

JM

--
Randy & Jean-Marc Lofficier
rjm...@haven.ios.com

Sex and The Doctor Randy/Jean-Marc Lofficier 2/18/96 12:00 AM
: In the oration <4fokkf$7...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, the orator known only as
: kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au (Kate Orman) orated thus to this newsgroup:

: > Maybe the Doctor's never found the right girl, boy, or model train set.
: > Or maybe he doesn't want to involve someone else so permanently in his
: > hazardous wanderings... it would be very easy indeed to make such a
: > little expansion of the character seem like a natural progression.

And maybe, just maybe, the Doctor did -- off screen.

I don't think Doctor #1 and #2 did it (with any of their companions);  On
the other hand, I'm not so sure about Doctor #3 and #4.  I don't know
about #5.  I'm inclined to believe #6 did.  I don't think #7 did.

All highly subjective, of course.

(This is like arguing Steed did it with Cathy Gale & Tara King but not
Emma Peel.)

JM

--
Randy & Jean-Marc Lofficier
rjm...@haven.ios.com

Missing Person No Longer Ian 'Changeling' McIntire 2/18/96 12:00 AM

And there was much rejoicing!  Eva has returned!  A debate with Jon Blum
concerning the brilliance of "The Pit" has been avoided!  All praise...

<Men in white coats drag Ian away from his keyboard before he
*completely* embarrasses himself.>

Ian "Relieved beyond words" McIntire
i...@po.cwru.edu

"Hide your daughters in the snow, and watch out for the undertow,
Hold both hands against the door, and dig your feet into the floor.
There's no map and there's no clue, of where to go and what to do,
And who to dog and who to ride, and who to hold forever by your side."

Morphine - Mary Won't You Call My Name?

Sex and The Doctor graeme robertson 2/18/96 12:00 AM
Are we talking boy or girl companions here ? (maybe even K9 had a few
interchangeable sockets we didn't get to see ... after all how many
poeple end up in casualty after having "accidentally" fallen onto the
vacuum cleaner while doing the housework naked)

Personally,I always found it highly dubious that Turlough stuck quite
schoolboy outfit after escaping the accursed institution.

Discuss

Graeme

Sex and The Doctor Jonathan Blum 2/18/96 12:00 AM

Oh gawd, this discussion is giving me really bad flashbacks.  I remember
arguing till the wee hours of the morning with my cousin once...  his
theory is that we've completely reversed natural selection now, because
stupid people breed more because smart people have better things to do
with their time than raise kids.  He used this premise to explain
everything from "Hard Copy" to the growing glut of blue-collar workers.  
I gave up trying to reason with him at about 3 AM and just let him ramble...

Regards,
Jon Blum
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"All this time you two thought you were playing some twisted game of
chess...  when it was just me playing solitaire!"
             D O C T O R   W H O :   T I M E   R I F T

Constipation and The Doctor Tre Hellman 2/18/96 12:00 AM
In article <4g4mvv$p...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au
(Kate Orman) wrote:

> In article <4fv96v$12...@zen.hursley.ibm.com>,
> Peter Anghelides <anghe...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >In <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, The Macra Terror <m...@mcs.com> writes:
>
> [snip]
>
> >>"Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or does temporal grace take care of
> >>that, too?"
>
> >She's a medical doctor, not a janitor.  Don't you follow this newsgroup?
>
> GROAN
>
> I suppose we're going to be putting up with "grace" jokes for the rest of
> the year...
>

To which I shall graciously refuse to contribute.

Tre.

Constipation and The Doctor Jen 2/18/96 12:00 AM
In article <tre-180296...@l136.ip.quake.net>, t...@quake.net (Tre

Well. I used to play violin, but haven't in years. Could someone else who
knows music play a grace note for me? Thanks much...


