Star Trek Discovery: The Future is Definitely Female

[F. King Daniel]

You don't test a nuke by nuking the place you wanna nuke with a smaller nuke!

In fairness, they were following the orders of the Sphere Builders, and their intent was "fuck up the timeline as quickly as possible" and their goal was winning that battle in the 26th century.

The Xindi and 22nd century Earth were just pawns in a far greater scheme (which of course was barely touched upon)

 

[jaime]

Yup, overreaction indicates projection?

I think in some cases it’s because English is not a first language. Puns fall by the wayside. Text lacks context.
I mean I was originally going to make a jokey response to your comment about internet voices, something along the lines of looking at my twitter feed and wondering if we shouldn’t be too hasty...or something about the internet meaning we get Trump on Twitter and Sarkesian on YouTube and could we go back to cans on string please. But the joke wasn’t fully formed, so I left it...because it’s open to misinterpretation, especially in the crazy polarised world of the internet.
I am sure we already had a Trek ‘the futures female’ headline years ago, probably on interviews with the female leads on Voyager, but didn’t lead to as much fighting and snarling.

 

[Spot261]

I think in some cases it’s because English is not a first language. Puns fall by the wayside. Text lacks context.
I mean I was originally going to make a jokey response to your comment about internet voices, something along the lines of looking at my twitter feed and wondering if we shouldn’t be too hasty...or something about the internet meaning we get Trump on Twitter and Sarkesian on YouTube and could we go back to cans on string please. But the joke wasn’t fully formed, so I left it...because it’s open to misinterpretation, especially in the crazy polarised world of the internet.
I am sure we already had a Trek ‘the futures female’ headline years ago, probably on interviews with the female leads on Voyager, but didn’t lead to as much fighting and snarling.

Yeah, once upon a time we'd have seen much less of a reaction, much less of a pushback over something innately positive within a medium so superficially trivial as pop culture. Whether that is down to changing attitudes or people simply feeling more enabled to openly express their pre existing insecurities at the expense of others, I don't really know.

I do, however, completely agree that something we might once have seen as simply being harmless marketing hype has become much more loaded and frankly this may be a good thing. Perhaps it means the underlying message is starting to be felt, those who value their bigotry are starting to feel threatened by the realisation that equality might mean sharing the top seat at the table rather than paying lip service in public.

 

[Refuge]

I think in some cases it’s because English is not a first language. Puns fall by the wayside. Text lacks context.
I mean I was originally going to make a jokey response to your comment about internet voices, something along the lines of looking at my twitter feed and wondering if we shouldn’t be too hasty...or something about the internet meaning we get Trump on Twitter and Sarkesian on YouTube and could we go back to cans on string please. But the joke wasn’t fully formed, so I left it...because it’s open to misinterpretation, especially in the crazy polarised world of the internet.
I am sure we already had a Trek ‘the futures female’ headline years ago, probably on interviews with the female leads on Voyager, but didn’t lead to as much fighting and snarling.

I agree about the language thing I hate it when someone is misinterpreted or flamed because of simple communication. It's pretty admirable that some of us know more than one language!

 

[Refuge]

Perhaps it means the underlying message is starting to be felt, those who value their bigotry are starting to feel threatened by the realisation that equality might mean sharing the top seat at the table rather than paying lip service in public.

Good Lord.

 

[jaime]

Yeah, once upon a time we'd have seen much less of a reaction, much less of a pushback over something innately positive within a medium so superficially trivial as pop culture. Whether that is down to changing attitudes or people simply feeling more enabled to openly express their pre existing insecurities at the expense of others, I don't really know.

I do, however, completely agree that something we might once have seen as simply being harmless marketing hype has become much more loaded and frankly this may be a good thing. Perhaps it means the underlying message is starting to be felt, those who value their bigotry are starting to feel threatened by the realisation that equality might mean sharing the top seat at the table rather than paying lip service in public.

I dunno, I think the polarisation can be a bad thing. It’s a leap from ‘hey, some female leads and writers’ to ‘its back to the matriarchy!’ with the humour getting lost. I also suspect most of the interstitial tables would happily pull out a chair for anyone who gets to them regardless of gender....the very top table? Yeah, may have to kick some incumbents in the nuts, but frankly, they didn’t get there because of their sacks of zygotes, they got there cos of their sacks of money and family ties. Kicking every bag on the way there is self defeating...we don’t want to turn the wheel of history, we know how that goes, we want to rip the wheel off and put on hover-skis or something. (Man I can stretch a metaphor.)

