Guy in Gown

[Brian]

Withers wrote:

---

Have you seen an episode of Star Trek before? Any of them? They're forever crawling through tubes, up ladders, and over fallen debris.

Some of them also walk around, delivering beverages and having superior officers sign things. Not everyone on a starship is a "big damn action hero".

Only the ones who's names are in the opening credits.

[Withers]

brian wrote:

---

Some of them also walk around, delivering beverages and having superior officers sign things. Not everyone on a starship is a "big damn action hero".

Only the ones who's names are in the opening credits.

That's refreshing. One line out of a 3 paragraph quote. Whew... I'm glad I enjoy this.

How often was Enterprise in a tactical situation? Or a situation where the ship suddenly dropped out of warp, flung everyone on board from one side of the ship to the other, or lost power disabling turbo lifts requiring the use of jeffries tubes for access to other parts of the ship?

I don't have instant recall but I'm thinking that happened at least once or twice, right? Yeah. So they didn't need to be assigned to tactical (though Tasha was) or be "action heroes" in order to be in danger from random explosions (things were always spraying sparks all over the place), debris (I don't even know what the 'rocks' were coming from but they sure lined the carpet every time the ship was hit by enemy weapon fire), or sliced up appendages. By nature of being on the Flag Ship a certain level of precaution (i.e. covering the legs of crew members and enabling them to work more efficiently without requiring them to change clothes) would be expected from any reasonable person.


Summarily- all one had to be was on a star ship assigned to anything outside the Sol system to be in danger from the impracticalities formerly mentioned about the Skant variant. (The use of emoticons was cute by the way. I always know people are serious business when they use them.)

-Withers-

[Brian]

That's also why the Enterprise-D didn't have children aboard.

Oh, wait...

[Withers]

Again, the one-line response, verrrry refreshing. But okay, I can go with that.


Let's start here; The existence of Stupid Thing B in no way diminishes or detracts from the stupidity of Stupid Thing A. Families on board Enterprise D was a stupid idea for largely the same reasons the Skant was a stupid idea only worse in every way I can imagine off the top of my head because rather than putting officers unnecessarily in harms way, having families aboard put civilians unnecessarily in harms way. And before you tell me to "blame the creators and not you" they agree-

Regarding the presence of families on starships, Ronald D. Moore commented "Perhaps [still] on some Galaxy-class ships, but I think this was an experiment that failed." (AOL chat, 1997) "I think that the "family friendly" starship notion was an interesting idea, but one that didn't pan out. There was always something awkward about Picard ordering the ship into battle situations with kiddies running through the corridors. And no matter how much lip service we paid to the "our families are part of our strength" concept, it never seemed very smart or very logical to bring the spouse and kids along when you're facing down the Borg, or guarding the Neutral Zone, or plunging the ship into uncharted spatial anomalies." (AOL chat, 1997)

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Galaxy_class

So, just because they were playing fast and loose with lives in other aspects of the show, doesn't negate they were playing fast and loose in regard to Officer efficiency and safety when it came to the Skant. Having civilians aboard was a stupid decision but this show had room for at least two because the Skant Uniform was a stupid decision too.

-Withers-

[Brian]

So, just as the experiment with children on-board didn't pan out, so too did the great skant experiment. So what's the problem?

(And should I apologize in advance if that response doesn't meet your arbitrary word count quota? )

[Brian]

It's a good thing no one in the military ever works with arms and legs exposed in real life. That would just be stupid.

[Withers]

I just had this very same argument on the last page but alright- we can do it again.

First of all I'll point out that the duties of a Starfleet Officer aboard a ship exploring unknown regions of outer space is considerably different and poses greater risk thanks to the unknown than the United States Navy could possibly be facing atop the ocean, on Earth, in the 21st century (Find me a woman dressed like that on a submarine and I'll eat my words.)

Secondly, look how low that skirt goes- it isn't anywhere near as high as Tasha's or 'the dudes' Skant uniform is and while I find the odds of her wearing that uniform when there's even any potential for a dangerous situation to arise (which on board Enterprise would be practically 24/7) extraordinarily low, it's at least something.

Thirdly, ask yourself if she's wearing that same thing to work in. Is she climbing up things, on her knees, bending, flexing and contorting wearing the skirt or is there a more practical uniform for the job? Since Tasha, Troi, and 'the dude' weren't in dress uniform one has to wonder what the reason for wearing such a uniform might be if there were a more practical version available that covered the potential for more eventualities.

Finally, if the idea of certain clothing items being less practical than others is still some how eluding your grasp, make it simple on yourself; no one would mountain climb wearing a ball gown and conversely no one would go dancing with two casts on their feet.

So, just as the experiment with children on-board didn't pan out, so too did the great skant experiment. So what's the problem?