--
j...@sirius.com / jenni...@aol.com
work e-mail: rha...@marinet.lib.ca.us
"Make way! For I am the official keeper of the Emperor's penguins,
and I must hurry because his majesty's laundry basket is on fire."
The Doctor, _Transit_

Constipation and The Doctor Zorak: Lone Mantis of the Apocalypse 2/18/96 12:00 AM
On 19 Feb 1996, Kate Orman wrote:

> In article <tre-180296...@l136.ip.quake.net>,


> Tre Hellman <t...@quake.net> wrote:
> >In article <4g4mvv$p...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au
> >(Kate Orman) wrote:
> >
> >> In article <4fv96v$12...@zen.hursley.ibm.com>,
> >> Peter Anghelides <anghe...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >> >In <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, The Macra Terror <m...@mcs.com> writes:
> >>
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> >>"Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or does temporal grace take care of
> >> >>that, too?"
> >>
> >> >She's a medical doctor, not a janitor.  Don't you follow this newsgroup?
> >>
> >> GROAN
> >>
> >> I suppose we're going to be putting up with "grace" jokes for the rest of
> >> the year...
> >
> >To which I shall graciously refuse to contribute.
>
> Angels and ministers of Grace defend us.

If you ask me, this entire newsgroup seems to be falling from grace.

benjamin sTone
                                                                   
______________________________________________________________________________
--------HE'S BACK AND IT'S ABOUT TIME...DOCTOR WHO COMES TO FOX IN MAY--------
       The Penny Dreadful Players!  http://www.students.uiuc.edu/~t-uhm
In Champaign/Urbana listen to THE WEB 93.5! See them at http://www.webxfm.com
 "Jesus saves, Allah protects, and Cthulhu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich."
______________________________________________________________________________


Sex and The Doctor Ken Mann 2/18/96 12:00 AM
> Nowhere in the series does it *ever*
> >>state that the Doc is asexual (it's purely an assumption on the
> >>part of the fans)
> >
> >'Nowhere in the series does it *ever* state that the Doc is sexual (it's

> >purely an assumption on the part of certain fans).
>
> Exactly.  Both interpretations are equally valid, and Segal and Co. are
> choosing the more daring one.  Drama 101:  When faced with a choice of
> situations, always take the more interesting one.
>
Who drafted the syllabus for this course?  Making the Doctor more like the
vast majority of TV heroes is the most interesting choice?  With an entire
universe of possibilities to play with?  Will every sentence in this
paragraph be a question?

Anyway I thought he already had an ongoing relationship with the TARDIS.
Maybe timelords and TARDISes are the same species but with extreme sexual
dimorphism.  Hence the fond pats on the console and the growing familiarity
with the controls over time.

--
Ken Mann
London, England

Sex and The Doctor Ken Mann 2/18/96 12:00 AM
> His choice of Adric and Turlough may also lead one to wonder about a more
> polymorphous orientation.  But as FU would say, I couldn't possibly
comment.
>
> JM
>

I have all the FU MANCHU books, and I don't remember him ever saying that.

Ken Mann
Si-Fan
North London Branch

Constipation and The Doctor Kate Orman 2/19/96 12:00 AM
In article <tre-180296...@l136.ip.quake.net>,
Tre Hellman <t...@quake.net> wrote:

Angels and ministers of Grace defend us.

--

__
kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au | http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au:80/~korman
Kate Orman - "A broad too deep for the small screen"

Constipation and The Doctor Charles Christopher Hart 2/19/96 12:00 AM
> > > >>"Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or does temporal grace take care of
> > > >>that, too?"
> > > >She's a medical doctor, not a janitor.  Don't you follow this newsgroup?
> > > GROAN
> > > I suppose we're going to be putting up with "grace" jokes for the rest of
> > > the year...
> > To which I shall graciously refuse to contribute.
>
> Well. I used to play violin, but haven't in years. Could someone else who
> knows music play a grace note for me? Thanks much...
Waht tasteless humour

You folks are nothing but a bunch of grace-ist pigs :)

POOKY!

Constipation and The Doctor Michael J. Hennebry 2/19/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fu4h1$o...@news.ios.com>,
Randy/Jean-Marc Lofficier <rjm...@haven.ios.com> wrote:
>: 'Nowhere in the series does it *ever* state that the Doc goes to the
>bathroom (it's : purely an assumption on the part of certain
>fans).

Time Lords do not go to the bathroom, except perhaps to take a bath.
Time Lords, like TARDIS's are dimensionally transcendental. They "hold it"
their entire lives. Every so often their waste containers require
sufficient internal expansion to induce regeneration. Had the Council
made good on its promise to the Master, the procedure would have involved
some rather delicate work with a roto-rooter.