Back to matriarchy is amusing on a number of fronts, the most amusing being that it’s like asking for a return to colonialism.... Victoria was Empress of half the world, and I am not sure we want certain Victorian values back, like girls doomed to death in childbirth at a young age after they learn their needlepoint, or little boys dying of horrific cancers after being stuck up a chimney. We would do well to remember that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Of course, that was not exactly a full on matriarchy, but knowledge of that village in the Himalayas that was one hundred percent Matriarchy is limited to hand tickling at dances. Thank you Michael Palin.
Humans. We are a funny lot.

 

[Refuge]

I dunno, I think the polarisation can be a bad thing. It’s a leap from ‘hey, some female leads and writers’ to ‘its back to the matriarchy!’ with the humour getting lost. I also suspect most of the interstitial tables would happily pull out a chair for anyone who gets to them regardless of gender....the very top table? Yeah, may have to kick some incumbents in the nuts, but frankly, they didn’t get there because of their sacks of zygotes, they got there cos of their sacks of money and family ties. Kicking every bag on the way there is self defeating...we don’t want to turn the wheel of history, we know how that goes, we want to rip the wheel off and put on hover-skis or something. (Man I can stretch a metaphor.)

Back to matriarchy is amusing on a number of fronts, the most amusing being that it’s like asking for a return to colonialism.... Victoria was Empress of half the world, and I am not sure we want certain Victorian values back, like girls doomed to death in childbirth at a young age after they learn their needlepoint, or little boys dying of horrific cancers after being stuck up a chimney. We would do well to remember that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Of course, that was not exactly a full on matriarchy, but knowledge of that village in the Himalayas that was one hundred percent Matriarchy is limited to hand tickling at dances. Thank you Michael Palin.
Humans. We are a funny lot.

Polarisation IS a bad thing - in my opinion. I don't see exchanging matriarchy for patriarchy as being anything other than the same behaviour but with the chess pieces swapped. Frankly it's depressing. It just comes down to who is on top and has nothing to do with equality but all to do with dominance. AND bugger humour

 

[Spot261]

I dunno, I think the polarisation can be a bad thing. It’s a leap from ‘hey, some female leads and writers’ to ‘its back to the matriarchy!’ with the humour getting lost. I also suspect most of the interstitial tables would happily pull out a chair for anyone who gets to them regardless of gender....the very top table? Yeah, may have to kick some incumbents in the nuts, but frankly, they didn’t get there because of their sacks of zygotes, they got there cos of their sacks of money and family ties. Kicking every bag on the way there is self defeating...we don’t want to turn the wheel of history, we know how that goes, we want to rip the wheel off and put on hover-skis or something. (Man I can stretch a metaphor.)

Back to matriarchy is amusing on a number of fronts, the most amusing being that it’s like asking for a return to colonialism.... Victoria was Empress of half the world, and I am not sure we want certain Victorian values back, like girls doomed to death in childbirth at a young age after they learn their needlepoint, or little boys dying of horrific cancers after being stuck up a chimney. We would do well to remember that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Of course, that was not exactly a full on matriarchy, but knowledge of that village in the Himalayas that was one hundred percent Matriarchy is limited to hand tickling at dances. Thank you Michael Palin.
Humans. We are a funny lot.

I wouldn't want true matriarchy, nor am I convinced we've ever really had one on a meaningful scale. Victoria may have been Empress but every part of the infrastructure from top to bottom was male dominated.

I do get your point that the conflict could do be doing more harm than good, but what else is there? Positive representation is causing that polarisation, that backlash, should we back off from that ideal to avoid the consequences of the offence caused? Or should we see that backlash as a sign people are starting to take notice?

Good Lord.

Did I say something wrong?

 

[jaime]

I wouldn't want true matriarchy, nor am I convinced we've ever really had one on a meaningful scale. Victoria may have been Empress but every part of the infrastructure from top to bottom was male dominated.

I do get your point that the conflict could do be doing more harm than good, but what else is there? Positive representation is causing that polarisation, that backlash, should we back off from that ideal to avoid the consequences of the offence caused? Or should we see that backlash as a sign people are starting to take notice?



Did I say something wrong?

