Kira Nerys - one of the best Trek characters ever?

[Bad Thoughts]

When the major critique is the character isn't sufficiency chaste, we can dismiss the critique out of hand.

 

[Tosk]

although she presented to audience with more different lovers/love interests than the others.

Bareil, Shakaar, Odo. That is all the lovers she had. She was attracted to Tom Riker, and subconsciously to Bashir but neither were lovers. I'll give you Mirror Bareil, even though that's a weird grey area where a big part of it is her feelings for the deceased Bareil.

Plus, Gul Dukat's constantly flirting

Are you suggesting that we count the constant unwanted flirtations of an "opportunistic, power hungry dictator" as being one of Kira's lovers? Either you're joking or I'm misreading.

How many lovers/affairs have Seven and T'Pol together?

I honestly don't know. But I also don't see the point. If another female character has zero lovers, how does that make any difference to Kira? I could list off other Trek characters who had both more lovers than Kira and fewer (and the list would include males and females) ...but it doesn't make one iota of difference. A persons character is not measured by the number of people they have slept with.

A strong and self confident woman has no problem with taking a man as an equal partner who is not alpha or not kind of useful for her position.

Sorry, I have no idea what that means. Are you saying that Kira would only be strong if she took lovers that were not so-called alpha males? If so...why? I disagree with the notion, but even if I didn't, I really don't think Bareil and Odo were alphas. (I don't recall Shakaar well enough to say for sure.)

 

[Bad Thoughts]

-I never like the religious fundamentalist people, so most of Bajorans, their pointless Gods, Emissaries, Kais and Kira. She was not less radical than Kai Winn. Kai Winn believed only power and utilized the religion for her issue. Kira never asked, if a priest has to have such kind of power, her problem was about an temporary owner of this power. The people who obsessed with their religion/nation/ ideology/ whatsoever tended to being dangerous for the rest of the society. As I understand not the Cardassian Occupation made them so fundamentalist (which can be a reason for a deep trauma, but it doesn't make them better) furthermore they were always like this.

Kira wasn't a fundamentalist. Check you definitions.

-I never like the people who doesn't know who they are. Kira called herself more than once terrorist, how can be a person who fights for survive during the genocide call herself as a terrorist? Who terrorize whom? Self defend is not a crime or terrorism. If you don't believe what you are doing, even see as crime what is your motivation? I am not sure, if it is weakness of script or it is intended..

Kira never called herself a terrorist. I just checked Chakoteya.

-For me strong Trek females like Seven or T'Pol always be criticized to be oversexed, none of them have too many relationships as Kira and/or cringey "sexy" scenes as Intendant. Face palm, nothing more.

Isn't it great that the only people complaining about Kira's sex drive are internet anomalies?

-We have Spock, next time we have Data. We have Troi, oh let me have next time Kira. How creative!

Oh, is there a point here?

-She was never a smart/ a good tactical warrior/ leader, maybe an adventurer and wanna be badass but not a solid /reliable soldier. Her ethical decisions were more than questionable and opportunist. They are not adjectives that I can relate with being strong. Nothing is inspiring about her, for me. Girly girls are cute when they are only children.

She was as good a tactician as anyone else in Star Trek (meaning that almost never are real work tactics used in Star Trek).

- Horrible costume. It remembers me always cheap Halloween Superman costumes with six packs, nothing moves with the body.

Ok, she dresses poorly. Whom does that say more about?

-Her relationship with Odo was never believable for me. Writers even didn't care about to show us how they forgive to each other after occupation of DS9. And the message of their "love": if a girl reject you, keep going, she will " accept" and love you back one day. Great empowerment for the stalkers!

In truth, it was the only relationship that she decided upon herself.

Of course she is tooo sexy and another guys like Gul Dukat does the same.Ohh, how erotic! Such amazing object of desire.

Victim blaming. Not cool.

-The voice of Nana Visitor is to me more disturbing than scratching of blackboard.

That's a character flaw?

 

[Tosk]

Kira never called herself a terrorist. I just checked Chakoteya.

