Spoilers The real reason (spoiler) fled Hysperian society
- Thread starter chrinFinity
- Start date
And how do you know that?
Look at it from the perspective of the Magna Roman government. If Kirk says he slept with Drusilla, why should they believe him? Wouldn't they want proof?
It seems obvious that Kirk and Drusilla were being monitored every step of the way. Who knows how many bugs/surveillance devices were planted in that room. They were totally being watched. There's literally no way they couldn't have been.
Last edited:
Why would any of them think anything different.
They certainly would take advantage of her if they were in Kirk's boots.
And how do you prove or disprove what they actually did, if both of them say they had sex?
Under the covers, even with cameras, it's easy to fake it.
(they do that in the movies all the time)
I don't think they are going to go digging around inside her to find his spunk.
And there's plenty of times when folks do the deed without a conception happening.
Last edited:
Magna Roma would surely have access to near-perfect surveillance capabilities. Any government which routinely engages in slavery and coercion would pretty much have to.
Kirk and Drusilla would never have been able to fake it for the cameras. If they didn't actually have sex, the government would know. And Drusilla would die.
As we all know, Kirk has a great deal of compassion and empathy. If he thought sleeping with Drusilla would harm her, he wouldn't even consider it. But in this case, it's NOT sleeping with her which would cause harm. The best thing Kirk can do for Drusilla, in this case, would be to have sex. Because it would literally save her life.
Billups, OTOH, isn't faced with that kind of a conundrum. If he chooses not to have sex with the royal guard(s) sent to seduce him, then they wouldn't be facing execution. So Billups is free to follow his personal integrity. Kirk didn't have that luxury.
Last edited:
Kirk being enslaved and forced to have sex (or at least romantic acts) is a bit of a running theme in his life.
There was absolutely no evidence of them having that kind of tech in the episode.
The only cameras that were shown in use were massive television cameras that had to be mounted on very large wheeled tripods.
Also, Drusilla specifically tells Kirk that they were alone, as in not being watched or listened to.
And the next scene does show Kirk waking up with his clothes still on.
Last edited:
I think it is a stretch to think that Drusilla would have been killed if she had failed to seduce Kirk (assuming she gave it a bonafide shot). The Proconsul did not particularly seem spiteful or vengeful or shortsighted or anything that would reasonably make one think that he would kill his own slave for such a failure.
And indeed, he says that if Drusilla had been seduced into betraying him and helping Kirk, he would not have punished her, just Kirk. Now he may be lying or he might somehow take a failure to sleep with Kirk as worse than equipping Kirk with a means of escape/rescue, which would make no sense.
On the surface of things, Kirk would have no reason to think that his choice is to sleep with a slave or let her be punished.
And FWIW, I think that the moral choice if he were 100 percent in that situation would still to not sleep with the slave.
The episode seemingly establishes the opposite, that they weren't being monitored.
Drusilla tells Kirk that they are alone and no one is watching. Sure, she could be lying or mistaken.
But the scene when Marcus comes in, he is wondering if Kirk had seduced Drusilla into stealing his communicator and Marcus has Kirk searched.
That scene makes no sense if someone was monitoring what was going on in the room, because they would be in a position to see if Drusilla left, if she was gone long enough to go to wherever the communicators were kept, if she had an opportunity to give the communicator to Kirk, and so forth.
The tech level was mid-20th century. That doesn't bode well for cameras being everywhere recording everything, or even on closed circuit TV. There are plenty of governments in our history that routinely engage in slavery and coercion that had no real surveillance capabilities or that didn't use them.
I think it's far more likely that the Queen would take out her displeasure on the guards in some way, shape or form for failing to fuck Billups than Markus was to take out his displeasure at Drusilla for failing to seduce Kirk. Indeed, the way that show played it, it seemed like Marcus kind of wanted to fuck Kirk himself, which is the only thing that might have made me think that he would have cameras to record what was going on, the creeper that he seemed to be.
Given how much the Queen had invested in getting Billups laid and given that she trusted her guards to get the job done, she would be royally pissed that they didn't pop his cherry and force him to take the throne. And given that this is apparently the latest in a series of schemes that she had employed it's almost certain that the bodyguards had to answer for their failure to fuck. Now the punishment probably wasn't death, but it was probably something.
Last edited:
I think the Queen is meant to be more Troi's mom than alien despot. Also, given how Rutherford was kidnapped to a feast and let run away without harm, I think we're meant to treat her fairly lightly.
You know, despite the fact that what she did would be NIGHTMARISHLY traumatizing to her son.
You know, despite the fact that what she did would be NIGHTMARISHLY traumatizing to her son.
Until we hear them, then yes, they ARE the only ones.
If we don't hear it, it doesn't exist.
This is the dumbest argument of all time. Of course they are not the "only" ones, they are merely the only ones ever mentioned on camera.
By that logic, Starfleet only had 100 or so officers, since those are the only ones we've ever seen. Therefore, the untold thousands of other Starfleet personnel, to say nothing of the billions of other Federation citizens, clearly don't exist.
They don't...
...until the story calls for it.
...until the story calls for it.
"Nothing unreal exists " Heard that on a weird movie once.
My question is, why can he abdicate being a prince, but not (theoretically) have sex (if he wanted to), then abdicate being a king?
