Tech, emailconfirmed, Administrators
37,855
edits
User talk:Najawin: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
→Space Babies
| Line 129: | Line 129: | ||
You've got me curious now, what are your thoughts on ''Space Babies''? {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 23:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC) | You've got me curious now, what are your thoughts on ''Space Babies''? {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 23:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC) | ||
: Pardon my jumping in — I didn't much care for the episode either, but I confess myself baffled as to how one could ''possibly'' interpret it as anti-abortion. The pro-choice parable seemed, if anything, ham-fisted (though intentionally so, I'm sure, that's just how Davies rolls, so that's not necessarily a criticism). "There's a law against switching off baby-making machines, but no structure to support the 'surplus' babies"… it seems pretty clear-cut? The law is clearly singled out as stupid in itself, so I don't think there's much of a reading to be had whereby the law is good but the government is culpable for not having the safety net afterwards. It's very much pitched as "you people passed that self-evidently stupid law, and then you ''don't even'' do anything to mitigate the damage? for shame". I've thought about it from several angles and I really just don't see what reading you and your friends seem to be onto. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC) | : Pardon my jumping in — I didn't much care for the episode either, but I confess myself baffled as to how one could ''possibly'' interpret it as anti-abortion. The pro-choice parable seemed, if anything, ham-fisted (though intentionally so, I'm sure, that's just how Davies rolls, so that's not necessarily a criticism). "There's a law against switching off baby-making machines, but no structure to support the 'surplus' babies"… it seems pretty clear-cut? The law is clearly singled out as stupid in itself, so I don't think there's much of a reading to be had whereby the law is good but the government is culpable for not having the safety net afterwards. It's very much pitched as "you people passed that self-evidently stupid law, and then you ''don't even'' do anything to mitigate the damage? for shame". I've thought about it from several angles and I really just don't see what reading you and your friends seem to be onto. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC) | ||
:: I don't see what "save the Bogeyman same as the others" has to do with it. I ''guess'' the basic "every life is valuable" can be read uncharitably, but that still seems strained to me; it's not as though the Doctor asserts that the machine should be kept ''on'', after all. It's just the difference between being pro-choice and being pro-''A Modest Proposal''. Maybe slightly clumsy but, with due respect to your friends, this seems tenuous enough relative to the earlier, much more explicit metaphor that I would certainly not describe it as ''worse'' than the ever-discourse-stirring ''Kill the Moon''. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
