Is Star Trek Interracially revolutionary?

[Sector 7]

^The US military was de-segregated by the 60s and 70s... much sooner than the rest of America. You were fortunate to be the beneficiary of this.

[scotpens]

Sector 7 wrote:

---

The US military was de-segregated by the 60s and 70s... much sooner than the rest of America. You were fortunate to be the beneficiary of this.

President Harry S. Truman's Executive Order 9981 ordered the integration of the armed forces in 1948, though the Army didn't officially desegregate until three years later.

Sector 7 wrote:

---

What movie was that clip from?

It's from The President's Analyst (1967). I highly recommend it if you haven't seen it -- in some ways it's an amazingly prescient satire. Wait till you see what it has to say about the phone company!

[Sector 7]

scotpens wrote:

---

It's from The President's Analyst (1967). I highly recommend it if you haven't seen it -- in some ways it's an amazingly prescient satire. Wait till you see what it has to say about the phone company!

Thanks, scotpens. I'll look it up. That clip really hit home with me.

[Hyfen_Underskor]

Christopher wrote:

---

Certainly there's a way to go, but I think we are seeing change with the growing prominence of actors like Daniel Dae Kim and John Cho.

That can actually be part of the problem. When there are one or two isolated role models to point to to suggest change. Those 2 have little to no chance of going further unless the element of racism is somehow eliminated.

The change tends to backslide like the waves at the beach. One of the problems is that racism is a commodity. It sells. So it has to be strategically marketed. And each race has to be worked differently. I think the careful marketing of racism for the most part began in the 70's, but may have started earlier.

Beyond any single ethnic type, I'm seeing an increase in multiethnic casting in general on TV.

After all, the assumption that the "common American male" is a WASP is becoming increasingly less true as demographics shift. We saw that in the 2012 election, when the party that catered principally to white males was trounced by the party whose coalition included just about everyone else. Countless analysts have agreed that the Republican Party can't win any more elections unless it broadens its appeal beyond white males, and if the evolving demographics of the country make that true for a political party, it's likely to be true for a TV studio as well.

The demographics for each race has it's own uniqueness. The reason we see the Black and Hispanic hero role model is because they target those who have their own separate communities (neighborhoods, districts, towns). The Asian community with few exceptions is more integrated into White communities. And the subtle message to Asian Americans is that the White hero represents their role model. They are just not supposed to notice the absence of the actual Asian role model.

[Christopher]

I think you're being too pessimistic. I think the American people are becoming more diverse and more comfortable with diversity, and I think what I see on TV reflects that. Certainly there is still prejudice and racism to be overcome, but I think the progress toward greater inclusion is building momentum, and we can help it along better by believing in it and supporting it than by sinking into pessimism.

[Hyfen_Underskor]

Christopher wrote:

---

I think you're being too pessimistic. I think the American people are becoming more diverse and more comfortable with diversity, and I think what I see on TV reflects that. Certainly there is still prejudice and racism to be overcome, but I think the progress toward greater inclusion is building momentum, and we can help it along better by believing in it and supporting it than by sinking into pessimism.

I don't think pessimism is really the issue. Being comfortable as things are I would say is more the issue, and I think it always was. Being a White male, things are very comfortable for me in the American-racial sense. At least now. There are people today who are very uncomfortable, and the only solution is to push for change. The media as it stands now, has no intention of changing on it's own. It's as comfortable as it was prior to the 60's.

I wasn't alive at the time, but I'm sure Hollywood, and Americans in general were very comfortable with the black-faced minstrels, black characters who couldn't articulate well, and afraid of their own shadow. I don't think there was any intention to remove those character types at all. Those that were uncomfortable had to take action to remove the discomfort. And the uncomfortable party is generally a representative of what is being stereotyped.

Like I think you indicated when referencing Obama, change came about partly due to a shift in racial population. There's always a chance that through time, things may change due to a minority population shift. But that's not to say that another minority group won't take it's place as far as media stereotype/racism.

[Christopher]

^I never said I was comfortable with how things are. I explicitly and repeatedly acknowledged that there are still problems to overcome, so you have no business accusing me of complacency. Optimism is not complacency. It's not the blind assumption that things are fine. It's the recognition that we have the power to make things better if we work at it hard enough and long enough. But in order to make that effort, you have to believe that it's possible to succeed, that the goal is attainable. Optimism is an incentive to fight harder for improvement. Pessimism is an excuse to give up trying.

