The dance belt is to protect his power pack.
Was TNG less progressive than TOS?
- Thread starter Orphalesion
- Start date
- Status
The dance belt is to protect his power pack.
Exactly.
This whole conversation reminds me of a situation that happened some years ago in a zoo. Two male penguins formed a same-sex relationship, and were very devoted to one another.
As I mentioned, there are many instances in nature where the genetic parents die or are killed (usually by predators) and this results in their chicks being orphaned - which is tragic in any circumstance, but especially if the chick hasn't even hatched.
There are also times when a female penguin will lay two eggs, and that can result in trouble for one of them. The normal thing is for penguin couples to rear one chick at a time, and so the "extra" chick needs a new parent now.
The male penguins at the zoo exhibited behaviors that made it plain that they wanted a chick to raise. When their keepers gave them an orphaned egg to care for (and look after the chick after it hatched), some members of the public went BS!C insane, claiming it was "immoral" and that this must not be allowed, because the adoptive parents would impart their "sinful lifestyle" to the chick.
It's ridiculous, of course. The only aspect of having and raising penguin offspring that male penguins can't do is the actual production and laying of the egg. After that, both parents share equal responsibility in caring for the egg and nurturing the chick after it's hatched. If penguins teach each other anything besides survival skills, I think it would be how to love and care for each other within their families. Whether their families are M/F or M/M or F/F doesn't matter. What matters is that the adults are devoted to each other and to their offspring.
I once received a finger-wagging, pompous lecture from someone on a gaming forum after I stated that I had never had kids, didn't want to have kids, and stated the reasons why. I was told that I was "depriving the world of someone who could have been awesome."
Well, it's nice that this person thought my offspring "could have been awesome." But the point is that it's my choice, not his, and I had sound reasons for not reproducing. It was a decision I made over 30 years ago, and it wasn't easy. I'm the last of my family line on my dad's side, and that's that. If medicine had been more advanced with regard to certain hereditary diseases and medical conditions and if I'd had the temperament required to nurture a human child (I do fine with cats), things might have been different. But that's not how things turned out, and if other people don't like it, too bad.
Looks like Data wasn't the first android to be "fully functional."
Last edited:
But the nipples are for everyone’s enjoyment.
You're left handed too? So am I. Did it run in your family? My mom's sister was also left handed, and when I was a kid she used to tell me "This is the right hand to use" (holding up her left hand), "And this is what's left" (holding up her right hand).
Nope. No one on either side of my family, and none of my kids.
I'm the only left hander in my family, too.
What is "SJW"?Well and I don't care for the word "SJW"
Expecting a modern show set in the future to have a cast that isn't 90% white, hetero cis men is not about "a sideshow" or "feeling superior to others".
I won't even dignify to address what you wrote in the second and we probably shouldn't anyway lest the thread be locked.
"Social Justice Warrior." Other than that, I don't know what it means as everyone seems to have a different definition.
A slur invented by Nazis to attack people who aren’t bigots.
Well, there you go. Those Nazi's, just a bit bigoted. They are known for theie hate of the Jews, but I have a feeling they pretty much hated everyone that wasn't a Nazi.
A few things here,
A little about myself, I grew up watching TOS in the late 60s and 70s so I can be biased for that show.
Is TNG progressive? Not much but then I never thought TOS was either, other shows in the 60s were as much or even more progressive.
First, about there being a disabled person in the crew, Geordi was not disabled. He could do anything a sighted person could do so just how is he disabled?
Sure, he was helpless if he lost his visor but so is an extremely near sighted person when they lose their glasses. Both near sighted people wearing glasses and Geordi with his visor can drive, truly blind people can't, that's one of the reasons why they're called disabled.
As for TNG being progressive in regards to women, when I first heard about a new Star Trek show in 1986 with a totally new set of characters, here's one of the first things I thought of.
At that time, I was still buying into Roddenberry's bullshit about the network making him get rid of a female second in command so I thought this new show would be a golden opportunity. I figured they wouldn't go so far as to have a female captain but I was nearly certain they would have the second in command be female, how could they not?
Well, as we all know, I was wrong. In fact, they had regressed, this is just a little lame I know but:
The top two honchos of the tos Enterprise was played by two white males but at least the character of Spock was only half human so the top two honchos were 75% white males and 25% alien. So with tng, the top two honchos of the Enterprise D were... 100% white males; the good ol' boys' club was firmly back in place.
Not only that, it's not so much Crusher and Troi were in supposedly caretaker roles but they weren't even within shouting distance of sitting in the captain's chair, even Yar didn't seem very close and she was soon gone anyway.
Yeah, I know later in the show, Crusher was shown to be qualified for command but that was not very realistic, it would be just as plausible for them to suddenly reveal Picard or Riker were qualified M.D.s like Crusher. And then they exacerbated the problem by making Troi suddenly qualified for command as well.
As my sister, who also liked tng pointed out, the only reason they did it, which she thought was pathetic, was because it was sticking out like a sore thumb that the only two female main characters remaining in the show were so far from sitting in the captain's chair. If the makers of tng really wanted to be progressive, they should have had the XO be female from the get go.
About tng not portraying gay characters, back in '87, when I read that one of the main cast was a 14 or 15 year old boy, it fairly screamed to me "this is going to be a kiddie show!!" Well, maybe not exactly a kiddie show but it did seem to me tng was at least partially, if not totally going to be aimed at a younger, teenage audience instead of adults. This was reinforced to me by the "Drugs Are Bad" speech Yar gave to Wesley, who represented the targeted audience of adolescents.
