Feminism in Star Trek Discovery
- Thread starter valden
- Start date
- Status
Vance doesn't get enough to do to really make a dent. Frankly the only way these types fans would be happy is if Lorca had lived and also if he hadn't been turned into a villain. The tortured hero who is suffering from PTSD and who would have been on a more even level to Burnham would have worked. They also seem to like Saru because he fits into the classic mode of traditional Trek alien. Book might have worked but he is to new agey. If they had made him a little more hardcore to fit into his background as a smuggler then he would have been popular. Instead he is seen as just another soft male who is in touch with his feelings.
I mean if you removed some of the toxic masculinity fueling some of these feelings and not just limit this to male characters they are even kind of right in the sense that the show has always needed more contrasting personalities on the show. KIrk being macho works because it contrasts with Spock being maybe tv's first nerd who doesn't want to solve problems with violence and they are then contrasted with Bones who is plain spoken but not in the toxic way Trump was plain spoken because Bones also cared about peoples well being.
I mean if you removed some of the toxic masculinity fueling some of these feelings and not just limit this to male characters they are even kind of right in the sense that the show has always needed more contrasting personalities on the show. KIrk being macho works because it contrasts with Spock being maybe tv's first nerd who doesn't want to solve problems with violence and they are then contrasted with Bones who is plain spoken but not in the toxic way Trump was plain spoken because Bones also cared about peoples well being.
Do we not remember that Discovery season 3 featured Osyraa, the main villain who embodied the stereotypical "ambitious and ruthless female" trope?
well, perhaps they should reconsider their so called “values”, as indeed many of those are quite fit to be for bad guys.
i’ve read about all the fuss about Gaal Dornick being female and found it pretty absurd: Gaal is a very minor character in the original work and he being male has no impact whatsoever on the story.
And yes, the books are quite lacking in compelling female characters, especially the early ones, but I guess it’s understandable in the historical context (and truth be told characters aren’t the strong part of Asimov’s books anyway).
pretty much.
Well the character kind of sucked and was forgettable so I am thinking most have forgotten that character. She is really only remembered I think for one scene and that is Vance eating shit in front of her. The scene and baddie that really set them off was L'Rell making all the Klingons call her Mother.
Sadly, for a lot of that crowd I think his not being a white guy might make them discount Vance. I’ve seen several folks discount Stamets as being an important male character and example of a male character who isn’t bad/wrong/whatever straw man complaint is being leveled in various instances, because he’s a Gay man.
Having seen the level of specificity some trolling bigots have exhibited, I can’t imagine Vance is a straight cis man that they feel they can relate to.
Last edited:
indeed. Honestly, I always wonder why people with this kind of mentality expect a show such as Star Trek to be made with them in mind.
Why wouldn't they? Assuming rational thought with an irrational emotional response is part of what leads to augments. What happens is a rose tinted glasses effect of the past making it feel worse than it already is. Couple that with feelings of isolation and negativity and there will be a longing for the "good old days" that lead to self-fulfilling cycles of thinking. So, since it is in the past then it becomes a part of that viewpoint.
But, again, you can't assume fully rational thinking here. It's emotionally driven, with a desire to sooth fear.
I’m sure that Gul Dukat and Weyoun would have sucked and been forgotten too if they only made a handful of appearances in their debut season and were killed off in that same season. Instead of you know, letting the character live, make recurring appearances and receive character develop over a few seasons. Osyraa facing off against Rillak and T’Rina, and being a regular foil for Burnham would have been interesting to see.
Maybe the Emerald Chain got inspired by the Dominion and have their own cloning facilities and will clone Osyraa at some point. It’s not like they follow Federation law as is.
I'm not sure the Chain ever had much of a chance of working because Discovery is not really into world building in the way DS9 was. In many ways TNG set up the framework for the 24th century but DS9 made it come alive at whole other level. It was smart to have characters to tell stories from a non-federation perspective IMO.
Ah, but she also explicitly advocated for capitalism as she engaged in her villainy, so I'm sure right-wingers would consider her to be an "evil right-winger." Which, in fairness, she was, because right-wing ideology is evil and DIS recognizes and depicts that fact.