Indeed, this is exactly why Star Trek was so important, so progressive in its portrayal of equality. It didn't give us a dystopian future, show us how bad things could get, and leave it at that. It showed us a vision of a world where we'd solved our problems, let us see what such a world could look like, and helped us to believe it was attainable. It gave us a goal to strive toward, not just a warning of what we should avoid. And that's something very valuable, something that's far too often lacking in science fiction. Positive reinforcement is a better motivator than negative.

[Hyfen_Underskor]

Christopher wrote:

---

^I never said I was comfortable with how things are. I explicitly and repeatedly acknowledged that there are still problems to overcome, so you have no business accusing me of complacency. Optimism is not complacency. It's not the blind assumption that things are fine. It's the recognition that we have the power to make things better if we work at it hard enough and long enough. But in order to make that effort, you have to believe that it's possible to succeed, that the goal is attainable. Optimism is an incentive to fight harder for improvement. Pessimism is an excuse to give up trying.

Indeed, this is exactly why Star Trek was so important, so progressive in its portrayal of equality. It didn't give us a dystopian future, show us how bad things could get, and leave it at that. It showed us a vision of a world where we'd solved our problems, let us see what such a world could look like, and helped us to believe it was attainable. It gave us a goal to strive toward, not just a warning of what we should avoid. And that's something very valuable, something that's far too often lacking in science fiction. Positive reinforcement is a better motivator than negative.

My apologies. I did not intend to give the impression that I think you personally are complacent. I was making the statement in the very general sense, even including myself. As far as I'm concerned, for all I know, you may be twice the humanitarian I am. I really don't know.

As far as the visionary aspect of Star Trek goes, that's great. But if we sort of look at a hypothetical future identical scenario, Uhura, or the equivalent thereof, we could say would be a product of the Civil Rights Movement which was a fairly aggressive, and necessary event.

The change was very drastic in the 60's, and a decision had to be made. Either honor the request of those feeling discriminated, victimized, and degradingly portrayed in the media, or refuse. Things are getting better, and being optimistic were not good enough in and of themselves.

Now we can resolve that this issue doesn't matter, but apparently it's a very real issue with some even today in our (somewhat questionable) progressive world. Our American society has a tendency to promote personal empowerment over racial empowerment. So typically when an Asian person voices discontent with negative media portrayals, they at times are accused of being personally insecure. It's suggested to be a personal problem instead of a racial problem.

There is still a voice, it's just probably not as loud as it was during the Civil Rights Movement. The question is, what do we do if/when it gets louder? Either we're going to grant the requests being made, or deny them. Is it wise to even wait for them to get louder?

[Christopher]

I'm not waiting for a damn thing. I promote inclusion and diversity in all my writing. But what I see as I get older is a world that's getting increasingly closer to the way I've always believed it should be, and I feel good about that. It's worth celebrating the gains and victories. That doesn't mean you're blind to the hurdles that remain.

[JirinPanthosa]

Star Trek was one of the first mainstream television series to be progressive about race.

But, the message and the subconscious message aren't necessarily the same thing.

Message: Judge by the content of the character not the color of the skin
Subconscious message: Treat everybody like an equal so long as they're human shaped, are pleasing to the human eye, and think the same way we do

[Christopher]

JirinPanthosa wrote:

---

But, the message and the subconscious message aren't necessarily the same thing.

Message: Judge by the content of the character not the color of the skin
Subconscious message: Treat everybody like an equal so long as they're human shaped, are pleasing to the human eye, and think the same way we do

I think you're forgetting episodes like "The Devil in the Dark" there.

[Hyfen_Underskor]

Christopher wrote:

---

I'm not waiting for a damn thing.

I meant in this in a general sense.

I promote inclusion and diversity in all my writing. But what I see as I get older is a world that's getting increasingly closer to the way I've always believed it should be, and I feel good about that. It's worth celebrating the gains and victories. That doesn't mean you're blind to the hurdles that remain.

I don't think inclusion has ever really been that much of a problem. Hollywood movies have always included ethnic minorities.

I'm not going to refer to your personal writings, but whatever form of Star Trek media has taken the place of the now defunct TV series format (movies, books, comics, etc.).

