RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,926
Posts: 5,478,723
Members: 25,054
Currently online: 467
Newest member: DRayTrekkie

TrekToday headlines

Trek Shirt And Hoodie
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

A Klingon Christmas Carol’s Last Season
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

Attack Wing Wave 10 Expansion Pack
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

New Star Trek Funko Pop! Vinyl Figures
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

QMx Mini Phaser Ornament
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Stewart as Neo-Nazi Skinhead
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Klingon Bloodwine To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Trek Actors In War Of The Worlds Fundraiser
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek: The Next Generation Gag Reel Tease
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Shatner In Haven
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Enterprise

Enterprise The final frontier has a new beginning in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 14 2014, 07:23 AM   #31
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

Anyway ENT is tame compared to TOS and tame compared to Gene Roddenberry's original vision of the future which involved free sex for everyone and group marriages.Apparently he wanted earth to be portrayed as a nudist colony. In TOS you had scantily clad females everywhere, including the crew. You had Kirk and the boys attending a strip club. You had all the Kirk bonking (compare this to Archer's "I'm all backed up" talk with Phlox ). In TMP you had a whole race whose only seeming point was to be about the libido, same with the Orions. At least ENT cleaned that little bit of female sex slaves in Trek up with a cover story that sorta made it better.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2014, 07:24 AM   #32
Robbiesan
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

Star Trek: not a show just about warp drive and exploring the stars, but screwing your fellow officers and rubbing them down with gel in the decon room.

What's next? Masturbation? Oral sex?

Fah! We had Orion slave girls. We had prostitution though she was a spy doing scans. Come on!

All that is just junk.

Imagine TNG S05e12 The Outcast. It's a sensitive portrayal about Riker (of all people) meeting an androgenous race and falling in love and romantically trying to rescue her. what do want to see? Them doing the nasty? That's better?

As it stands The Outcast will probably be remembered some day for breaking new ground and being sensitive. The other would probably be over the top based upon her description of how they mated.

Correction: TNG S05e17
Robbiesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2014, 12:03 PM   #33
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

I was disgusted by "The Outcast" - it ended with the "gay" alien being reprogrammed and everyone shrugging and getting on with their lives. What's the message there, send kids to "pray the gay away" because they can be fixed? Let those twisted camps be?

Apologies for the tangent.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2014, 12:15 PM   #34
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

The Outcast is really bad.. Trek attempting to do an issue based episode and ballsing it up. Same with T'Pol's AIDS episodes, though The Outcast was worse.

If someone doesn't like sex in Star Trek, fair enough. Their personal taste. But there is no way that ENT was more gratuitous than.. TOS. From nearly 50 years ago. ENT did not turn into Star Porn or Game of Starsex or whatever.. hardly. It acknowledged that adults have needs (Hoshi, Risa.. terrible convos with Archer.. T and T) and most of the time it was fine about it.

Decon was silly. It was tacky. It was scientifically dumb. It was not the beginning of some sex apocalypse.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2014, 12:54 PM   #35
lurok
Commodore
 
lurok's Avatar
 
Location: Lost in the EU expanse with a nice cup of tea
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

I'm all for Trek sex in its fascinating infinite varieties.

But the sex Trek actually does best due to censorship/restrictictions: sublimated and repressed desire.
__________________
"Anál nathrach, orth’ bháis’s bethad, do chél dénmha"
lurok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2014, 12:54 PM   #36
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

Vulcans, Vulcans and more Vulcans.

Oh we can throw a little J/7 in there too..
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2014, 05:39 PM   #37
Cyke101
Rear Admiral
 
Cyke101's Avatar
 
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

Robbiesan wrote: View Post
Star Trek: not a show just about warp drive and exploring the stars, but screwing your fellow officers and rubbing them down with gel in the decon room.

What's next? Masturbation? Oral sex?

Fah! We had Orion slave girls. We had prostitution though she was a spy doing scans. Come on!

All that is just junk.

Imagine TNG S05e12 The Outcast. It's a sensitive portrayal about Riker (of all people) meeting an androgenous race and falling in love and romantically trying to rescue her. what do want to see? Them doing the nasty? That's better?