There isn't one. I pointed out why it was stupid and you threw your hat in the ring to say maybe it wasn't... though I guess you capitulated so what the problem is is a question I should be asking you.

(And should I apologize in advance if that response doesn't meet your arbitrary word count quota? )

No, because I don't have a word count, but to counter- I don't think you actually have a point.

-Withers-

[Brian]

The idea that everyone onboard a ship at some point (not even at some point by your estimation... it's "forever", lol) crawls through access crawlways or climbs ladders is ludicrous. Those areas are for maintenance. For engineers and technicians. Who wear long pants, btw. There are people on a ship who are nothing but administrators, supply people, or in food and beverage service. There's even a barber. Their jobs involve nothing more physical than walking around. And as has been discussed ad naseum since it was first glimpsed, the Enterprise-D is not akin to a modern-day battleship. It is more like a cruise ship with weapons. If you want to pick nits, why not get to the bottom of why flaming rocks shoot out of the walls every time the ship is jostled, not why people wear comfortable uniforms in which to do their comfortable jobs.

Withers wrote:

---

I don't have a word count

Really.

Withers wrote:

---

That's refreshing. One line out of a 3 paragraph quote.

Withers wrote:

---

Again, the one-line response, verrrry refreshing.

It certainly seems to harm your sense of self worth to get terse replies. Maybe this quote-reply-quote-reply-quote-reply format of this note will make you feel better.

Withers wrote:

---

I don't think you actually have a point.

Since it seems to have gone flying right over your head, the point is that you are taking the costuming on a sci-fi television show way too seriously. Especially for a costume that was barely around long enough to be seen.

[Withers]

The idea that everyone onboard a ship at some point (not even at some point by your estimation... it's "forever", lol) crawls through access crawlways or climbs ladders is ludicrous. Those areas are for maintenance. For engineers and technicians. Who wear long pants, btw. There are people on a ship who are nothing but administrators, supply people, or in food and beverage service. There's even a barber. Their jobs involve nothing more physical than walking around. And as has been discussed ad naseum since it was first glimpsed, the Enterprise-D is not akin to a modern-day battleship. It is more like a cruise ship with weapons. If you want to pick nits, why not get to the bottom of why flaming rocks shoot out of the walls every time the ship is jostled, not why people wear comfortable uniforms in which to do their comfortable jobs.

To which I said this (preemptively apparently):

How often was Enterprise in a tactical situation? Or a situation where the ship suddenly dropped out of warp, flung everyone on board from one side of the ship to the other, or lost power disabling turbo lifts requiring the use of jeffries tubes for access to other parts of the ship?

I don't have instant recall but I'm thinking that happened at least once or twice, right? Yeah. So they didn't need to be assigned to tactical (though Tasha was) or be "action heroes" in order to be in danger from random explosions (things were always spraying sparks all over the place), debris (I don't even know what the 'rocks' were coming from but they sure lined the carpet every time the ship was hit by enemy weapon fire), or sliced up appendages. By nature of being on the Flag Ship a certain level of precaution (i.e. covering the legs of crew members and enabling them to work more efficiently without requiring them to change clothes) would be expected from any reasonable person.

It certainly seems to harm your sense of self worth to get terse replies.

My sense of self worth? Don't flatter yourself. It only bothers me to get one line replies because you're taking up space from someone who might actually put more than 10 seconds into a post with a valid point someone didn't make on the previous page.

the point is that you are taking the costuming on a sci-fi television show way too seriously.

This is my favorite argument. "I don't have anything left to say so I'm going to say you're taking things too seriously" We're on a forum, dedicated to Trek, in a thread about a show that has been off the air since I was 8 years old. But talking about the Skant Variant uniform in any detail is where you draw the line? Oooohhkay.

So... did you have a point? Or were your esoteric one liners of such immense gravitas I should consult the Dean at Harvard law?

-Withers-

[SpyOne]

brian wrote:

---

It's a good thing no one in the military ever works with arms and legs exposed in real life. That would just be stupid.

First, none of the women in any of those pictures are actually doing work: the first two are on break, the second is just demonstrating an acceptable uniform, and the third are doing the traditional activity of women in skirts, standing around and looking pretty.

As I said above, those uniforms are vestigial, and they are "stupid". And I doubt you'll find anyone dressed that way on a ship.

[scotpens]

Therin of Andor wrote:

---

In TOS, the controversial mini dress worn by the female crew was essentially co-designed by Grace Lee Whitney, who'd complained to William Ware Theiss that she hated having to wear Sally Kellerman's hand-me-down black slacks in pre-publicity photos and wanted to express 1960s (and 23rd century) femininity by wearing a spacesuit that showed off her legs. (Similar to how womens' libbers made political statements by wearing mini-skirts.)