--
Mike   henn...@plains.NoDak.edu
Who is this Mrs. Troi and why does Commander Ivanova keep babbling about her?
                                                              --  Lady Morella

Constipation and The Doctor Paul Shields 2/19/96 12:00 AM
On 19 Feb 1996 09:26:53 +1100, kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au (Kate
Orman) shared the following with us all:

>>> I suppose we're going to be putting up with "grace" jokes for the rest of
>>> the year...
>>
>>To which I shall graciously refuse to contribute.

>Angels and ministers of Grace defend us.

Even Kate's doing it now! I almost responded with a "Grace" joke when
I saw the original post but I just knew that everyone else would also.

There but for the Grace of god go I...

Paul
(Goodness Graceous!)
-----------------------------------------
       Paul Shields    Leeds  UK
        pa...@korova.demon.co.uk
-----------------------------------------
listening to: The snow gently falling
              outside my window
-----------------------------------------


Sex and The Doctor Laurence Jason Koehn 2/19/96 12:00 AM
Ken Mann <K...@kenelise.demon.co.uk> writes:

>Anyway I thought he already had an ongoing relationship with the TARDIS.
>Maybe timelords and TARDISes are the same species but with extreme sexual
>dimorphism.  Hence the fond pats on the console and the growing familiarity
>with the controls over time.

And operating the TARDIS is analogous to making love to it...  :)  That
would explain why the Doctor doesn't like anyone else to do it.  

Laurence


Sex and The Doctor Jonathan Blum 2/19/96 12:00 AM
In article <4g63ht$s...@news.ios.com>,

Randy/Jean-Marc Lofficier <rjm...@haven.ios.com> wrote:
>: In the oration <4fokkf$7...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, the orator known only as
>: kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au (Kate Orman) orated thus to this newsgroup:
>: > Maybe the Doctor's never found the right girl, boy, or model train set.

>And maybe, just maybe, the Doctor did -- off screen.

Now now, Jean-Marc, wouldn't saying that count as...  revisionism?  ;-)

>I don't think Doctor #1 and #2 did it (with any of their companions);  On
>the other hand, I'm not so sure about Doctor #3 and #4.  I don't know
>about #5.  I'm inclined to believe #6 did.  I don't think #7 did.

Y'know, I really think the folks who perpetrated an old zine called "The
Rod of Rassilon" should put it up on the web -- the descriptions of some
of the pairings in that zine would put readers off the idea of sex
between these Doctors and these companions for life.  :-)

Regards,
Jon Blum
(The first Doctor and Tegan?  *retch*)


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"All this time you two thought you were playing some twisted game of
chess...  when it was just me playing solitaire!"
             D O C T O R   W H O :   T I M E   R I F T

Constipation and The Doctor The Macra Terror 2/20/96 12:00 AM
>Time Lords do not go to the bathroom, except perhaps to take a bath.
>Time Lords, like TARDIS's are dimensionally transcendental. They "hold it"
>their entire lives. Every so often their waste containers require
>sufficient internal expansion to induce regeneration. Had the Council
>made good on its promise to the Master, the procedure would have involved
>some rather delicate work with a roto-rooter.

So you're saying Borusa had to regenerate so much because he was so full of shit?

Constipation and The Doctor Sean Gaffney 2/20/96 12:00 AM
>   j...@sirius.com (Jen) writes:
>  In article <tre-180296...@l136.ip.quake.net>, t...@quake.net (Tre
>  Hellman) wrote:
>  > In article <4g4mvv$p...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au
>  > (Kate Orman) wrote:
>  > > In article <4fv96v$12...@zen.hursley.ibm.com>,
>  > > Peter Anghelides <anghe...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>  > > >In <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, The Macra Terror <m...@mcs.com> writes:
>  > > [snip]
>  > > >>"Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or does temporal grace take care of
>  > > >>that, too?"
>  > > >She's a medical doctor, not a janitor.  Don't you follow this newsgroup?
>  > > GROAN
>  > > I suppose we're going to be putting up with "grace" jokes for the rest of
>  > > the year...
>  > To which I shall graciously refuse to contribute.
>  
>  Well. I used to play violin, but haven't in years. Could someone else who
>  knows music play a grace note for me? Thanks much...

Sigh.  There but for the grace of God go I.