As it stands The Outcast will probably be remembered some day for breaking new ground and being sensitive. The other would probably be over the top based upon her description of how they mated.

Correction: TNG S05e17
But you're also assuming that viewers can't tell the difference between love and sex. Riker and Soren clearly had more at stake than the physical. Let's compare that Mirror Universe Kira, who sought almost nothing but the physical -- she never tries to redeem herself through genuine intimacy, and is much too narcissistic to consider the feelings of others. But regardless, there's still a clear difference. And in both cases, regardless of quality of story, the episode didn't demand Soren or Mirror Kira to confuse or shoehorn love in place of sex or vice versa. Viewers should be smart enough to recognize that.

And that's part of the irony that's supposed to make this thread fun. The decon chamber serves almost no story purpose whatsoever -- after all, there's a reason why it fell into disuse in later seasons. No matter what kind of lip service the Powers That Be may give, it's still gratuitous. But for once, enjoying the gratuitous is an option, because removing it from context inversely makes more sense than shoehorning it into an episode about alien germ warfare and artificial drama.

Keep in mind, nobody's bumping nasties in this room. Nobody is sexually harassing each other. Sure, there's some mild flirting, but boundaries are clearly established by the characters as well (very few can shut 'em down like T'Pol, for one). There is no violation of consent (compare that to every time Troi gets mind-raped in TNG!).

Here's the thing -- Trek may be an all-ages show, but it was rarely condescending, too. The expectation, for every incarnation, is that adults could handle its material. If a little bit of skin and nudity is enough to throw off a viewer compared to everything else in the episode (explosive decompression? vaporization? flesh-eating bacteria? all-out war?), then just exactly how mature is that viewer to begin with? There's a big difference between saying, "OMGboobs" and "That is a beautiful body." The former is the mindset of teenager -- inexperienced, ignorant, immature. The latter acknowledges that it's a human being and that there's a certain amount of respect owed, both of which comes from celebration, not objectification, of who's on screen. And yes, it is quite possible to appreciate someone's body without resorting them to an object, because it comes from not being a jerk.
__________________
“You do not use science in order to prove yourself right, you use science in order to become right.”
Cyke101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2014, 08:39 PM   #38
Robbiesan
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

Nudity isn't truly the issue here. I have no problem with nudity. The issue is the writers, directors, and producers deciding that, "Wouldn't it be lurid if we set up decon as a way to show some skin to improve ratings?" To me that's an abuse of the actors.

Is it an abuse to show a shower scene after a difficult inner struggle over some issue, but not actually show anything? No. We are very vulnerable when alone and in the shower, we might actually show our face because of the solitude. That doesn't have to mean T and A.

Is it an abuse to show people in bed together being both playful, sexual, and tender? No, it's a normal human aspect of intimacy, and there's a wide range of vulnerability and emotion besides sexuality that happens within that context.

Is it an abuse to show sexual situations outside of the bedroom? Probably not. As couples especially, who developed a bond and true closeness, people sneek off and kiss, fondle, caress and some nudity might happen in unexpected places because couples find the time to make those happen or they happen spontaneously.

What is an abuse is to set up situations to show skin under a medical situation to allow the viewer to oogle the actors with implied sensuality. Then use those scenes to replay within dream sequences to give the writers an out, but not actually let the actors explore a healthy normal sexuality.

There's a difference between porn and relationships leading to love. Porn is gratiuitous, cares about physical attributes, not feelings. It's largely selfish and about self-pleasure and is disinterested in the Other.

None of which is really about being a fan of Star Trek, but about "give me more". To me being a fan is about having an appreciation for the actors and crew. It's not demanding to sate my appetite. I'm a fan because of a sincere appreciation for what they do, not demanding they do more.

The slippery slope of always demanding more gratuitous situations is terrible because it reduces the actors to playthings, dolls for adults, to satisy us by sexual situations, and actually ends up disempowering the actors.

When you demand a high level of gratuitous nudity, then you set up a physical standard for the actors, for the implication is every actor is going to be utilized at some point to appear nude, and so must have a high level of physical perfection.