She does at least once, in Defiant. "I know. I was a terrorist."
That's not to say I am agreeing with Sek's point.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

She does at least once, in Defiant. "I know. I was a terrorist."
That's not to say I am agreeing with Sek's point.

OK, one time. However, she was describing a modus operandi, not an identity.

 

[kkt]

I think DS9's point is that one person's terrorist is another one's freedom fighter. They're all irregular fighters, generally using hit and run tactics and sabatage rather than pitched battles. Kira isn't ashamed of her past, she's proud of it and doesn't care which words you use.

Kira is an important person among Bajorans. Senior Bajoran on the station, liason to the Emissary. Of course important Bajorans are interested in her - vedicks, prime ministers, etc. You'd have trouble convincing me that she's any more of a golddigger than they are.

 

[Kilana2]

Great Kira moments were in:

1. Second Skin
2. Duet
3. Indiscretion
4. Our Man Bashir
5. Shakaar
6. Ties of Blood and water
7. The Dogs of War - great

She had great scenes with Tekeny Ghemor and Damar. I'm not sure about her relationship with Winn. She respected the office of the Kai, on the other hand she didn't approve with Winn's hunger for power.
She developed a great working relationship with Sisko and earned his respect. And I guess it was difficult with all the different factions on Bajor from agnostics to extremists. The whole Pah-Wraith story was a bit scary, though.

 

[Lynx]

When I started watching DS9 I couldn't stand Major Kira. She was tough, grim and belligerent. With progression of the show Kira showed different aspects and startet to really grow on me. It were the novels that showed a little bit more of her background and childhood. There are still people around who dislike Kira. Why? She is my favorite female character now.

1. She had discussions with Kai Winn.
2. She did things nobody expected from her - e. g. carrying a child for the O'Briens.
3. She fought for her dear life during the Occupation.
4. She hated Cardassians but was able to overcome her misgivings and fought with Damar against the Dominion.
5. She is faithful.

The only thing that bothered me is her relationship with Bareil. Shakaar was the better choice. The Odo-Kira relationship is something special.

I totally agree with your statements here and I also think that Kira is one of the best characters ever in Star Trek.

 

[sekundant]

Thread called "Kira Nerys.. One of the best Trek characters ever?" It is a question and I am saying "No, she is not. She is even neither original nor complex, plus she cannot be a "real". ".As I said before it is my meaning, my personal meaning, even I said I won't defend or annoy any fans, it should be possible to say my meaning without getting personal. And I tried to say, why I think like this. Well, I know, it is senseless arguing with fans, fans are fans but it doesn't mean everyone should accept their sights of the things.

When I say " -We have Spock, next time we have Data. We have Troi, oh let me have next time Kira. How creative!" It means she is not original for me that is the point! If someone says

Oh, is there a point here?

I don't feel, the aim of the thread is discus about the question but, " Oh my God, how dare you, so say this to my hero? Than I show you"

Isn't it great that the only people complaining about Kira's sex drive are internet anomalies?

Victim blaming

When the major critique is the character isn't sufficiency chaste, we can dismiss the critique out of hand.

Ohh calm down, she is only a fictional character, but you and me are real (I hope so ) and this is childish, sorry. After you calm down, we can continue to exchange our thoughts, but not now, I assume.

Maybe I couldn't express my meaning not good enough, about her lovers. All I want to say is some other female Trek characters which are criticized as "eye candies" or reduced to their "sexiness" were not more often utilized as sex object/love interests as Kira. It is one of the purpose why we get Kira portrayed in this way, she should have lovers, she should obsessed with sex as Intendant for tie faster some special part of audience. And it was the same purpose why Gul Dukat can so often try to flirt with her. Bleak provocation serves them too. I find it is some kind of hypocritical to fade out this aspect of her creation.

You'd have trouble convincing me that she's any more of a golddigger than they are.

Please read what I wrote, I am not calling her or another DS9 character as golddigger.

I think DS9's point is that one person's terrorist is another one's freedom fighter. They're all irregular fighters, generally using hit and run tactics and sabatage rather than pitched battles. Kira isn't ashamed of her past, she's proud of it and doesn't care which words you use.