--Sean Gaffney
--"You git!  I thought you were dead!  Git git git!" - Benny, No Future

Sex and The Doctor IMNLEN 2/20/96 12:00 AM
If you also look at Millenial Rite (sp ??), when Mel points out that Anne
thought the Doctor invited her to his bed, he was surprised and said that
he couldn't even comsider it.  (I don't have the book infront of me) but
he seemed to imply that Time Lords and humans were incompatible.  The
nanties in Human Nature changed his whole physical being so he could "do
it".

Just my 2 cents
Paolo

Constipation and The Doctor Daniel Frankham 2/20/96 12:00 AM
j...@sirius.com (Jen) spake unto us thusly:

>In article <4g4mvv$p...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au
>(Kate Orman) wrote:
>> In article <4fv96v$12...@zen.hursley.ibm.com>,
>> Peter Anghelides <anghe...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> >In <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, The Macra Terror <m...@mcs.com> writes:
>> >>"Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or does temporal grace take care of
>> >>that, too?"
>> >She's a medical doctor, not a janitor.  Don't you follow this newsgroup?
>> GROAN
>> I suppose we're going to be putting up with "grace" jokes for the rest of
>> the year...

>By the grace of the gods, we won't be. ;-)

Ten to one the Doctor says "Amazing, Grace" at least once  }:-p

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Frankham                                       dan...@senet.com.au
WE'RE ALL IN THE GUTTER BUT SOME OF US ARE LOOKING AT THE STARS  (O.WILDE)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


Constipation and The Doctor Brad Filippone 2/20/96 12:00 AM
Kate Orman (kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au) wrote:
: In article <tre-180296...@l136.ip.quake.net>,

: Tre Hellman <t...@quake.net> wrote:
: >In article <4g4mvv$p...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au
: >(Kate Orman) wrote:
: >
: >> In article <4fv96v$12...@zen.hursley.ibm.com>,
: >> Peter Anghelides <anghe...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
: >> >In <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, The Macra Terror <m...@mcs.com> writes:
: >>
: >> [snip]
: >>
: >> >>"Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or does temporal grace take care of
: >> >>that, too?"
: >>
: >> >She's a medical doctor, not a janitor.  Don't you follow this newsgroup?
: >>
: >> GROAN
: >>
: >> I suppose we're going to be putting up with "grace" jokes for the rest of
: >> the year...
: >
: >To which I shall graciously refuse to contribute.

: Angels and ministers of Grace defend us.

Goodness gracious me! - C3P0, Return of the Jedi

: --

: __
: kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au | http://www.ocs.mq.edu.au:80/~korman
: Kate Orman - "A broad too deep for the small screen"

--

Sex and The Doctor Pat1974 2/20/96 12:00 AM
In article <4gau2t$g...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, ko...@glibm18.cen.uiuc.edu
(Laurence Jason Koehn) writes:

>>Anyway I thought he already had an ongoing relationship with the TARDIS.
>>Maybe timelords and TARDISes are the same species but with extreme
sexual
>>dimorphism.  Hence the fond pats on the console and the growing
familiarity
>>with the controls over time.
>
>And operating the TARDIS is analogous to making love to it...  :)  That
>would explain why the Doctor doesn't like anyone else to do it.  

Well, there's that clip at the end of MTTYITT with Davison fondling the
door lever. . .

t.o.Patrick

Sex and The Doctor HL Davies 2/20/96 12:00 AM
Ken Mann (K...@kenelise.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: > Nowhere in the series does it *ever*

: > >>state that the Doc is asexual (it's purely an assumption on the
: > >>part of the fans)
: > >
: > >'Nowhere in the series does it *ever* state that the Doc is sexual (it's
: > >purely an assumption on the part of certain fans).
: >
: > Exactly.  Both interpretations are equally valid, and Segal and Co. are
: > choosing the more daring one.  Drama 101:  When faced with a choice of
: > situations, always take the more interesting one.
: >
: Who drafted the syllabus for this course?  Making the Doctor more like the
: vast majority of TV heroes is the most interesting choice?


This is a point that bares repeating I think. Given all the modern T.V. heros,
would it not be better to make the Doctor different from them? (And this
is certainly one way to do it) This would get thier attention, and that is
half the battle I would think. ..

Mind you, what do I know?

--

Huw Llewellyn Davies (Hl-d...@uwe.ac.uk).
BTS Web Page at http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/Union/BTS
"Suicide only changes nothing if your immortal."

