fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #5523 ]

[ SECRET POST #5523 ]

⌈ Secret Post #5523 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08. [SPOILERS for Encanto]

__________________________________________________

09. [SPOILERS for Head AS Code and Birth ME Code]

__________________________________________________

10. [WARNING for discussion of abuse/sexual harassment/etc]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 16 secrets from Secret Submission Post #790.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

10. [WARNING for discussion of abuse/sexual harassment/etc]
https://i.imgur.com/xKctvWU.jpeg

It's clear that there was a lot of backstage politics on the first season of New Who, it's clear that RTD did some things that were vindictive, and it's clear that people in charge should have stopped Barrowman from taking his dick out. That's obviously bad. If you don't want to watch stuff made by people who have done those things, that's a choice that's up to you to make.

The thing I'm not sure I agree with is, your secret frames it as though that's who RTD is right now: "he's clearly shit at running things and an extremely vindictive person". And I don't know whether or not that's true. He's done a lot of television since leaving Who and I haven't heard anything to suggest that those productions have had major issues. He had those issues on the early seasons of his Who run, but I don't know if it's accurate to say that those things are still true of him now.

True, but this is the internet and no one forgives. Nor forgets. But especially not forgives. Celebrities aren't allowed to grow or change, they will always be seen as only the sum of their mistakes and bad choices. (sigh)

I hate cancel culture. They don't care about rehabilitation, just making everybody that they want to vanish, vanish.

Not just vanish--grovel. Confess to untold wrongdoing. Be torn down so completely that the rest of us who are Good and Pure and Free of Sin can see them as the example they are.

It's bizarre.

It's not bizarre, it's very human just not in a good way. It's also a technique that has been used by many of the worst regimes in history (the witch hunts, the Spanish Inquisition). Break them down, make them grovel, but they're still going to die (socially) anyway. The only difference is it's happening online with only emotional and psychological repercussions not physical, so people can't see it clearly.

Very true. I wish the term "witch hunt" wasn't so watered down these days, because I've studied the actual historical periods in depth, the way online mobs work is REALLY similar to how the trials tended to go (particularly in Salem, where we can look directly at trial records and see some incredible similarities in the "logic" being used by persecutors)

The difference is that online mobs have not got the legal force of law behind them, which Salem and the various European literal witch trials, in fact, did. Online mobs are gossipy nonsense. Unpleasant, but not mob violence much less mob rule.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2022-02-19 19:21 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2022-02-19 21:40 (UTC) - Expand

I would be very surprised if anything bad happened during things like It's a Sin considering that was a very personal project, I've not heard anything.

Obviously I don't mean you need a personal project to not be a dick, though Doctor Who was pretty personal to him as well as basically a life-long fan.

I think it can be both true that he's maybe better now and really fucked up in the past. I don't have anything off the top of my head in the way of clarification, acknowledgement or apologies for what happened in mid 00s Doctor Who though, so that might be why some people are still wary.

Although to be fair, he wouldn't be the only man who let things slide even without any malice. I love David Tennant for example, he's usually pretty switched on, but did he say anything at the time about John Barrowman flashing people? If he even knew it was happening of course.

I can't find the link right now, but DT's position is that since JB received a formal reprimand for his behaviour during the second season of Torchwood, and that JB knocked it off, so he wasn't prepared to discuss it.

That seems pretty reasonable and like exactly what I would say if gossip-hungry media were hounding me to comment on my former colleague's former flashing habit, tbh

I actually had vague recollections of similar with Tennant. To be honest, I don't blame him for not wanting to discuss it seeing as even if you explicitly condemn the behaviour even in retrospect, there sometimes seems to be a "gotcha" element to questioning anyone who was around at the time.

Even if he could use his power as the star, he wasn't necessarily THE most powerful person there I guess?

Doctor Who was really Tennant's big break out role, he'd been mostly a bit or indie actor before that, can't blame him for not feeling confident about rocking the boat too much at that point in his career.

Would you care to share your sources, please OP? Or give some indications on what kind of proofs you have at least? Because, knowing how easily some of the more extreme antis (not saying you are one) can spread so called "well-documented" misinformations (straight up making things up or taking them way out of context or acting like rumors are facts) about a celebrity they hate, then spread those misinformations and let others, often those that also dislike this celebrity but are more honnest, that what they're saying is the truth, I can't help but feel cautious about this secret. Even if I don't believe you're lying. I still would prefer to double check. One of the point I'm most curious about is the other main actor who was harrassing the crew sexually. The first one is John Barrowman. Christopher Ecclecston is the one who was supposedly fired for speaking against it, so it couldn't have been him. At the time, the only other main actor was Billie Pipper, with Camille Coduri and Noel Clarke as secondary character. I can't see any of them doing that.

Didn't hear about Noel Clarke?

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/apr/29/actor-noel-clarke-accused-of-groping-harassment-and-bullying-by-20-women

Thank you for the information. I'm verry sorry to hear about what Noel Clarke did. I'll read The Guardian (not a fan of this magazine)'s article later. I asked because I didn't have the time to do a lot of researches (I was in the middle of my exams) and didn't know where to begin with. I'm not in a country where Noel Clarke is talked about a lot, so no, I didn't know about all of this.

Noel Clarke has been credibly accused of sexual harrasment by over 20 women, as well as other credible bullying allegations by other cast and crew, including basically destroying the career of actor Adam Deacon. Clarke has basically done a "sorry if you were offended" faux-pology and is "working on himself" - yet it's not even a year since this kicked off in the UK press and he's trying to make a comeback with a self-justifying documentary about how it's so unfair that he's been cancelled. So yeah, he would do that.

This. I get ayrt wanting to be more informed about RTD before making any kind of judgment. But maybe they should have done some of their own research before making this comment, and then they would have easily found out about Clarke. “I can’t see any of them doing that” my ass.

is that what the she looks tired" line was about? Why would he... essentially criticize his own behaviour on the show?

He wasn't. He was justifying it.

Huh. I haven't watched Doctor Who in a very long time, but I do have that moment very firmly imprinted in my mind as a brilliant "the main character is doing something terrible, and you understand it and sympathize but it's still terrible" moment. Could be accidental, I suppose! But I think I'd have to read the details of the incident and rewatch the episode to be sure, which tbh I am probably not interested enough to do...

Textually the way that the storyline ends up playing out on the show is that this line is an example of the Doctor's hubris and ultimately (indirectly) leads to his regeneration, no?

No. That interpretation assumes that Harriet would have been anything more than a road bump on The Master's quest for revenge. No matter who was in the PM's chair when The Master set out to use the Doctor's favorite country on his favorite planet to hurt him, they were doomed. If anything, The Doctor saved Harriet's life. Plus, since Harriet herself invited him to come solve the world's problems for her, she had no right to object to how he did it. The Doctor was Judge Judy, and Harriet was the disgruntled plaintiff who was upset she didn't get all she wanted and got smacked down.

Back in the day, an aide mentioned that Margaret Thatcher looked tired. Many have drawn a direct line between that and the challenge to her leadership that ended her career as Prime Minister. RTD himself has cited this as what he was thinking of when he created this moment of the Doctor being incredibly awful to Harriet Jones (and, you know, democracy of a sovereign nation, but whatever).

Has there been complaints about him in recent years? I know he's been working on shows like its a sin so its not like RTD has done nothing since doctor who.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only