Of course one person's terrorist is another one's freedom fighter/hero and visa verse. Nevertheless, you won't call yourself as terrorist if you fight for a purpose that you believe or barely for surviving (What she related herself more than once, I am pretty sure). You will never ever associate yourself with your enemy. Why she is doing this? I am not sure if it is intended, but I gave this as an example to tell how superficial Kira is written. Hell, we have enough modern female models: Soviet partisans to Zionist emigrants, Palestinian fighters to IRA, South American Guerillas to German RAF and so on. They all have very different military structures, back rounds, art to fight, end target and ethic codes, but all those women have something common: They are rebels not only against their opponents, but mostly against their own communities; they all rejected the classical female role of own societies and mostly blamed for rejecting their own nature (motherhood etc.) . What about Kira? She follows without questioning the Bajoran religion and society laws. She finds always good situated good guys who make her happy as Ken does for Barbie. She never goes beyond the cliches. Even when she is angry and threats some one, you see it is coming, no surprise moment. There is nothing rebel about her. Her talents as guerilla are not the best, remember Cardassia campaign. So why we need her with this kind of history? Well, Kira Nerys is not Ro Laren, Nana Visitor is not Michelle Forbes. If we would have Ro instead of Kira, she could be a great rebel, unconventional soldier/lover/leader with multifaceted character and for me definitely believable one. Seven season to watch how she became probably the most bad ass Trek character, that would be a thing! Kira on the other hand, a customized girly girl with rebel past? Who believes?
I won't.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

To be fair, in the pilot, Kira doesn't come across as very sympathetic. It's only with the hindsight you gain later in the series and when you learn something of her background story you can understand why she was so non-trusting and belligerent in the beginning of the series.

Even in the pilot though if you take into account her history her attitude is understandable.

Kira’s main story drive is reconcile her anger against her empathy and desire to heal, and learning to see broader contexts than her own past trauma. She has to make more difficult ethical decisions than the Starfleet officers we’re used to.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Kira most certainly used the tactics of a terrorist. It’s just hard for you to call her one because you sympathize more with her cause.

 

[at Quark's]

Even in the pilot though if you take into account her history her attitude is understandable.

Kira’s main story drive is reconcile her anger against her empathy and desire to heal, and learning to see broader contexts than her own past trauma. She has to make more difficult ethical decisions than the Starfleet officers we’re used to.

Yes, but do people also see it that way when they have seen only the pilot and nothing more of the series? Even the OP admits she "couldn't stand" Kira at first, and the character had to grow on her.

And just to be clear on this: I wholeheartedly agree she is one of the best Trek characters we've ever had.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Ohh calm down, she is only a fictional character, but you and me are real (I hope so ) and this is childish, sorry. After you calm down, we can continue to exchange our thoughts, but not now, I assume.

There is nothing childish about calling out ideas that help support dangerous positions, whether or not they were composed wittingly. Indeed, I was not the only person to call you out on how you frame the character's sexuality. I intend to give no parlance to anyone who will suggest that someone, real or fictitious, has not been equally shamed as others, or that the men who would abuse her reflect her flaws. Much of what you have written was histrionics. There are certainly valid critiques of Kira that can be written, even in the vein of some issues you raise. However, you must take responsibility for what you write. It's the adult thing to do.

 

[Tosk]

Well, I know, it is senseless arguing with fans, fans are fans but it doesn't mean everyone should accept their sights of the things.

It is a discussion board, responding to what other people say is pretty much what we're here for. Just like you posted in the thread disagreeing with the original post, why wouldn't people in turn argue the points of your post?

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I think some of the trouble with Kira when DS9 first started is that most of the TV at the time including TNG had characters who are instantly lovable and friendly to everyone, with no negative personality traits that can't be solved in a couple hours of being trapped in a small space with someone. So confrontational, less approachable personality traits stand out the most and feel like the only defining traits of her character.

 

[Tosk]

That's one of the things I love about Kira and Bashir. The show had the stones to not have them be likeable right out of the gate.