So instead of a Star Trek that reflects societal norms in terms of the range of human appearance, the actors will all be prime physical specimens. I don't know about you, but I'd rather they have high acting ability than large breasts and big packages.

One can have both, but why would we expect that it's fair game to demand things which in any other profession would be sexist and lewd and ultimately illegal and discriminatory?

And who in history has paid that price over and over? Women mostly as a result of existing power structures of patriarchy. That's even still largely true with a very small portion of women directors in Hollywood, and a miniscule amount of women controlling corporations. Your way disempowers the actor and reempowers the very ones who abused their power historically.

The conversation is immensely distasteful, for nudity shown in a healthy relationship, to convey vulnerability, and is sensitive about using that method, all can empower an actor. That's why I find the attitude so selfish to raise an expectation to do it any time simply for a thrill. It's shallow, ungrateful, and puerile.

Re: The Other
As an older viewer who lived through the tumultous sixties and beyond, in which love became less defined by society, and more by the individual, I'm more patient about what I expect to see on television. The crew doesn't have to fix society, but usually if thoughtful attempts to deal with ongoing issues within society and to offer some solutions as well as the many voices within that society.

The decision to show brainwashing replicated repugnant gender reassignment counseling that was inflicted upon the homosexual community in fact. Prior to say the early seventies, being homosexual was consider a mental abberation according to the DSM and so people were actually institutionalized for that reason.

Showing that the same thing was actually going on in human society was not saying that was the answer, but the horror, and so was important to the story. It's up the viewer and hopefully the fan, especially the fan who knows folks in the gay community that that was taking place during the historic period in which the show was on.

Can Star Trek go further? Maybe, but not always, for there are always controversial limits, and if Star Trek becomes preachy and a bullypulpit then it's no longer Star Trek. We need to change ourselves, not Star Trek, and not expect for it to fix society.

Last edited by Robbiesan; January 14 2014 at 08:54 PM.
Robbiesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2014, 09:44 PM   #39
gblews
Rear Admiral
 
gblews's Avatar
 
Location: So. Cal.
View gblews's Twitter Profile
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

I recall that as TNG was winding down, back when internet forums were just getting off the ground, the Trek forum at AOL had a lively discussion about the future of the franchise on film. One of the things that was discussed and advoated by many, was the injection of some kind of sexual content. Most agreed that it was about time.

According to some here, I guess it still isn't.
__________________
Duckman: I'll never forget the last thing my father said to me...
Cornfed: "Careful son, I don't think the safety's on"?
Duckman: BEFORE THAT!!!
gblews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2014, 09:56 PM   #40
Robbiesan
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

gblews wrote: View Post
I recall that as TNG was winding down, back when internet forums were just getting off the ground, the Trek forum at AOL had a lively discussion about the future of the franchise on film. One of the things that was discussed and advoated by many, was the injection of some kind of sexual content. Most agreed that it was about time.

According to some here, I guess it still isn't.
If you think I'm one who doesn't want sexual content, then you're making a conclusion that's not based upon my statements. Perhaps you should reread those comments.

It might be that the best future for Star Trek would be on HBO, not the typical networks, which would give the writers more leeway.

The only nudity and sexual situations which I find unwelcome are the gratuitous ones which add nothing to the story and imply sensuality in ridiculous situations.

Nudity and sexual content within norms and not just nudity for nudity sake would be fine.
Robbiesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2014, 10:11 PM   #41
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

I must have missed the decon scene where everyone was naked in response to puerile viewer demands. I could have sworn they were pretty much in gym gear.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 14 2014, 10:30 PM   #42
Robbiesan
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

teacake wrote: View Post
I must have missed the decon scene where everyone was naked in response to puerile viewer demands. I could have sworn they were pretty much in gym gear.
Sure, it's just a Nike athletic commercial, right? Not designed to imply sensuality, only athleticism and art.
...
In the seventies, there was a play by Robert Andersen called "You know I can't hear you when the water's running...". In it, a dialogue between a impassioned director and his producer is the main focus.

