• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Captain Pike's weird comment about "women on the bridge"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brit here, and a Welsh Brit at that. There's loads of terms that can be used for people from our islands, and some here, get confused too.

British, English, Welsh, Scottish or Scots (never Scotch), Irish, Manx.

As to the Idris Elba question of what he could be described as, I know that 'black' is generally accepted here, and is even listed that way in the police 'IC' codes for describing race ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IC_codes ). However, one term I've heard is 'Afro-Caribbean'. I've never heard it being used in a negative fashion, but maybe someone like @Nyotarules can tell me if it's offensive.
 
It was once English convention to refer to people from Scotland as "Scotch" (I have half a dozen books on my shelves by English historians spanning 1850 to 1960 who use it and I'm sure they weren't alone). However, as I recall (and I could be off by a decade or so), by the mid sixties "Scotch" was being displaced by "Scots" or "Scottish" (depending upon noun or adjective--"Scotch" served as both). As far as I can tell from the preface of one of those books, "Scotch" was not used by Scots themselves, though it has been a while since I've read the book.

I once saw a b&w movie made in the 1930s, or at least well before the '60s, with a cop who kept saying Scotchman, and the subject of this kept trying to correct him to say Scotsman. And the cop meant it to needle the guy. But I have no idea what film it was.
 
Last edited:
As far as the Native Americans, American Indians etc I'm leaning more and more to Indigenous. As far as I'm concerned anyone born in this country after it was named America is a Native American, however, I am not offended by the terms Native American or American Indian because they are normally not meant as a slur. The newspaper my dad got from the reservation used both words. When we get together in a group we might call each other 'natives'.
 
As far as the Native Americans, American Indians etc I'm leaning more and more to Indigenous. As far as I'm concerned anyone born in this country after it was named America is a Native American, however, I am not offended by the terms Native American or American Indian because they are normally not meant as a slur. The newspaper my dad got from the reservation used both words. When we get together in a group we might call each other 'natives'.

Except when it's used in the expression: "The natives are restless."
 
I started saying Native American after working with people who are actually Indians, like from India. It just didn't seem natural to say "Indian" anymore. There are lot of people from India around the urban area where I work but not as much elsewhere in the state. When I was back home I told my aunt I felt like getting some Indian food and she said "You mean like maize?". :lol:
 
What is he talking about? :confused:

It's the same sort of dialogue as Taylor telling Lucius "Don't trust anybody over 30" in Planet of the Apes.

It breaks the 4th wall and speaks to the current cultural context of the audience rather than the future.

f0db145107214e316b5cd2ed643cd1de.jpg
 
Last edited:
Anyway its interesting how limited the writers' view of the future was, even in the 1960's. Perhaps the concept that TOS Star Trek was set in the 23rd century did not exist until later in the franchise.

A note in the cast of characters list in the fotonovel for "City on the edge of forever" says twenty-fifth century. Dunno if that was just a mistake by the publisher of the book though.
 
Envisioning the future, particulatly the far future, is dicey because most everyone is caught up in the perspectives of their own time.

The real problem with Pike's line is that it shouldn't even be spoken. By that time women aboard ship and on the bridge should be commonplace and not thought unusual or even worthy of comment. It just is. Simply seeing professional female personnel working alongside men would have been enough of a statement about the fictional setting.

Later, in early TOS, no comment is made about a woman--and a black woman at that--manning the communications station or an Asian manning the helm. They are simply there and accepted naturally without comment. The way this was done was simple, succinct and the most effective in establishing the society of this fictional future.

Pike's line was an awkward attempt to clue the audience in to the state of the future society depicted onscreen. And it was wholly unnecessary given we had already seen Number One manning the helm with no unusual comment from anyone.

It's sloppy writing. But if you need to rationalize it in-universe then Pike was really commenting on how this particular young woman--Colt--was personally distracting to him such that he expressed his thoughts poorly.
 
A shame to admit it, because I've forgotten and I'd have to check... BUT does he make that remark in the televised bits from "The Cage"? Perhaps we could agree that only the scenes which made "The Menagerie" are canon...

I've often thought, IF ONLY that line about hand lasers hadn't made the cut... we could've made believe the weaponry were always phasers and the pistols just changed their look from time to time.
 
Last edited:
Why?

I don't have a problem with that. I have a bigger issue with ENT completely ignoring the existence of lasers as weaponry. Instead they retconned a name for something that worked just like phasers.
As much as my fandom revolves around ENT as much as the Original, that's true. Obviously because lasers exist and are defined by doing eye surgery or reading data off a disc with. Phasers don't, and they can make shit up about as they go along! I don't exactly see Discovery having its crew running around firing lasers myself... so they either retcon or - realising how unsatisfactory any answer they might come up with will be - ignore it completely.
 
Last edited:
Laser weaponry is already a fact as systems have been and continue to be developed primarily as a means of shooting down missiles. But further development could lead to other large scale uses as well. That makes the concept of spaceship mounted lasers a credible idea.

Hand held energy weapons are also a fact if you accept the idea of a taser using energy (electricity) as means of incapacitating someone. Given enough of a charge it could conceivably be lethal.

Will hand held lasers ever happen? If you are thinking in terms of how they are depicted in popular SF then who knows? But in a sense a hand held laser pointer could be a weapon of sorts--you won't directly kill someone with it, but you could injure their eyesight. And if you blind them while they're operating any sort of moving vehicle then they could potentially be killed.
 
Brit here, and a Welsh Brit at that. There's loads of terms that can be used for people from our islands, and some here, get confused too.

British, English, Welsh, Scottish or Scots (never Scotch), Irish, Manx.

As to the Idris Elba question of what he could be described as, I know that 'black' is generally accepted here, and is even listed that way in the police 'IC' codes for describing race ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IC_codes ). However, one term I've heard is 'Afro-Caribbean'. I've never heard it being used in a negative fashion, but maybe someone like @Nyotarules can tell me if it's offensive.

Nope, its not an insult. I use Black British for myself (born and bred Londoner!) and Afro-Caribbean for folks from my heritage not born in the UK.
 
Laser weaponry is already a fact as systems have been and continue to be developed primarily as a means of shooting down missiles. But further development could lead to other large scale uses as well. That makes the concept of spaceship mounted lasers a credible idea.

Hand held energy weapons are also a fact if you accept the idea of a taser using energy (electricity) as means of incapacitating someone. Given enough of a charge it could conceivably be lethal.

Will hand held lasers ever happen? If you are thinking in terms of how they are depicted in popular SF then who knows? But in a sense a hand held laser pointer could be a weapon of sorts--you won't directly kill someone with it, but you could injure their eyesight. And if you blind them while they're operating any sort of moving vehicle then they could potentially be killed.
The reason they dropped laser was due to the real world limitations. They needed something that wasn't real world so they could have a weapon that did everything the script required.

One shouldn'lt get lost in the minutia. The show was still being developed and concepts were evolving. Lasers, like Vulcanians, UESPA and other discarded concepts are just hiccups on the way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top