Why not a black male starship commander, with a white female love interest? Why not an Asian male starship commander, with a white (or Asian female) love interest? I admit, I don't read Star Trek literature, but I would gladly pick up a copy of an ST book or comic if anyone tries to break the common mold. Why not the all-American work in the engine room, and have the one with the thick Scottish or Russian accent command the ship?

Ever notice how humorous it appears when we see a futuristic movie from the 50's that's supposed to take place in the 70's, and everyone is still wearing a crew cut or a grease job? "If it's the 70's, where are the bell-bottoms"? Or a futuristic movie made in the 70's that's supposed to take place in the 90's or the new millenium, and then it becomes "what's with the bell-bottoms"? Well if ST represents the future, 24th century or what have you, why not break some 2003 stereotypes along with it?

[Christopher]

Hyfen_Underskor wrote:

---

Why not a black male starship commander, with a white female love interest? Why not an Asian male starship commander, with a white (or Asian female) love interest? I admit, I don't read Star Trek literature, but I would gladly pick up a copy of an ST book or comic if anyone tries to break the common mold.

For your information, the Trek novelists have taken diversity a lot farther than the shows ever did -- for instance, there have been dozens of LGBT characters in Trek Lit, and crews with more alien and nonhumanoid members. And the current TNG command crew in the novels is more than half female. So interracial romances are a snap. For us, that kind of diversity is "the common mold." Let's see, the lead character of the first few Vanguard novels was a Latino man with an Indian lover (South Asian, that is). Those novels also featured a USS Endeavour whose captain was a man named Zhao Sheng and whose first officer, later captain, was a woman named Atish Khatami, as well as the Lovell, an SCE ship captained by Daniel Okagawa. In the Titan novel series, the science officer Jaza Najem, who was a "black" Bajoran, was briefly involved with first officer Christine Vale, who's Caucasian. In my own post-TMP fiction, I've had Sulu get romantically involved with Chief DiFalco, the relief helmswoman from TMP, who's Italian. I also have a mixed-race lesbian couple in The Buried Age. In the novels, Geordi LaForge has recently been involved with a woman named Tamala Harstad, a fair-skinned woman who resembled a dark-haired Tasha Yar (and let's not forget there was a hint of La Forge-Yar flirtation in "The Naked Now"), though there was one novel, Indistinguishable from Magic, wherein he briefly became a captain and got romantically involved with Leah Brahms. And this is very far from an exhaustive list; it's just what I can remember at the moment.

Why not the all-American work in the engine room, and have the one with the thick Scottish or Russian accent command the ship?

In the Corps of Engineers series, the ship's captain is an elderly Jewish man. His first officer and SCE team leader is Sonya Gomez from TNG. The ship's own chief engineer for most of the series' run is a woman named Nancy Conlon, who later went on to become Voyager's chief engineer in that series' novels. In Vanguard, the captain of the Sagittarius is Adelard Nassir (a Deltan whom the series' creator modeled on Ben Kingsley) and the chief engineer is Mike Ilucci (whom the creator modeled on Jack Black).

Well if ST represents the future, 24th century or what have you, why not break some 2003 stereotypes along with it?

Which is exactly what I and my Trek-Lit colleagues have been doing for many years. We're way, way ahead of you.

[E-DUB]

The first interracial same-sex kiss was between Dan Ackroyd and Garret Morris, although Morris was dressed as a woman at the time.

[MacLeod]

Hyfen_Underskor wrote:

---

I meant in this in a general sense.

I don't think inclusion has ever really been that much of a problem. Hollywood movies have always included ethnic minorities.

I'm not going to refer to your personal writings, but whatever form of Star Trek media has taken the place of the now defunct TV series format (movies, books, comics, etc.).

Why not a black male starship commander, with a white female love interest? Why not an Asian male starship commander, with a white (or Asian female) love interest? I admit, I don't read Star Trek literature, but I would gladly pick up a copy of an ST book or comic if anyone tries to break the common mold. Why not the all-American work in the engine room, and have the one with the thick Scottish or Russian accent command the ship?

We'll we had a French Captain (albeit with a British accent) command the Enterprise in TNG. Riker was about the only American Character in the main cast. And Sisko was black and a Starbase/starship Commander. If you go further into fan creations such as a PBEM's you see a wide diversity of Characters.