I don’t think positive representation is what’s causing the backlash. I think the backlash is noisier because of the ‘everyones Voice’ thing we mentioned earlier. I also think think some of the voices on ‘our’ side are also their own form of backlash, and both lashes are misguided sometimes...chicken and egg. I mentioned Sarkesian earlier, because I am...not a fan. And it’s not because of her political stance, it’s because she has a tendency towards lies and sensationalism (specifically, her analysis of older Tom Raider games, her discussion of Lara’s wardrobe, and her total obliviousness over Rise Kamigawa in Persona 4 dancing all night...make her credentials in the area she chooses as a platform to be shakier than a strawberry milk confection.) There’s so much damned noise it’s led to battlegrounds between people on the same side. There should be a massive group of all people protesting something like genital mutilation...but we divide it on gender grounds and end up with battles amongst ourselves.
Years of being told ‘SF is boys thing, and mainly weirdos at that’ suddenly flip flips now the geek is ascendant, and we end up with strange polarisation. Years ago some of us boys would have been tentatively holding out a copy of Trek on VHS and hoping we don’t get rejected, hiding our SF shelves the first time a girlfriend comes over. Now The SF Ghetto sits accused of rejecting girls, or its being fought over by some groups like there’s a war on. Some of us boys and girls who managed to exist under the old paradigm wonder what the heck some of these people are on...angry puppies or whatever they are, pissing ina circle around ‘their’ spaceships like idiots, some of them not even interested except for the fight (ex jocks mostly...) while a crew of fluffy unicorns mounts against them trying to claim land some of them aren’t actually that interested in, except for the battle it represents, appear on the horizon.
I mean, could those two sets please shut the heck up, some of us boys and girls and everything in between are trying to read over here. XD

 

[Jinn]

I mentioned Sarkesian earlier, because I am...not a fan.

By the way, she's spelled "Sarkeesian".

 

[Spot261]

I don’t think positive representation is what’s causing the backlash. I think the backlash is noisier because of the ‘everyones Voice’ thing we mentioned earlier. I also think think some of the voices on ‘our’ side are also their own form of backlash, and both lashes are misguided sometimes...chicken and egg. I mentioned Sarkesian earlier, because I am...not a fan. And it’s not because of her political stance, it’s because she has a tendency towards lies and sensationalism (specifically, her analysis of older Tom Raider games, her discussion of Lara’s wardrobe, and her total obliviousness over Rise Kamigawa in Persona 4 dancing all night...make her credentials in the area she chooses as a platform to be shakier than a strawberry milk confection.) There’s so much damned noise it’s led to battlegrounds between people on the same side. There should be a massive group of all people protesting something like genital mutilation...but we divide it on gender grounds and end up with battles amongst ourselves.
Years of being told ‘SF is boys thing, and mainly weirdos at that’ suddenly flip flips now the geek is ascendant, and we end up with strange polarisation. Years ago some of us boys would have been tentatively holding out a copy of Trek on VHS and hoping we don’t get rejected, hiding our SF shelves the first time a girlfriend comes over. Now The SF Ghetto sits accused of rejecting girls, or its being fought over by some groups like there’s a war on. Some of us boys and girls who managed to exist under the old paradigm wonder what the heck some of these people are on...angry puppies or whatever they are, pissing ina circle around ‘their’ spaceships like idiots, some of them not even interested except for the fight (ex jocks mostly...) while a crew of fluffy unicorns mounts against them trying to claim land some of them aren’t actually that interested in, except for the battle it represents, appear on the horizon.
I mean, could those two sets please shut the heck up, some of us boys and girls and everything in between are trying to read over here. XD

I do hope you aren't suggesting pointless and ongoing conflict in nerddom is a new phenomena, brought about as a consequence of our newfound "cool kid" status?

These issues are obviously much bigger than our fandom, or sci fi in general, they are permeating every aspect of society, including those which have no desire to be permeated. But those are the time we live in, we can't choose that, all we can do is act according to our own principles and try to make that matter in whatever walk of life we choose.

I'm personally not convinced "girls in sci fi" is remotely a new thing, nor am I convinced the old trope of the socially inept nerd really held up under scrutiny. Personally I've always been a confident chap and have spent a lot of time around female roleplayers and comic book fans.

Rather the scrutiny did not exist or was disjointed and isolated,lacking any coherency and leaving the stereotype with free reign in the media. The internet has changed that much at least and a great deal of the backlash has been about the industry acknowledging at long last what was there all along, a much more diverse and dynamic fan base than was previously suspected.

In that model why shouldn't the people who were sidelined for so long want to finally be recognised?

 

[jaime]

I do hope you aren't suggesting pointless and ongoing conflict in nerddom is a new phenomena, brought about as a consequence of our newfound "cool kid" status?

These issues are obviously much bigger than our fandom, or sci fi in general, they are permeating every aspect of society, including those which have no desire to be permeated. But those are the time we live in, we can't choose that, all we can do is act according to our own principles and try to make that matter in whatever walk of life we choose.

I'm personally not convinced "girls in sci fi" is remotely a new thing, nor am I convinced the old trope of the socially inept nerd really held up under scrutiny. Personally I've always been a confident chap and have spent a lot of time around female roleplayers and comic book fans.