Constipation and The Doctor R.J. Smith 2/20/96 12:00 AM
In article <4gce52$h...@clams.camtech.com.au>,

Daniel Frankham <dan...@senet.com.au> wrote:
>j...@sirius.com (Jen) spake unto us thusly:

>>In article <4g4mvv$p...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au
>>(Kate Orman) wrote:
>>> In article <4fv96v$12...@zen.hursley.ibm.com>,
>>> Peter Anghelides <anghe...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>> >In <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, The Macra Terror <m...@mcs.com> writes:
>>> >>"Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or does temporal grace take care of
>>> >>that, too?"
>>> >She's a medical doctor, not a janitor.  Don't you follow this newsgroup?
>>> GROAN
>>> I suppose we're going to be putting up with "grace" jokes for the rest of
>>> the year...

>>By the grace of the gods, we won't be. ;-)

>Ten to one the Doctor says "Amazing, Grace" at least once  }:-p

Stop! You're driving me gracey!

 - Robert Smith?
(anything you can do I can do worse)

Sex and The Doctor Jen 2/20/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fuscc$3...@twin.wasatch.com> infi...@wasatch.com (The
Robinsons) writes:

>Ian 'Changeling' McIntire (i...@po.cwru.edu) wrote:
>> Drama 101:  When faced with a choice of situations, always take the
>> more interesting one.
> ROTFL. This comment reminds me of a game. It's called "Telephone".
> Perhaps you've played it? If not, let me briefly explain. One person
> makes up a message. They whisper it in the ear of another person.
> That person in turn whispers it to another person, and so on. The
> result is that by the time you're done, if the message has been
> passed on enough times, it almost NEVER resembles the original message.

Hah! Yeah, I remember a time when this was played at school, and the
original message was something poetic, about birds flying with pretty
wings and then sitting on branches to sing. By the time it went all around
the classroom, it had been absolutely mangled into something hilariously
bizarre. :-)

> My point? This whole discussion started out with Jeff saying he'd seen
> a scene being shot, and had decided not to reveal it, and he "personally
> doesn't like it and wouldn't be upset if it made the cutting room floor"
> This was followed by a bunch of people wildly speculating about a kiss,
> which turned into a romance, which turned into a quickie on the console.

Yes, let's all please remember that it only started as a comment about
seeing something filmed that didn't thrill him, and we all conjectured
that it must be <gasp> a kiss! He didn't say any such thing; we just
assumed that this might be what it was. It's been entertaining to see this
debate spring out of that wee comment. :-)

> All of this is pure conjecture. Now we have Ian here saying that this
> *speculation* is fact.

Bah! Jeff still has made no comment about what he saw. Keep that in mind.
The rest has all been conjecture.

> Ladies and Gentlemen, I think the moral to this story is clear.

Yep. But the "Telephone" game can be enormously entertaining...


--
j...@sirius.com / jenni...@aol.com
work e-mail: rha...@marinet.lib.ca.us
"Make way! For I am the official keeper of the Emperor's penguins,
and I must hurry because his majesty's laundry basket is on fire."
The Doctor, _Transit_

Sex and The Doctor Sean Gaffney 2/21/96 12:00 AM
>   Ken Mann <K...@kenelise.demon.co.uk> writes:
>  > His choice of Adric and Turlough may also lead one to wonder about a more
>  > polymorphous orientation.  But as FU would say, I couldn't possibly
>  comment.
>  >
>  > JM
>  >
>  
>  I have all the FU MANCHU books, and I don't remember him ever saying that.

Castle of Fu Manchu?  NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


--Sean Gaffney
--"Well, I didn't mean to, but these new seat covers..." - Joel, MST3K

Constipation and The Doctor JohnH10337 2/21/96 12:00 AM
Before I go off to shop at Grace Brothers...

"Say goodnight, Gracie."

JohnH

Sex and The Doctor Randy/Jean-Marc Lofficier 2/21/96 12:00 AM
Ken Mann (K...@kenelise.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: > His choice of Adric and Turlough may also lead one to wonder about a more
: > polymorphous orientation.  But as FU would say, I couldn't possibly
: comment.
: >
: > JM
: >

: I have all the FU MANCHU books, and I don't remember him ever saying that.

Francis Urquhart.