 

[DarthPipes]

My favorite story as to the awesomeness of Kira was during Valiant. I read the Behind the Scenes DS9 book and it mentioned that it was originally supposed to be her instead of Nog and Jake who were picked up by the cadets. But they had to write her out because the audience wouldn't have believed Kira not kicking their ass and taking over the ship by herself.

 

[Tosk]

The episode would have been five minutes long.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

One of the weaknesses of DS9's storytelling is that they often came back to the same formats. O'Brien must suffer is the most obvious. Kira seemed to get stuck with Cardassians or was otherwise abducted,making her damsel-not-quite-in-distress. Valiant would have been too much like the episode Defiant if she were on. I wonder what the nature of the conflict would be between her and the cadets.

 

[sekundant]

It is a discussion board, responding to what other people say is pretty much what we're here for. Just like you posted in the thread disagreeing with the original post, why wouldn't people in turn argue the points of your post?

They have all right to do and that is why I am here. Nevertheless, without giving any reason "Nooo, she is not, if you say so you are..blabala" is not arguing or any kind of discussion. It is for me typical fan behavior and it is senseless to ask someone "Why do you love x too much?" Love is love, not reasonable but it is not enough for me to change my meaning, even if 1378056806th fan comes and repeats how great she is. It is their fact and I respect what they say for their selves, but I am not agree with them. For the few other kind of feed backs, I tried to give my response. As said often enough, they are only my meanings. And I don't remember saying " I am the truth and the way and the life" , I am a normal humankind and I can be wrong as often as all others. I gave the reasons why I think in this way, if someone is not agree with them, he/she should give the (reasonable) reason why I am maybe wrong.

There is nothing childish about calling out ideas that help support dangerous positions, whether or not they were composed wittingly. Indeed, I was not the only person to call you out on how you frame the character's sexuality. I intend to give no parlance to anyone who will suggest that someone, real or fictitious, has not been equally shamed as others, or that the men who would abuse her reflect her flaws. Much of what you have written was histrionics. There are certainly valid critiques of Kira that can be written, even in the vein of some issues you raise. However, you must take responsibility for what you write. It's the adult thing to do.

I have to thank to you @Bad Thoughts . After I read what you written I watched again Monthy Pyton's Holy Grail "Burn the Witches" scene, I would suggest you, if you still haven't. It is hilarious and genial . The days we can burn the people if they are not agree with majority and call their ideas as dangerous are (widely) over. One day we will also overcome social lynches, bullying the people, moralize the discussions, forbidding the ideas. Trek and Trek people have contributed more than half a century to these days. Isn't it cool? I believe in freedom of speech: anyone can say anything (unless calling for violation, insulting the people, plus trek bbs rules must be keep for here). Who has the right call a thought/meaning as "dangereous" or "help support dangerous positions"? Are you? What are those dangerous positions? It is not the fair way to silence someone who is not agree with your meanings. Is it what you called "responsibility" and "adult thing" ?
I didn't create Intendant ( totally unnecessary) as sex obsessed person. I didn't give Kira totally meaningless love interests/relationships which has no important impact on the arc. I didn't give her a relationship with a person who was never accept the rejection until she says yes and I didn't present it something very romantic. I didn't write a character who is a mass murder and rapist of her mother and never give up to flirting with her. (I was not so old but I remember well, that they stopped making Gul Dukat very sympathetically after they get very harsh critics. As they tried to make him again unsympathetically, they destroyed the character in very unrealistic manner). I didn't make her adjusted ex-freedom fighter/terrorist girly girl with the voice of six years old (Visitor's daily voice is not so high, as I heard live at the Con) and so on. I criticize the maker of all those things, and this is supporting dangerous positions? What? Did you really understand what I have written? I don't think so.

Yes art has all the freedom, imho (so far you can call a TV show as an art) and a TV show needs viewing quotes. Can they do all those things in the name of whatsoever? Of course. As a Joe Bloggs consumer /hater/ fan have I right the criticize their product? Of course. Deal with it! Using ad hominem and argumentum ad numerum not makes you morally superior, on the contrary. And blame/ accuse no one for the things, that he/she didn't do/say with the hope you can silence him/her. I do now something very adult and ignore you.