The director for artistic reasons wants full frontal nudity by a male actor to intentially show his phallus. The producer states that it's not necessary, merely gratuitous, and likely unwelcome.

It then degenerates into a discussion about the real purposes of showing a real phallus on stage and not being bashful about it. It's really about demystifying the male organ, not as a weapon, but as a point of ridicule from a male and female perspective.

While it's fine to show a vagina or a breast on stage within the play, the director argues that there's a double standard since the penis is somehow frightening. A vagina is considered passive and fine as a result, while a penis is active and menacing.
...
We haven't much changed those beliefs within drama. This is why it's extremely rare to see full frontal male nudity. We're afraid to depict it, and only once in a while will some brave actor in film show it.

On the other hand, should nudity be seen unless there's a rationale for it? Some would like to see it, others not, but from a writing perspective you don't show things on stage or screen unless there's an intentional reason that furthers the story.

And the discussion is timely because of the controversy of Girls featuring Lena Dunham. It is different though, for in the actress' mind, she's not exploited and took offense at a critic asking why she appeared nude so many times. In her mind, she felt that the critic was objecting to her physical appearance, something which I don't think was an issue at all.

Nudity can be seen under all manner of circumstances, and especially if it in keeping with displaying the freedom of the character as they routinely walk about their home.

I think you'd have a hard time justifying the decon scenes from a writing perspective. However a scene is written, it's not going to make sense to the actor, or the director, if it doesn't result in something happening. Otherwise we'd have random blocking on stage like jump roping, genuflecting, pirouetting. You'd likewise have odd instances of costuming for no discernable reason as well.
Robbiesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15 2014, 12:22 AM   #43
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

No one has said it wasn't a gratuitous scene. It's just that some of us don't care that it was a gratuitous scene. The clumsy tackiness of it is what bothers me, not the perv part. Oh and that we didn't get to see Phlox in his blue undies. We got to see his tongue, his toes, his back.. stick that man in some hot pants! I will personally volunteer to decontaminate him
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15 2014, 12:38 AM   #44
Robbiesan
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

Actually John Billingsley (Phlox) disrobed in decon with T'Pol. He'd also brought in a curtain for privacy and explained that not all species are comfortable with being nude in front of others. This being an interesting aspect of a species who displayed a sexual openess even frankness in polygamous relationships.

He did take his shirt off and walked around demonstrating not only a pouching belly but mild gynecomastia. It was pretty fearless but unnecessary.
http://www.trektoday.com/news/210104_02.shtml

Now imagine a realistic decon scene in which not a "hawt" guy is the one you decontaminate, but a rather rotund male that you dislike, while he caresses your body with gel in kind. Welcome or not? I doubt you'd find it welcome. Instead it would be creepy especially if the ages differences were great and the woman an ingenue.
Robbiesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 15 2014, 12:42 AM   #45
HopefulRomantic
Phloxist moderator
 
HopefulRomantic's Avatar
 
Location: feeding the cats again
Re: Decon blue porn. You know you want it

Robbiesan wrote: View Post
It might be that the best future for Star Trek would be on HBO, not the typical networks, which would give the writers more leeway.
For nudity? That would be a big yes, methinks.

But really, add up all the dopey immature decon and underwear scenes on Enterprise and you have... what, 5% of the total four seasons? When I think of ENT, I think about early explorers and scheming Vulcans and Shran and the Xindi war. I think of Archer's reaction to hearing about the decimation of his race in "Twilight," Trip finally breaking down over his sister in "The Forgotten," Archer scanning records of the dead in "Shockwave" while holding Porthos, T'Les dying in T'Pol's arms in "Awakening," Archer making an impassioned plea to the Organians to show mercy to his crew in "Observer Effect." I don't think, oooooh, deeeecon.

Robbiesan wrote: View Post
We haven't much changed those beliefs within drama. This is why it's extremely rare to see full frontal male nudity. We're afraid to depict it, and only once in a while will some brave actor in film show it.
Personally, I think it's because societies are still largely male-dominated.
__________________
"It's late, I'm tired, and there's so much left to do." ~Ernst Stavro Blofeld, Diamonds Are Forever
HopefulRomantic is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:28 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.