Rather the scrutiny did not exist or was disjointed and isolated,lacking any coherency and leaving the stereotype with free reign in the media. The internet has changed that much at least and a great deal of the backlash has been about the industry acknowledging at long last what was there all along, a much more diverse and dynamic fan base than was previously suspected.

In that model why shouldn't the people who were sidelined for so long want to finally be recognised?

Here in the U.K you could get battered by other boys for reading ..well...any books tbh. But S.F geeks were a small band apart in the worlds of all boys schools. And if I had a pound for every time a girl dismissed Star Wars or Trek as a ‘boy thing’ well, I would have...ok not many pounds, but as I said, all boys school. I could probably cover a box set though. That all changes, same way there was a massive influx of female football fans around about World Cup Itália (I think we should call it the David Ginola effect, similar to the Will Carling effect a few years later in Rugby....) and much of that influx stuck around and changed things for the better. Except maybe in West Ham.

I do t think girls in SF is a new thing (ahem, Mary Shelley Wolstonecraft started the damn thing, mor or less.) but I think we all hid in our little corners. Organised fandom, the internet, the breakout of things like the X-Files change all that, and for ten minutes in the nineties, we lived in a utopia and dared to dream of the potter patter of tiny nerd feet, created in the image of parents whose own parents had probably given up hope of any of us producing offspring, male or female.
Then the war came....

Though in America of those days, some of you already had a utopia xD
Over here, stuff was about as underground as pornography. That’s how Forbidden Planet sprung into being about five minutes walk from SoHo unsurprisingly.

I am all for realising we are all in the SF corner, male, female, small furry creatures from alpha centauri etc. We always had been, but lived in hidden cities. Our unification is not going as well as Berlin’s did though. I would like it if the battles can end. There are more important ones to be fought, and it’s a waste of passion and resources.
Don’t like Michael Burnham? Fine. But remember, some teenager somewhere has just pinned her on the wall, the same as ever. Kirk didn’t tear his shirt and get strapped in bondage gear for the heterosexual males in the audience, and I doubt Bashirs fan following was because of his witty dialogue. Seven is an intriguing character, portrayed by a talented actress...but there’s a reason she wore that catsuit. Can’t have one without the other, speaking of which, we should stop ‘othering’ every damn thing. There is no need for an enemy.

 

[jaime]

By the way, she's spelled "Sarkeesian".

Well, she’s less of a cultural figure than Lara Croft, but I feel bad I missed a letter. Wonder how she feels about Lara’s winter wardrobe and her mistakes there?

 

[cultcross]

Of course, that was not exactly a full on matriarchy,

It was nothing like a matriarchy. Victoria faced absurd sexism from day one (even from her husband and his family who imagined he would be King) and while she certainly gained a respected position eventually she was the figurehead of a deeply patriarchal society, in which women were denied even the legal fiction of equality.

I also suspect most of the interstitial tables would happily pull out a chair for anyone who gets to them regardless of gender..

While I'm sure they would say they agree with you, the presence of women in leadership at any level suggests they either aren't as willing to pull out the chair as they say they are, or there are ingrained societal or systemic issues preventing the women from reaching the table at all.

 

[jaime]

It was nothing like a matriarchy. Victoria faced absurd sexism from day one (even from her husband and his family who imagined he would be King) and while she certainly gained a respected position eventually she was the figurehead of a deeply patriarchal society, in which women were denied even the legal fiction of equality.

While I'm sure they would say they agree with you, the presence of women in leadership at any level suggests they either aren't as willing to pull out the chair as they say they are, or there are ingrained societal or systemic issues preventing the women from reaching the table at all.

I was being a bit tongue in cheek about Victorian society as a matriarchy. in very technical terms, she was the ultimate power, much like Elizabeth’s prior and to an extent since...in another sense, yeah the day to day power was rich mostly white dudes. The rich part definitely helped...even in the ‘votes for women’ of the suffragettes, it really meant ‘votes for rich women’. Virginia Woolfs ‘a room of ones own’ would have been a step up for much of the population whether they wore crinoline or not at the time. It was a rough time by modern standards. Especially for those at the bottom.