I don't. They expect the world to revolve around them. And they don't think they're Archie Bunkers because they don't realize that's who they've turned into over time. "No! I'm not like that!" Ego and Denial are two very powerful things.
They expect it because Star Trek used to be made for them. We are talking about people who are usually Gen X or maybe a Boomer on the young side. I am Gen X and I know we use to be the main target audience for this kind of stuff until we aged out of it. Some of these fans haven't gotten the memo yet they are old.
Their at the age now were they are suppose to be watching CBS police procedural shows starring someone who was really cool in the 80 and 90's and now you can only think. "Dam he or she really got old." Then in 10 more years it will be time for Matlock and In the Heat of Night reruns when you and your fellow elders get back from your daily walking exercises at the mall and have returned back to your nursing home.
Their at the age now were they are suppose to be watching CBS police procedural shows starring someone who was really cool in the 80 and 90's and now you can only think. "Dam he or she really got old." Then in 10 more years it will be time for Matlock and In the Heat of Night reruns when you and your fellow elders get back from your daily walking exercises at the mall and have returned back to your nursing home.
They don't know when to move on, in other words. Something we can both agree with.
I'm not quite sure what this says about me. I'm only four years younger than you, but I love DSC and PIC. Being born in 1979 puts me right on the Gen X / Millennial border. I don't feel like I'm completely one or the other. I think I'm a little bit of both. But I can't imagine myself watching police procedurals at any age. Mainly because -- to put it diplomatically -- I think the police are in desperate need of reform. But then that's getting off-topic.
I agree with you that a lot of these people should move on. But I think you have a tendency to over-classify people too much. "If you're this age, you should be this." "If you're that age, you should be that." My belief is "If you enjoy it, you should watch." "If you don't enjoy it, you shouldn't." So we agree that they should move on, we just get to that conclusion a different way.
Last edited:
I think Gen X as people think of it died in the mid 90's so if your 4 years younger than me then it means when you were in high school it was in the late 90's which was different than the early 90's. Grunge and gangster rap was out and boy bands were in and music was started to reflect the more optimistic 90's that came from the strong economy and the rise of the internet and what everyone thought it would be. It's quite amazing just how different 1993 was from 1998 even if their was only a 5 year gap. It's not to different from how the early 60's and late 60's look and feel so different.
the show should not even be having 5 females to 1 male. also what is the ratio at NASA?
the show should be having a balance. it is not about been threatened, it is about the fact that even the female characters are used nothing more as a platform for a ''message'' that the story itself tends to suffer and we are left with a mediocre sci fi show.
meanwhile the classic male characters they keep trying to erase become more popular and beloved (data, ricker, sisko, goeordi) because these new females characters are in CW generic star trek that it becomes more necessary to hold on and even appreciate great star trek like TNG that just happens to all the good male characters.
I think the fact that of all the star trek series, Discovery been the weakest in story telling, writing , intellectual depth, character development and world building really hurts all the diversity and really hurts women, because at the end of it all, the worst star trek tv show is female driven.
not the best look is it?
Warning for trolling. I can't do anything about you posting your misinformation and sexist bullshit in the other forums, but it sure as hell is not going to go on here. Comments to PM.the show should not even be having 5 females to 1 male. also what is the ratio at NASA?
the show should be having a balance. it is not about been threatened, it is about the fact that even the female characters are used nothing more as a platform for a ''message'' that the story itself tends to suffer and we are left with a mediocre sci fi show.
meanwhile the classic male characters they keep trying to erase become more popular and beloved (data, ricker, sisko, goeordi) because these new females characters are in CW generic star trek that it becomes more necessary to hold on and even appreciate great star trek like TNG that just happens to all the good male characters.
I think the fact that of all the star trek series, Discovery been the weakest in story telling, writing , intellectual depth, character development and world building really hurts all the diversity and really hurts women, because at the end of it all, the worst star trek tv show is female driven.
It really does make me wonder, since all this person can talk about in any forum is gender, race, gender, race, gender, race - as if there's nothing else to Trek. And in the most misinformed way possible.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
