3 ms·

They went ultra woke and it tanked exactly as you'd expect.

voidUpdate 17d ago
Doctor Who has been "woke" for a long time. I believe the 4th doctor discuss what pronouns to use for an alien. There have been several episodes essentially about slavery in the 10th and 11th doctors runs. Also you should read about The Happiness Patrol, a 7th doctor episode
- philipallstar 17d ago
  > I believe the 4th doctor discuss what pronouns to use for an alien. You believe it because you've memorised it for such a time as this, but it is not the same as woke "black is white if it feels it is" style feelings. > There have been several episodes essentially about slavery in the 10th and 11th doctors runs Being anti-slavery isn't woke. Thinking that changing the name of a git branch from "master" to "main" fights slavery is woke.
  - voidUpdate 17d ago
    Could you please define what you think "woke" means then? Because I'm working off the definition of "being aware of and attentive to social and political injustices, especially regarding race, gender, and inequality"
    - philipallstar 17d ago
      I think you have to be completely in another universe to think that's all anyone means by that. Are you really so delusional about your own superiority that you think "anti-woke" just means anti those things? It's 2026 and there has been almost 10 years of woke excess. I don't think me explaining is going to do anything for you or to knock you off your high horse.
      - voidUpdate 17d ago
        That's why I'm asking you what your definition of woke is, so that I can understand what it is about new doctor who that you don't like
        deleted 17d ago
        [deleted]
      - rcxdude 17d ago
        That's pretty much the definition that the term started with (arguably it was a bit more general in some sense: just along the lines of 'politically aware and engaged'). It seems to have morphed, but I find that when it's used pejoratively there's not one fixed definition beyond 'I don't like it'.
        philipallstar 17d ago
        > That's pretty much the definition that the term started with No, it started as being aware of issues black Americans were facing. Then it got co-opted and contorted by the far left in America into all sorts of crazy issues.
        joshtynjala 17d ago
        It got co-opted and contorted by the right in America. The right intentionally pretended that "woke" was an umbrella term for "all sorts of crazy issues" that it never was. The more "crazy issues" that they could add onto the pile the better, in order to make the word useless to the left. If anyone on the left continued to use "woke" intending its original meaning, those listening would associate their own thoughts about the extra unrelated issues, muddying the speaker's message.
        philipallstar 17d ago
        It's good that the left has got to the point where they're disavowing woke[0], although they're only doing it to not plummet further into the depths of unpopularity, but to say it was never co-opted by the radical left in the first place is so breathtakingly untrue even they haven't done that. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/18/opinion/woke-liberals-restitution.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/18/opinion/woke-liberals-res...
    - jimbokun 17d ago
      What is the word for when those are the ONLY things you can see in the world, to the exclusion of any other factors?
      - krapp 17d ago
        "strawman"
    - rsynnott 17d ago
      Traditionally (in the modern pejorative sense), it means "things the speaker doesn't like", in much the same sense as "common sense" means "the speaker's opinions".
    - graemep 17d ago
      It definitely is a lot more specific than that. It means, at the very least means having certain views on the causes of injustices, and on the policies required to fix them, and even on how one judges whether there has been an injustice in the first place.
- rsynnott 17d ago
  Also, well, women in major non-romantic roles in the 1960s! I'm struggling to think of another major TV example of that from the time period, honestly.
- graemep 17d ago
  > I believe the 4th doctor discuss what pronouns to use for an alien. An alien, not a human. > There have been several episodes essentially about slavery in the 10th and 11th doctors runs. Progressive in 1830 maybe. In the 21st century saying that slavery is bad thing is hardly revolutionary. > The Happiness Patrol, a 7th doctor episode A bit of left wing subtext and some caricature? So what? Very common at the time. Lots of comedians doing the same. Nothing like woke, not even a bit controversial.
jordanb 17d ago
More like "go woke because you've run out of ideas." The only "woke" thing about Whittaker was that the doctor was female, something they would have done in earlier episodes (in fact, did do) and wouldn't have made a big deal about it. But they had no reason for people to watch Who by the time you got to Whittaker, and the show should have been cancelled already but it was making too much money, so they treated her like a Cousin Oliver and made the fact that she was the First Female Doctor (not even true) into a huge thing because they had nothing else.
- voidUpdate 17d ago
  I think the episode written by Malorie Blackman about some random time criminal appearing during MLK and Rosa Parks' protests would fall under "woke" too, but that was just a shit episode because of bad writing. A competent episode writer could probably have done something better with that time period/setting
  - jvyvinomigg 16d ago
    Jesus now this is one terrible take. Rosa is a bad story? Please. Rosa is phenomenal.
- philipallstar 17d ago
  Probably the fact that in one episode[0] the Doctor's incarnations were actually mostly women except for the most recent few - who obscured this important fact - smelled a lot like "yet another man taking credit for a woman's work". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Timeless_Children https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Timeless_Children
  - jimbokun 17d ago
    I wasn’t aware of those episodes but from that description sounds like people writing the show who despise the character and the audience.
    - 17d ago
nilamo 17d ago
idk, Who, Trek, Star Wars have been woke since the 60s. At this point, it seems more likely that you've changed woke to mean "anything I don't like". Or you watch too much Fox
afavour 17d ago
Staggers me when I see viewpoints like this about Who, Trek and the like. Take a second to consider, maybe it isn't the show's outlook that changed, it's you? Who has always been progressive. Trek, too. If you were your current age in the 60s I bet you'd be railing against Kirk kissing Uhura.
- AvocadoPanic 17d ago
  Yhe kiss wass involuntarily forced by psychokinesis.
TheOtherHobbes 17d ago
No doubt MAGA Who would have been much more popular?