: Ken Mann
: Si-Fan
: North London Branch

--


Randy & Jean-Marc Lofficier
rjm...@haven.ios.com
or
rjm...@leonardo.net

Sex and The Doctor Randy/Jean-Marc Lofficier 2/21/96 12:00 AM
Jonathan Blum (jb...@access2.digex.net) wrote:

: Randy/Jean-Marc Lofficier <rjm...@haven.ios.com> wrote:
: >: In the oration <4fokkf$7...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, the orator known only as
: >: kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au (Kate Orman) orated thus to this newsgroup:
: >: > Maybe the Doctor's never found the right girl, boy, or model train set.
: >And maybe, just maybe, the Doctor did -- off screen.
: Now now, Jean-Marc, wouldn't saying that count as...  revisionism?  ;-)

Guilty as charged, yer honor.

JM


--
Randy & Jean-Marc Lofficier
rjm...@haven.ios.com

Sex and The Doctor Andrew Blyth 2/21/96 12:00 AM
pat...@aol.com (Pat1974) wrote:

>Well, there's that clip at the end of MTTYITT with Davison fondling the
>door lever. . .
>
>t.o.Patrick

I think he's taking the piss out of Sarah Sutton and the way she opens the TARDIS
door. (She tends to be the one who does it in most stories) Or he could just be
taking the piss. You never know with PD.

Andrew Blyth


Sex and The Doctor Ken Mann 2/21/96 12:00 AM
In article: <4gfdun$n...@news.ios.com>  rjm...@haven.ios.com (Randy/Jean-Marc
This was joke based on a pretended misunderstanding.  I pretend that I don't
know that FU is an abbreviation and ...... oh never mind.

--
Ken Mann
Supplier of hyenas to the humour-impaired

Sex and The Doctor Alden Bates 2/21/96 12:00 AM

In article <483926...@kenelise.demon.co.uk>, Ken Mann (K...@kenelise.demon.co.uk) writes:
>Anyway I thought he already had an ongoing relationship with the TARDIS.
>Maybe timelords and TARDISes are the same species but with extreme sexual
>dimorphism.  Hence the fond pats on the console and the growing familiarity
>with the controls over time.

Uh oh, I can see where this is headed...

The TARDIS door control story.

Alden Bates.

--
  /~~~|_|~~~\  "So tell me Doctor, where are we going this time?
 / _   _  _ <   Is this the fifties, or nineteen ninty nine?"
/_/ |_| |___.'          - Hewey Lewis and The News, Back in Time.
Alden Bates: al...@bates.wn.planet.gen.nz

Constipation and The Doctor Lorrill Buyens 2/25/96 12:00 AM
j...@sirius.com (Jen), while summoning a demon, chanted :

>In article <tre-180296...@l136.ip.quake.net>, t...@quake.net (Tre
>Hellman) wrote:
>> In article <4g4mvv$p...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au>, kor...@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au
>> (Kate Orman) wrote:
>> > In article <4fv96v$12...@zen.hursley.ibm.com>,
>> > Peter Anghelides <anghe...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> > >In <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, The Macra Terror <m...@mcs.com> writes:
>> > [snip]

>> > >>"Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or does temporal grace take care of
>> > >>that, too?"
>> > >She's a medical doctor, not a janitor.  Don't you follow this newsgroup?
>> > GROAN
>> > I suppose we're going to be putting up with "grace" jokes for the rest of
>> > the year...
>> To which I shall graciously refuse to contribute.

>Well. I used to play violin, but haven't in years. Could someone else who


>knows music play a grace note for me? Thanks much...

Sorry, but I never learned to play an instrument.  (Terrible disgrace, ain't it?
<g>)

Lorrill "Patience is a virtue,/And virtue is a grace,/And Grace is a little girl
who never washed her face." Buyens


 ----------------------------------------------------------------
|               Doctor Fraud                  |Always believe six|
|Mad Inventor & Purveyor of Pseudopsychology  |impossible things |
|       Weird Science At Bargain Rates        |before breakfast. |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|
|"Where did Robinson Crusoe go                |  "On a double    |
| with Friday on Saturday night?" - Al Jolson |     date?"   - Me|
 ----------------------------------------------------------------


Constipation and The Doctor Daniel Frankham 2/26/96 12:00 AM
gaf...@iconn.net (Sean Gaffney) spake unto us thusly:

