There are plenty of us...women, who also don’t want a female Dr. Who, or James Bond
When I talked about ‘ working women’ paperbackwriter, I wasn’t meaning those who have to put food on the table. I’m talking about the people who choose it over looking after their children.
I really don't quite know what to say - this is absurd.
Dr Who and Mr Bond are fictional characters - this is entertainment, literature, acting... a world that is separate from every day life. The 'arts' world is free to express itself in whichever way it chooses - that is the point of Art.
You have a choice - if you don't like the subject matter, you really don't have to watch, read or look.
And if men are so insecure that an entertaining piece of science fiction with a woman as the main character makes them feel threatened, then the problem is with them.
As for "working women" who have to "put food on the table". These women need well-paying jobs. How do they get them other than by entering into the professions, by studying, by taking exams, by getting degrees - by doing the same jobs that men take for granted?
And if they are married with a family, they have to fit this in with those commitments. Which means they might have to employ someone to look after their children.
What you are basically saying - and it can't be interpreted any other way, is that women with young children should only work if they have to, to make ends meet. If they have no qualifications, then what jobs should they do - cleaning, shop work, just the menial work that can be fitted around their duties at home? And low paid work at that.
This is the 40s / 50s mentality - where women were sometimes allowed by their husbands to work for 'pin' money, or to help out with the family budget. Is that what you want us to return to?
Finally, do you have any concrete proof that the children of women who work and are looked after by a child-minder or nanny, are statistically more likely to be the violent offenders?