I think it depends which leadership table tbh...there’s no system in place officially blocking that table anymore. That’s why we are on a second female Prime Minister. Attitudes though? Yeah, there’s some real tribal nastiness that shows it’s face. There’s lines in the sand, and groups have marked out their territory a long time ago. There’s some change, but there’s a reason you can stratify some organisations by gender and racial majority’s (down at our working class end, a little microcosm, a shop will have females at the tills, men stacking shelves, ethnic minority male security guards, and white male upper management, mixed white male and female middle management as recently as a decade ago. The warehouse will be majority male. You dont find many female plumbers or sparks, and male public sector receptionists were about as rare...teaching doesn’t know which end is which, with a vast vast majority of females in the profession, particularly at primary level, yet somehow ends up with many males in headships. There’s just no sense and plenty of crazy territorialism and ingrained prejudices every step of the way. )
At the younger end, and the closer to the bottom, it’s been my experience that people don’t give too much of a monkeys...we’re all trying to scrape enough to get by, and don’t have time to worry if the chief exec who is on more money than most of us put together is a man or a woman...it’s never gonna be us anyway. This whole gig economy thing is odd too...I think I have seen maybe four female delivery people in ten years, and probably fifty times that male.
Which is why I mention the interstitial tables. Leadership tables are the top tables.

 

[Spot261]

Here in the U.K you could get battered by other boys for reading ..well...any books tbh.

Grim industrial north of England here

My experience of the eighties was somewhat less monochrome than yours it seems.

I do t think girls in SF is a new thing (ahem, Mary Shelley Wolstonecraft started the damn thing, mor or less.) but I think we all hid in our little corners.

Agreed.

Don’t like Michael Burnham? Fine. But remember, some teenager somewhere has just pinned her on the wall, the same as ever. Kirk didn’t tear his shirt and get strapped in bondage gear for the heterosexual males in the audience, and I doubt Bashirs fan following was because of his witty dialogue. Seven is an intriguing character, portrayed by a talented actress...but there’s a reason she wore that catsuit. Can’t have one without the other, speaking of which, we should stop ‘othering’ every damn thing. There is no need for an enemy.

Absolutely, there's a definite tendency to sexualise characters in sci fi, although scales are very weighted. For every Kirk ripped shirt there were dozens of skimpy dresses, cat suits and cleavage shots. It's no secret for all the good trek has done in terms of female representation it has been made largely by some pretty predatory and sexist males for much of it's run.

 

[jaime]

Grim industrial north of England here

My experience of the eighties was somewhat less monochrome than yours it seems.



Agreed.



Absolutely, there's a definite tendency to sexualise characters in sci fi, although scales are very weighted. For every Kirk ripped shirt there were dozens of skimpy dresses, cat suits and cleavage shots. It's no secret for all the good trek has done in terms of female representation it has been made largely by some pretty predatory and sexist males for much of it's run.

Ey oop.
London working class. I hear it’s grim oop north. It’s grim down here too, but we have better PR to hide it xD

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Reposting from another poster in the other closed thread:


Interview with Sonequa Martin-Green & Mary Chieffo (Fangirling):

MARY CHIEFFO: What I really appreciated about the story that we're telling is the diversity of the types of women, of the types of men. I mean, I feel it's a feminist piece in both, its male and female characters, that we get the sensitivity of Tyler and Stamets' intellect, and the beauty of Hugh's intelligence and his ability to figure things out that nobody else did, you know and uh. . . .

SONEQUA MARTIN-GREEN: Yea, it's true.

MARY CHIEFFO: And then it's been for me to explore L'Rell being in a patriarchal species. You know, it's—there are a lot of different strong women but they're not strong in the same way.

SONEQUA MARTIN-GREEN: Right. Absolutely. It's like championing diversity in all its forms.

[. . .]

MARY CHIEFFO: Well, one thing that um, has actually been really fun to play with—again, coming back to L'Rell specifically being in a patriarchal species—is what I think in playing her I embodied more—you know she says in episode four, "I live in the shadows, I prefer to work on the sidelines," and um, and she sees herself as someone who is in service of the males in charge. She's powerful but she doesn't realize it yet. And maybe as the audience we're seeing her in a clearer way than she does, so as an alien she also views herself as a woman within the species that she's in.

[. . .]

MARY CHIEFFO: That scene with Tyler—I mean, c'mon. . . .

SONEQUA MARTIN-GREEN: Yes . . . It's something that we discussed from the very beginning that there was going to be a bit of a gender role reversal with this relationship because here you have this man who's so sensitive and so open and so vulnerable, and losing his way, not knowing where he's going and then seeking comfort, and you know, and then you see, you know, the woman in the relationship being the one that's sort of leading and championing, and being the one that is sort of covering him in that way, and I think it's so inspiring to see two people decide to come to that point but—and really do what's best for each other—and again, it speaks to what we're doing on this show in particular because it's very different from what we've seen before.

[. . .]

MARY CHIEFFO: Women power!​

 

[Long Syntax]

I'm assuming if I type LOL your head will explode.

 

[Jinn]

^Lol