I can kind of understand why they aimed the show at teenagers, when tos was so popular in the 70s, a large part of the audience were adolescents, heck, I was one of them, but it seemed to me they dumbed down the show a little, hence the "Drugs Are Bad" speech.
So I wonder maybe the reason tng didn't portray gays is because it was made for a younger audience and homophobes would be screaming, "You're trying to turn our kids into gays." I'm speculating, were there any other shows for younger audiences at the time that did have gay characters?
I guess I'm being unkind to tng but I just feel tos was written for an adult audience and tng was written for a younger audience. I'm one to talk though, one exception is the tos episode "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield", that episode has all the subtlety of a thirty pound sledge hammer.
Robert
A little about myself, I grew up watching TOS in the late 60s and 70s so I can be biased for that show.
Is TNG progressive? Not much but then I never thought TOS was either, other shows in the 60s were as much or even more progressive.
First, about there being a disabled person in the crew, Geordi was not disabled. He could do anything a sighted person could do so just how is he disabled?
Sure, he was helpless if he lost his visor but so is an extremely near sighted person when they lose their glasses. Both near sighted people wearing glasses and Geordi with his visor can drive, truly blind people can't, that's one of the reasons why they're called disabled.
As for TNG being progressive in regards to women, when I first heard about a new Star Trek show in 1986 with a totally new set of characters, here's one of the first things I thought of.
At that time, I was still buying into Roddenberry's bullshit about the network making him get rid of a female second in command so I thought this new show would be a golden opportunity. I figured they wouldn't go so far as to have a female captain but I was nearly certain they would have the second in command be female, how could they not?
Well, as we all know, I was wrong. In fact, they had regressed, this is just a little lame I know but:
The top two honchos of the tos Enterprise was played by two white males but at least the character of Spock was only half human so the top two honchos were 75% white males and 25% alien. So with tng, the top two honchos of the Enterprise D were... 100% white males; the good ol' boys' club was firmly back in place.
Not only that, it's not so much Crusher and Troi were in supposedly caretaker roles but they weren't even within shouting distance of sitting in the captain's chair, even Yar didn't seem very close and she was soon gone anyway.
Yeah, I know later in the show, Crusher was shown to be qualified for command but that was not very realistic, it would be just as plausible for them to suddenly reveal Picard or Riker were qualified M.D.s like Crusher. And then they exacerbated the problem by making Troi suddenly qualified for command as well.
As my sister, who also liked tng pointed out, the only reason they did it, which she thought was pathetic, was because it was sticking out like a sore thumb that the only two female main characters remaining in the show were so far from sitting in the captain's chair. If the makers of tng really wanted to be progressive, they should have had the XO be female from the get go.
About tng not portraying gay characters, back in '87, when I read that one of the main cast was a 14 or 15 year old boy, it fairly screamed to me "this is going to be a kiddie show!!" Well, maybe not exactly a kiddie show but it did seem to me tng was at least partially, if not totally going to be aimed at a younger, teenage audience instead of adults. This was reinforced to me by the "Drugs Are Bad" speech Yar gave to Wesley, who represented the targeted audience of adolescents.
I can kind of understand why they aimed the show at teenagers, when tos was so popular in the 70s, a large part of the audience were adolescents, heck, I was one of them, but it seemed to me they dumbed down the show a little, hence the "Drugs Are Bad" speech.
So I wonder maybe the reason tng didn't portray gays is because it was made for a younger audience and homophobes would be screaming, "You're trying to turn our kids into gays." I'm speculating, were there any other shows for younger audiences at the time that did have gay characters?
I guess I'm being unkind to tng but I just feel tos was written for an adult audience and tng was written for a younger audience. I'm one to talk though, one exception is the tos episode "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield", that episode has all the subtlety of a thirty pound sledge hammer.
Robert
That's the thing though, the character can't be disabled to the point where realistically they would not be capable of being a Starfleet officer. And if their particular disability is made to disappear by technology or medical tretment, then are they then still disabled?
If you make the disabled a civilian, then the question arises as to why future tech/med can't deal with the disability.
I really couldn't care less if Star Trek follows progressive ideas, I want them to follow realistic ideas. It's fine to have women in important positions, that would be normal. I've always had a bugaboo about leading female characters involved in fights. Like a 99 lbs. soaking wet Kira beating up trained soldiers more than twice her weight class. Happens way too much.
It wasn't a problem limited to the women. Take "The Way of the Warrior." It was implausible for any of the human Starfleet officers to be able to go one-on-one in hand-to-hand combat with the Klingons. The humans were not security officers. All of the main cast had plot armor.
As a profoundly deaf person, I'd say that Geordi is in the same boat that I am.
He loses his visor, pretty much game over for him.
And it doesn't take a lot for his visor to get lost, I'm pretty sure there is an episode where it gets broken, Lor or Data takes it from etc.
If I happen to fall in a lake or river, game over for me.
Pretty simple stuff.
I mean of course Others can have stuff happen to them where they break their leg or arm etc. but that isn't as easy as just losing something or someone taking it from you.
So even with the tech. Advances, I'd say Yes, Geordie is disabled. Just like me.
Later when he gets the ocular implant eyes, maybe then he is no longer disabled.
And when I can get audio logical implants that can go in the water and don't need an endless battery supply to be inserted, maybe I'll no longer be disabled either.
Science Fiction.Realistic ideas.
Boy have you got the wrong franchise.And maybe the wrong genre.
Too broad.
- Status