Yes, the TOS minidresses may look silly and sexist today, but in the era of Mary Quant and Carnaby Street fashions, miniskirts were a symbol of women's sexual and social freedom, much like the short flapper dresses of the 1920s. (How clothing could be considered "liberating" when it forced you to do contortions to maintain a shred of dignity while entering or exiting a low-slung car, I'll never know.)

For TNG, the in-joke was that, this time, the so-called "skant" (short pants that appear to be a skirt) would be worn by both sexes. Several males are seen wearing skants in "Encounter at Farpoint".

Men wearing skants in the future? Naaaah, it'll never happen!

[Therin of Andor]

Withers wrote:

---

Tasha Yar was the effing Security Chief. How much more labor intensive does the job need to be before wearing a skirt becomes a ludacris notion for you?

Did you ever watch the show?

Tasha wore a skant once, in one scene, at the very end of "Encounter at Farpoint", the pilot episode. She was standing behind the bridge rail and most people don't even notice what she was wearing; probably she was about to go off duty after the grueling first mission, and had come up to the bridge to ensure her station was in safe hands.

Every other time we saw Tasha on duty she was wearing sensible long pants.

Withers wrote:

---

Re Uhura: Finally, yes, it was just as stupid for her to wear a skirt as it was for anybody else to wear a skirt as a uniform in an easily hazardous situation and it is as simple as that. When there's a chance for sparks and debris to contact your skin it's crazy to expose more flesh as opposed to less.

Have you considered that 23rd century Starfleet stockings may have some measure of protection?

Also, by your recommendation, no 21st century airline stewardess should ever wear a skirt on duty, since she never knows when the plane might crash, and her legs might get covered in sparks. No woman should ever drive a car in a skirt, because she might have to change a tire in the mud. No man should ever ride a motorbike in shorts and T-shirt, in case they fall off. But, of course, these people do. People also mow the lawn with bare feet. Some people manage to do that every week and never cut off a toe, while others have been know to mangle their foot and their boot.

[Mr. Adventure]

brian wrote:

---

Some of them also walk around, delivering beverages and having superior officers sign things. Not everyone on a starship is a "big damn action hero".

Only the ones who's names are in the opening credits.

They don't have to go commando.

And didn't anyone watch The Crocodile Hunter? There's no action that can't be performed in shorts.

[Withers]

Therin of Andor wrote:

---

Did you ever watch the show?

Tasha wore a skant once, in one scene, at the very end of "Encounter at Farpoint", the pilot episode.

And it was stupid. The fact that they only had her do it once neither negates that it happened or how stupid it was when it did. If anything it reaffirms that the idea was terrible and so they abandoned immediately after using it. I thought it was stupid. They thought it was stupid. Questions?

Therin of Andor wrote:

---

Also, by your recommendation, no 21st century airline stewardess should ever wear a skirt on duty, since she never knows when the plane might crash, and her legs might get covered in sparks.

If you really think there's no difference between a 24th century star ship exploring unknown space and a 21st century airplane that goes directly from A to B...you're laboring in a reality that I couldn't possibly hope to correct and can only say good luck to you in dealing with. Lost only happened once. How many times was the Enterprise in a dangerous situation? Yeah.

Therin of Andor wrote:

---

No woman should ever drive a car in a skirt, because she might have to change a tire in the mud. No man should ever ride a motorbike in shorts and T-shirt, in case they fall off. But, of course, these people do. People also mow the lawn with bare feet. Some people manage to do that every week and never cut off a toe, while others have been know to mangle their foot and their boot.

When did I become the fashion police? Regular people can wear whatever they want to wear in any situation they choose. I could go mountain climbing in ball gown if I felt like, it'd be stupid, but that would be my right as an individual person. If I joined the military, however, and expected them to let me wear the plugs in my ears, the barbell in my tongue, and the giant baggy jeans while I went on duty I'd be crazy wouldn't I? (I don't dress like that by the way- just an example.) You've named off a bunch of civilian activities and civilians doing them. Had I said Guinan shouldn't be wearing skirts/dresses it would be different but I didn't say that; my objection is to their standard uniform (not dress uniform- regular uniform) being a skirt that would be impractical and easily dangerous given the situation to work in.

And didn't anyone watch The Crocodile Hunter? There's no action that can't be performed in shorts.

You really want to bring the Crocodile Hunter into this? Well... okay, look how well being reckless worked out for him. (I'm sorry... I know that point might have been made in poor taste but its the truth. Awesome guy for whom I have nothing but respect but c'mon- touting him as an example of how people can flout common sense and get away with it simply won't fly.)

-Withers-

[CaptainStoner]

Originally, Picard set the policy that males would wear the skant on Thursdays, or "Freeballin' Thursdays". But Riker had a tendency to sit in rather unladylike postures in his XO chair, and Data's pasty legs were too horrifying for duty.