"See what a grace was seated on this brow..."  Hamlet III iv 55

"There are so few who can grow old with a good grace"  Sir Richard
Steele, _The Spectator_ 263

}:-p

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Frankham                                       dan...@senet.com.au
WE'RE ALL IN THE GUTTER BUT SOME OF US ARE LOOKING AT THE STARS  (O.WILDE)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sex and The Doctor Ian McIntire 2/27/96 12:00 AM
infi...@wasatch.com (The Robinsons) wrote:
>Ian 'Changeling' McIntire (i...@po.cwru.edu) wrote:
>
>: Exactly.  Both interpretations are equally valid, and Segal and Co. are
>: choosing the more daring one.  Drama 101:  When faced with a choice of
>: situations, always take the more interesting one.

>All of this is pure conjecture. Now we have Ian here saying that this
>*speculation* is fact.
>


>Ladies and Gentlemen, I think the moral to this story is clear.

Very well.  I hereby retract my earlier statement and replace it with
the following:

"Exactly.  Both interpretations are equally valid, and Segal and Co. are
free to choose the more daring one."

Happy?

Ian McIntire
i...@po.cwru.edu
"As the days go by, we find ourselves faced with the increasing
inevitability that we are alone in a Godless, hostile, uninhabited and
meaningless universe. Still, you've got to laugh, haven't you?" - Holly,
Ship's computer, JMC vessel Red Dwarf.

TARDIS 21? Man, that takes me back! Christopher D. Heer 2/27/96 12:00 AM
In article <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, m...@mcs.com says...

>One question that was much better than its answer was at one of the
>Chicago cons (TARDIS 21, I think).  "Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or

>does temporal grace take care of that, too?"

TARDIS 21!  Wow.  The memories.

It's a funny coincidence, really, as I've only recently come back to the
Chicago area, and I'm staying with my folks until the house in California
sells.  Well, I go up to my room the other night, and my mother had gone
through some stuff in storage, and dug out my TARDIS 21 poster.

(For those who didn't attend, there were no autograph sessions at TARDIS
21; instead, the guests all signed 3000 posters, which were given to the
first 3000 registrants.  A failed experiment, but still.)

I sat and looked at it and realised that at least two signatures are from
people no longer with us (Patrick Troughton and Ian Marter).

Wow.  Sometimes I feel old.

By the way, you're not the same Macra Terror that ran a Doctor Who BBS in
the north suburbs many years ago, are you?
--
 Christopher D. Heer: Shocked, Surprised and Amazed | ch...@us.oracle.com
 Doctor Who, coming to Fox in May, 1995!  Be there! | ch...@eskimo.com
 My opinions are my own and do not reflect those    | Not just cheer. . .
 of Oracle Corp.  Not that I've asked, of course.   | all tempa-cheer!


TARDIS 21? Man, that takes me back! (---The Bat---) 2/27/96 12:00 AM
Christopher D. Heer wrote:
>
> In article <4fur1n$k...@Nntp1.mcs.net>, m...@mcs.com says...
>
 > TARDIS 21!  Wow.  The memories.
>
> It's a funny coincidence, really, as I've only recently come back to the
> Chicago area, and I'm staying with my folks until the house in California
> sells.  Well, I go up to my room the other night, and my mother had gone
> through some stuff in storage, and dug out my TARDIS 21 poster.
>
> (For those who didn't attend, there were no autograph sessions at TARDIS
> 21; instead, the guests all signed 3000 posters, which were given to the
> first 3000 registrants.  A failed experiment, but still.)
>
> I sat and looked at it and realised that at least two signatures are from
> people no longer with us (Patrick Troughton and Ian Marter).
>
> Wow.  Sometimes I feel old.
>
Your post made me go back into the boot cupboard and dig out my old
T21 poster too...those were the days...maybe they'll live again.

> >One question that was much better than its answer was at one of the
> >Chicago cons (TARDIS 21, I think).  "Is there a loo on the TARDIS, or
> >does temporal grace take care of that, too?"
>
Oh, another question...will Daphne Ashbrooks character, should she stay
on for more than just this movie and actually do some time travelling
be referred to as 'Temporal Grace' ;^) sorry couldn't resist


--
Later-                     ****************************************
Dan Pawlak                          Push the button Frank ...
bat...@mcs.net             If you need me...just send the signal.
void where prohibited      ****************************************

More topics »