Doctor Who has been "woke" for a long time. I believe the 4th doctor discuss what pronouns to use for an alien. There have been several episodes essentially about slavery in the 10th and 11th doctors runs. Also you should read about The Happiness Patrol, a 7th doctor episode

philipallstar 17d ago
> I believe the 4th doctor discuss what pronouns to use for an alien. You believe it because you've memorised it for such a time as this, but it is not the same as woke "black is white if it feels it is" style feelings. > There have been several episodes essentially about slavery in the 10th and 11th doctors runs Being anti-slavery isn't woke. Thinking that changing the name of a git branch from "master" to "main" fights slavery is woke.
- voidUpdate 17d ago
  Could you please define what you think "woke" means then? Because I'm working off the definition of "being aware of and attentive to social and political injustices, especially regarding race, gender, and inequality"
  - philipallstar 17d ago
    I think you have to be completely in another universe to think that's all anyone means by that. Are you really so delusional about your own superiority that you think "anti-woke" just means anti those things? It's 2026 and there has been almost 10 years of woke excess. I don't think me explaining is going to do anything for you or to knock you off your high horse.
    - voidUpdate 17d ago
      That's why I'm asking you what your definition of woke is, so that I can understand what it is about new doctor who that you don't like
      - deleted 17d ago
        [deleted]
    - rcxdude 17d ago
      That's pretty much the definition that the term started with (arguably it was a bit more general in some sense: just along the lines of 'politically aware and engaged'). It seems to have morphed, but I find that when it's used pejoratively there's not one fixed definition beyond 'I don't like it'.
      - philipallstar 17d ago
        > That's pretty much the definition that the term started with No, it started as being aware of issues black Americans were facing. Then it got co-opted and contorted by the far left in America into all sorts of crazy issues.
        joshtynjala 17d ago
        It got co-opted and contorted by the right in America. The right intentionally pretended that "woke" was an umbrella term for "all sorts of crazy issues" that it never was. The more "crazy issues" that they could add onto the pile the better, in order to make the word useless to the left. If anyone on the left continued to use "woke" intending its original meaning, those listening would associate their own thoughts about the extra unrelated issues, muddying the speaker's message.
        philipallstar 17d ago
        It's good that the left has got to the point where they're disavowing woke[0], although they're only doing it to not plummet further into the depths of unpopularity, but to say it was never co-opted by the radical left in the first place is so breathtakingly untrue even they haven't done that. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/18/opinion/woke-liberals-restitution.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/18/opinion/woke-liberals-res...
  - jimbokun 17d ago
    What is the word for when those are the ONLY things you can see in the world, to the exclusion of any other factors?
    - krapp 17d ago
      "strawman"
  - rsynnott 17d ago
    Traditionally (in the modern pejorative sense), it means "things the speaker doesn't like", in much the same sense as "common sense" means "the speaker's opinions".
  - graemep 17d ago
    It definitely is a lot more specific than that. It means, at the very least means having certain views on the causes of injustices, and on the policies required to fix them, and even on how one judges whether there has been an injustice in the first place.
rsynnott 17d ago
Also, well, women in major non-romantic roles in the 1960s! I'm struggling to think of another major TV example of that from the time period, honestly.
graemep 17d ago
> I believe the 4th doctor discuss what pronouns to use for an alien. An alien, not a human. > There have been several episodes essentially about slavery in the 10th and 11th doctors runs. Progressive in 1830 maybe. In the 21st century saying that slavery is bad thing is hardly revolutionary. > The Happiness Patrol, a 7th doctor episode A bit of left wing subtext and some caricature? So what? Very common at the time. Lots of comedians doing the same. Nothing like woke, not even a bit controversial.

jordanb 17d ago

More like "go woke because you've run out of ideas." The only "woke" thing about Whittaker was that the doctor was female, something they would have done in earlier episodes (in fact, did do) and wouldn't have made a big deal about it. But they had no reason for people to watch Who by the time you got to Whittaker, and the show should have been cancelled already but it was making too much money, so they treated her like a Cousin Oliver and made the fact that she was the First Female Doctor (not even true) into a huge thing because they had nothing else.

voidUpdate 17d ago
I think the episode written by Malorie Blackman about some random time criminal appearing during MLK and Rosa Parks' protests would fall under "woke" too, but that was just a shit episode because of bad writing. A competent episode writer could probably have done something better with that time period/setting
- jvyvinomigg 16d ago
  Jesus now this is one terrible take. Rosa is a bad story? Please. Rosa is phenomenal.
philipallstar 17d ago
Probably the fact that in one episode[0] the Doctor's incarnations were actually mostly women except for the most recent few - who obscured this important fact - smelled a lot like "yet another man taking credit for a woman's work". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Timeless_Children https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Timeless_Children
- jimbokun 17d ago
  I wasn’t aware of those episodes but from that description sounds like people writing the show who despise the character and the audience.
  - 17d ago

nilamo 17d ago

idk, Who, Trek, Star Wars have been woke since the 60s. At this point, it seems more likely that you've changed woke to mean "anything I don't like". Or you watch too much Fox

afavour 17d ago

Staggers me when I see viewpoints like this about Who, Trek and the like. Take a second to consider, maybe it isn't the show's outlook that changed, it's you? Who has always been progressive. Trek, too. If you were your current age in the 60s I bet you'd be railing against Kirk kissing Uhura.

AvocadoPanic 17d ago
Yhe kiss wass involuntarily forced by psychokinesis.

TheOtherHobbes 17d ago

No doubt MAGA Who would have been much more popular?