![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
keep_countingSo, I liked Madge I really did. I thought she was a suitably badass, the plot was okay, Eleven made me laugh and the children weren't annoying: in fact I really liked Lily and I wanted to squeeze the life out of Cyril.
But my main problem with this is the whole motherhood > womanhood thing. Madge was strong because she was a mother - you can take this either in the way that her love for her kids made her strong, which I'm all for. Her response to the guys from Androzani (Classic Who reference! does anything good comes from that hell-hole?) was brilliant and bamf.
On the other hand, does that mean she was only strong as a mother, and not just because she was a woman? (note that for me, 'motherhood' is a concept, or call it a role, not an issue of gender. A man can be a 'mother-figure' as much as a woman can be a 'father-figure' for me). Because if that's the case - mothers = strong, woman = needy, which Moffat tends to give us an expression of - then, because I currently don't want children, does that mean I'm weak?
Sorry, no, but this bugs me a lot. I do believe that a parents love for their children can make them stronger than anything you could possibly imagine (and btw, where was this plotline when Melody was taken Moffat?????? In this view Amy is a crap mother, sorry), but Madge could have been just as strong and determined and amazing on her own, and the fact that she was 'only' strong enough to carry the forest because she was a mother left me annoyed - and the whole 'mothership' explanation was a little weak. As I said above, it's something that can be intepreted differently, I just think Moffat makes it a very bad habit of woman = only wants husband and babies (River's ending anyone?)
As stated above, I don't want children. Not because I don't like them - I have an eight year old sister, and I adore her. But I don't want children, because as of the moment, I want other things from my life. That might change, but as now my point stands. None of this makes me un-womanly. None of this makes me one of those non-existing stereotypes of over-independent feminist that everyone loves to play up so much. It also does not make me a bad person or a weak person. At all. The women = wants babies mentality is way too close to the women = needs to be housewife one, and seeing as this is 2011 (almost goddamn '12) it has to stop.
Back to the episode: I didn't find the tree-people very impressive either, but maybe that was just because I had to watch it on a (high definition though) computer screen. Their features were too... dark? I liked that the daddy didn't die though, even if it was a bit predictable: the fact that it was Madge all along, and the Doctor basically didn't do anything was even more amazing :) and also, Amy fights carolers off with a water pistol. I WILL START DOING THIS!!!
But my main problem with this is the whole motherhood > womanhood thing. Madge was strong because she was a mother - you can take this either in the way that her love for her kids made her strong, which I'm all for. Her response to the guys from Androzani (Classic Who reference! does anything good comes from that hell-hole?) was brilliant and bamf.
On the other hand, does that mean she was only strong as a mother, and not just because she was a woman? (note that for me, 'motherhood' is a concept, or call it a role, not an issue of gender. A man can be a 'mother-figure' as much as a woman can be a 'father-figure' for me). Because if that's the case - mothers = strong, woman = needy, which Moffat tends to give us an expression of - then, because I currently don't want children, does that mean I'm weak?
Sorry, no, but this bugs me a lot. I do believe that a parents love for their children can make them stronger than anything you could possibly imagine (and btw, where was this plotline when Melody was taken Moffat?????? In this view Amy is a crap mother, sorry), but Madge could have been just as strong and determined and amazing on her own, and the fact that she was 'only' strong enough to carry the forest because she was a mother left me annoyed - and the whole 'mothership' explanation was a little weak. As I said above, it's something that can be intepreted differently, I just think Moffat makes it a very bad habit of woman = only wants husband and babies (River's ending anyone?)
As stated above, I don't want children. Not because I don't like them - I have an eight year old sister, and I adore her. But I don't want children, because as of the moment, I want other things from my life. That might change, but as now my point stands. None of this makes me un-womanly. None of this makes me one of those non-existing stereotypes of over-independent feminist that everyone loves to play up so much. It also does not make me a bad person or a weak person. At all. The women = wants babies mentality is way too close to the women = needs to be housewife one, and seeing as this is 2011 (almost goddamn '12) it has to stop.
Back to the episode: I didn't find the tree-people very impressive either, but maybe that was just because I had to watch it on a (high definition though) computer screen. Their features were too... dark? I liked that the daddy didn't die though, even if it was a bit predictable: the fact that it was Madge all along, and the Doctor basically didn't do anything was even more amazing :) and also, Amy fights carolers off with a water pistol. I WILL START DOING THIS!!!
