You have lost me now...
Racism among humans in the 24th Century
- Thread starter Jetboogieman
- Start date
You have lost me now...
Are you saying that discrimination and racism are more along the lines of "adult themes" that younger viewers should be shielded from?
Sadly, such attitudes still exist, and kids are going to encounter them someday, somehow. I think it's better to prepare and educate them in advance.
Kor
I have a 10 year old son.
He knows about the Holocaust.
He knows about the Holodomor.
He knows about the Battle of Waterberg.
He knows about the slave trade.
He knows about trench warfare.
Etc., etc., etc.
And he watches Star Trek.
Please, tell me, what am I doing wrong as a parent?
Children can easily tell people apart from one another - by their height, their weight, their skin tone, their age, the way they talk, the way they walk/don't walk, etc.
There is no reason to pretend that a child won't notice differences, or pretend everyone is the same. Best to help them see that differences don't make a person better or worse, but that we must treat everyone the same, and if we see others treating people poorly due to something that makes them different, we need to speak up/do something when appropriate.
It is also important to help children understand that discrimination is a part of human history, and as the child ages, help them understand how history affects current attitudes and ideas.
"Big picture" discussions are not something that a child should be shielded from, out of a misguided attempt to "protect their innocence." In fact, shielding your children from age-appropriate discussions may in fact lead to them making their own conclusions about incongruities they observe, conclusions that may be founded in falsehood and will shape the rest of their life.
There is no reason to pretend that a child won't notice differences, or pretend everyone is the same. Best to help them see that differences don't make a person better or worse, but that we must treat everyone the same, and if we see others treating people poorly due to something that makes them different, we need to speak up/do something when appropriate.
It is also important to help children understand that discrimination is a part of human history, and as the child ages, help them understand how history affects current attitudes and ideas.
"Big picture" discussions are not something that a child should be shielded from, out of a misguided attempt to "protect their innocence." In fact, shielding your children from age-appropriate discussions may in fact lead to them making their own conclusions about incongruities they observe, conclusions that may be founded in falsehood and will shape the rest of their life.
I think it wil take cheap/free transporter costs for that to happen. If you have a United Earth and can live in Canada and work in Lagos and are beamed to work everyday, then national borders become irrelevant. Today people date folks from overseas via the net, in the ST universe people can date and meet folks around the SOL system, much more less Earth via transporter.
I started watching TOS and TNG in the spring of 1991, when I was 9. I started because my younger brother, who was 7 or 8 at the time (I don't remember the exact date), heard about TNG from a friend of his. It's never the place of the person to diagnose oneself, but I don't think I was harmed by Star Trek. In fact, I always say that DS9, in particular, was perfectly timed for me, as I started watching it in sixth grade and finished it the day before I graduated high school. If it was later, I wasn't watching as much television in college. It's the only franchise I truly love, precisely because it engages with these issues. I think it's an empowering show and perfectly fine for children to watch.
There are probably some episodes of DS9 that might be more appropriate for older children, specifically the ones that deal with the nuance and moral ambiguity of the Dominion War, such as In the Pale Moonlight, or even possibly some of the Maquis episodes, but Far Beyond the Stars and Badda Bing Badda Bang are certainly appropriate for younger children.
Reading this helped me to see some patterns in my son's appreciation for Star Trek. I've noticed he likes those episodes that focus on kids and young people, even those episodes we adults tend to be cynical about: Rascals, Ethics, Valiant. They are stories in which shows kids trying to fit into an adult world, sometimes being naive, sometimes being physically or mentally clumsy in their dealings with adults. These are staples of children's programing: I try, I fail, I try again.
To circle back to the subject of this thread, how would a kid interpret DS9's exploration of race? The most notorious instance, as has already been mention was Jake saying "As far as they're concerned, we'll always be niggers." Far Beyond the Stars doesn't focus on the kids' angle, but it looks like the type of defeatism that should be rejected and overcome.
I am just talking about the TV ratings and censorship, in case it offends.
Have you watched TV in the last 40 years?
Yes, those things happened, but I would not send a child to watch Family Guy's take on racism. I wouldn't want a young child to hear the N-word, but that's just me. I guess as long as they don't start imitating it, that should be fine.
I hope any young children under your influence don't look like me. Growing up as a brown girl in a pink world, forewarned is forearmed.
Sorry guys, I don't mean to cause any controversy....
I'm really not sure what Family Guy even has to do with this discussion... 
I don't watch Family Guy, so I'm not familiar with that show's depiction of racial issues. But from what I gather, I presume it would be comedic and insensitive.
Trek is nothing like that. When Star Trek deals with such issues, it does so in a way that makes the viewer think and reflect and take away positive and valuable lessons.
Kor
I don't watch Family Guy, so I'm not familiar with that show's depiction of racial issues. But from what I gather, I presume it would be comedic and insensitive.
Trek is nothing like that. When Star Trek deals with such issues, it does so in a way that makes the viewer think and reflect and take away positive and valuable lessons.
Kor
Controversy?
I'm just trying to figure out your logic.
I don't want my daughter watching Family Guy period. It's mostly toilet humor, and I've never seen an episode of Family Guy that I've really laughed at. I just don't get it, I guess.
I watched the Simpsons growing up. I feel like it was a little classier at least. And the humor had much better wit, but I haven't seen it in years. If there's time for TV, we just watch stuff on Netflix, but we rarely watch TV.
I think Sisko was simply bothered by the time period the simulation was set in--not holding some irrational grudge. It was simply a time when black people were treated pretty badly and would not have been allowed in. I think it's a pretty normal reaction. There's no gurantee that every 24th century human is going think of the past in the exact same utopian way.
I think a person, especially a Trek character, can be bothered by an obvious wrong that happened in the past, and still be a stable, fair minded person.
Trek characters have always expressed disdain for time periods like the early 21st century. (Like the Neutral Zone) Why would it be so hard to believe Sisko might not like a simulation from these time periods?
I think one problem is that the show never really created that type of environment where the characters just freely talked about things like race, money and homosexuality, while still remaining in the enlightened 24th century. "Hey, I just read about the Asian exclusion act from our earth history. It reminded me of the Bajorans".
Instead it opted to avoid certain topics entirely, so when it does come up, if it ever did at all--it's always awkward.
Sure, you had the generic, "we had poverty, wars and destruction" speeches, but never anything specific. That was the cut off point. So whenever the topic comes up, some fans think things like this just wouldn't come up in 24th century. Which seems really unrealistic, if you ask me.
I think a person, especially a Trek character, can be bothered by an obvious wrong that happened in the past, and still be a stable, fair minded person.
Trek characters have always expressed disdain for time periods like the early 21st century. (Like the Neutral Zone) Why would it be so hard to believe Sisko might not like a simulation from these time periods?
I think one problem is that the show never really created that type of environment where the characters just freely talked about things like race, money and homosexuality, while still remaining in the enlightened 24th century. "Hey, I just read about the Asian exclusion act from our earth history. It reminded me of the Bajorans".
Instead it opted to avoid certain topics entirely, so when it does come up, if it ever did at all--it's always awkward.
Sure, you had the generic, "we had poverty, wars and destruction" speeches, but never anything specific. That was the cut off point. So whenever the topic comes up, some fans think things like this just wouldn't come up in 24th century. Which seems really unrealistic, if you ask me.
Never seen the miniseries ROOTS have you?
Why not? I was around seven when Wrath of Khan came out and nothing about it was traumatizing.
