Star Trek Discovery: The Future is Definitely Female
- Thread starter Mirror Tuvix
- Start date
Oh my, I'm rereading and I just can't believe I missed some posts, lol it feels so like a time bubble or something.
I feel we're often thinking of the future still as a hierarchy, I really do believe so much in things changing. You and I can have such difficulty picturing a world where people aren't competing anymore but we're cooperating instead, and working together instead of against each other. When women get power today we basically have to become like men, so like women rulers are still part of the patriarchy, because they've been part of this whole hierarchical power structure of competition and dominance, and when people today think of a future lead by women (oh it's so going to happen!) they picture a continuation of this old hierarchy, but I totally don't feel that's going to be the case. I feel women will rise more when we abandon hierarchy and we're more communal, and we're working for everyone's benefit not just our own. Oh so basically like the world of Star Trek!
I feel to understand, you've got to first get past thinking of our future as a hierarchy.
I feel we're often thinking of the future still as a hierarchy, I really do believe so much in things changing. You and I can have such difficulty picturing a world where people aren't competing anymore but we're cooperating instead, and working together instead of against each other. When women get power today we basically have to become like men, so like women rulers are still part of the patriarchy, because they've been part of this whole hierarchical power structure of competition and dominance, and when people today think of a future lead by women (oh it's so going to happen!) they picture a continuation of this old hierarchy, but I totally don't feel that's going to be the case. I feel women will rise more when we abandon hierarchy and we're more communal, and we're working for everyone's benefit not just our own. Oh so basically like the world of Star Trek!
I feel to understand, you've got to first get past thinking of our future as a hierarchy.
Well I don't really feel that's a sign of society hierarchy. Like I don't feel in the Federation there is classism in anyway, like an Admiral in Starfleet wouldn't be viewed as a more important person than a waitress, everyone is considered equal in dignity and societal rank, and you're expected to do your best to help society as a whole and I'm not just out for my own personal gain. No one's exploiting labor for his own benefit and advancement, and people aren't viewed as better just because of her position or function. Someone might be a really good Admiral, so she serves that duty to her best ability, and someone else might be a great mechanic, so that's what he does, but both people are equals and neither holds higher standing, that's what I mean by communal instead of hierarchical. I feel the writers for The Next Generation did such a wonderful job to start envisioning that world, even if they didn't really understand how it'd all work and of course it's just fiction so details won't be perfect by any means.
But I feel if you can start picturing that future world, you can start to see more how different it'll be with women replacing men as leaders, but actually as women and not as women acting like men.
But I feel if you can start picturing that future world, you can start to see more how different it'll be with women replacing men as leaders, but actually as women and not as women acting like men.
Please don't be patronised by this but I think your image of the future is unrealistically optimistic but beautiful. Never stop dreaming
It's pretty clear that the Federation is Socialist and Roddenberry was heavily influenced by Socialist theory throughout the 70s and 80s (in fact Majel Barret did say essentially he was a Maoist). TNG is clearly espousing Socialist theory and ideology as well especially in the first season.
This is why I've always found it bizarre that people don't understand how the federation works economically or socially... Socialist theory and economic models have been around for 150 years, just read them lol.
There are distinctions though, even speaking as a vocal socialist myself. Crucially the post scarcity model and (alleged) lack of internal currency would require a reworking of classical socialist models even if we maintain the underlying principles. Certainly current market socialism wouldn't be relevant but the need to maintain viable trade between member states which maintain a plethora of economic models would rule out a complete shift to communal control of resources.
It's not hard there to actually see the federation as utilising a distributed form of state capitalism within an overarching communist structure, but even there a number of conditions would mean the parallels only take us so far.
Last edited:
Conrwell continues the Star trek tradition of asshole, human Admirals, I see no reason to end this tradition based on gender.
In the Star Trek universe most of the men died in WW3 so the women took over...result semi Utopia full of love instructors
Well its taking more than 100 years since 1860 for some white people to get the message that lack of melanin does not make them superior humans, it might take 300 years for some human males to get the message as well.
In the 23rd century the Federation is still a work in progress, its only 100 years old, there would still be beings who remember life pre Federation, which would explain Starfleet's human dominance 100 years later. The 'perfect' Federation does not turn up until TNG
Last edited:
I feel it's not so really the same thing, we're still today thinking of socialism with a hierarchical structure, but I believe even Karl Marx knew it'd only work with a communal society, and I do believe for that to work you're going to need women running it. Oh but I definitely do feel that's Gene's vision, but I'd use the word communal instead of socialist. I feel people get angry when you talk about socialism or communism because they're thinking from a capitalist hierarchical viewpoint that's based on competition and classism and he has so much difficulty envisioning something so totally different where we work for others' benefit and not our own greed and power. You can't have hierarchy without classism, like today so many men don't understand how women are still an oppressed class, and to succeed we have to act like competitive ruthless men (oh please note I'm talking general, not every individual male!) willing to oppress. Maybe I was drawn so much to The Next Generation was how I picked up on their society and just loved it?
To be honest I'm not convinced even TNG actually portrayed a perfect utopia to the extent that is commonly supposed. Rather it showed an extremely idealistic group of talented people led by a charismatic and noble captain who represented and effectively "became" the federation wherever they were sent. What glimpses we get outside of that bubble seem to show all the usual venal, self interested human traits we see today, hence the mad admirals, the surprisingly commonplace criminal elements, the colonies falling into anarchy.
However sexism and racism in their current sense are already seen as anachronistic by the time of ENT, but the underlying instincts still hold sway, with rampant xenophobia shown to any and all alien species. Pike seems to represent a set of views, attitudes and behaviours outdated by Archer's time, or even our own. To my way of thinking he represents a mindset that would have been familiar to the audience of the 1960's, one the show went on to challenge precisely because it represented the real world faults inherent in society of the day.
Just my two cents.
Last edited:
Your two cents converted to common currency usually comes out to like a million dollars.
Er, thank you very much?
Yup - socialism, like most political systems is ultimately about how and by what means wealth is generated and distributed. It is pretty meaningless as a concept in a post scarcity economy. What the Federation is though is socially progressive from a contemporary perspective - espousing equality, social justice, harmony between people, peace, and other similar themes. Although sometimes with a few off piste ones thrown in - 'submit to authority' is a theme that pops up in TOS in particular (e.g. The Way to Eden), but then re-emerges when the Marquis appear.
While I'm sure the Federation wouldn't object to the basic idea of 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need', that is still based on the concepts of labour in exchange for resources, albeit with a slant of fairness. The Federation (in concept, if not perhaps always in actual execution) represents an entirely new paradigm in human economics where labour for survival should no longer be necessary for most people, and resources are near infinite. The biggest problem we have in depicting that is that we have no language to describe it and no cultural basis to work from. Trek just tried it's best and sometimes ended up a tad anachronistic in the process.
Very much agree.
Last edited:
Which is why I'm more than happy that they'd drop it, like how most of the franchise dropped the level of sexism that was in 60s Trek. Pike is supposed to be one of the heroes of Trek, sexism would not really make him appealing.
Unless you're Don Draper.
The "system" to which you refer was simply the actions of a civiliation desperate to save itself from extinction. Just about any species might do something irrational and which might otherwise go against their principles, in order to survive.
Recall what L'Rell told Cornwell; that the Klingons would not stop until Earth, the Fed and all it's members, were destroyed. That is what led to Starfleet's decision to go with a plan of mass destruction. Cornwell was looking for something she could use as a point of negotiation, but L'Rel told her that no such point exists.
The reason they let the Emperor carry out the plan was because she was familiar with Q'uonos and to distance Starfleet from the action.