What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[fireproof78]

Yep. I have a Nurse Practitioner as my primary, and she handles all of my medications.

Yup, same here. My mom used to run an anti-coag clinic within a larger organization as an NP. I work in an agency that has NP's as psychiatric prescribers. NPs wield a lot of medical power.

Here’s a controversial Trek opinion:

I’d like to see Trek avoid romantic relationship-based plot lines all together when it comes to ‘shipping of main characters. Trek is generally shitty at it anyway, and frankly I tune in to Star Trek too see space adventure stories, not the same generic romantic relationship stuff I can get out of any other show available today.

Stay away from it, keep the focus on the camaraderie and conflicts between the characters and the sci-if adventure components.

I mostly feel the same. I do understand that Star Trek is about the human experience, and I understand that romance is a part of that experience. Hell, I use to enjoy romances as a genre, and talking with friends about what romance looks like remains one of my high points in college bull sessions. But, as much as I like Star Trek romance is not something I find that it does well. It tends to trade in tropes of romance, i.e. conflicts around time being spent together, balancing duty vs. personal interest, etc.

If you're going to do a romantic relationship then I would do it like a workplace procedural show, with the relationship as part of the background tapestry. It doesn't require constant focus, but can be apart of the story. I just have not enjoyed Trek's focused romance episodes.

 

[1001001]

Um...am I understanding correctly that you are saying only doctors can prescribe medications? Because, PA's, and nurse practitioners have prescribing power based upon their degree and training. It is more limited, and usually there is medical oversight by a doctor, but they can still write scripts for medications.

Yeah I was confused by that post too. Was he saying that in Star Trek we only see Physicians prescribing meds?

I have many PA’s and FNP’s who work for me and prescribe all kinds of meds, including controlled substances.

 

[Paul755]

Here’s a controversial Trek opinion:

I’d like to see Trek avoid romantic relationship-based plot lines all together when it comes to ‘shipping of main characters. Trek is generally shitty at it anyway, and frankly I tune in to Star Trek too see space adventure stories, not the same generic romantic relationship stuff I can get out of any other show available today.

Stay away from it, keep the focus on the camaraderie and conflicts between the characters and the sci-if adventure components. The “romantic relationship” stuff is a dime-a-dozen and a sloppy, lazy substitute for true character development.

I generally agree…when it come to the main characters. It worked with Riker/Troi, Worf/Jadzia and Stamets/Culber. Trip/T’Pol and Kira/Odo were ok but most of the others felt clunky or just because the writers needed something for the characters to do. Stuff like Worf/Troi, Bashir/Ezri, Seven/Chakotay etc…

But stuff between a main and secondary character has usually been pretty good like Ben/Kassidy, Kira/Bareil and Burnham/Book.

and to each their own but man/man, woman/woman, etc…I have zero desire to see Kirk and Spock in a relationship like that. They’ve been portrayed as brothers, lovers feels like a step too far.

 

[fireproof78]

and to each their own but man/man, woman/woman, etc…I have zero desire to see Kirk and Spock in a relationship like that. They’ve been portrayed as brothers, lovers feels like a step too far.

It also diminishes what a friendship love can mean to two people, and the deep level of caring that it produces. Tolkien, among others, would discuss at length how those war time relationships meant a lot to him and helped him. I recall reading about Greek concepts of love, and eros (erotic love) being considered lower down than love of brothers and friends (philia, if I'm recalling correctly) and family love (storge). I think American culture puts too much emphasis on the erotic love and has to reframe everything accordingly. So, I tend to look at trends towards couple pairings/shipping, etc. with a bit of a wary eye.

 

[eschaton]

I'd much rather have romantic "tension" between two mains than ever see "romance of the week" again.

The ship I really wanted in Trek was...Jadzia/Quark.

Obviously Quark had the hots for Jadzia, and she humored him. But the idea of Quark having to be in a relationship with a strong, assertive woman is intriguing. We could see the sparks fly, and if it had any chance of succeeding it would result in tremendous character growth for Quark.

 

[Farscape One]

Quark was clearly attracted to assertive women, which was very much not the traditional Ferengi view. Just look at the ones he was attracted to or had a relationship with: Jadzia, Natima, and Grilka.


I have a possibly controversial opinion... Worf and Quark are very alike in several respects.

For starters, Worf was also attracted to assertive women: K'Ehleyr, Grilka, and Jadzia. Just like Quark.

Both are also very much lovers of traditional things of their respective cultures, but both are also not very traditional members of them. Both were also outcasts of their race at one time or another. Both of them also helped shape their culture's political landscape. (Quark with Zek and Ishka, Worf with killing Duras and Gowron and installing Martok.)

I think the reason why Worf never got along with Quark was because he recognized a lot of himself in Quark. It's not uncommon to be at odds with someone who is similar to yourself.

 

[Tallguy]

Both are also very much lovers of traditional things of their respective cultures, but both are also not very traditional members of them.

Interesting. Except Quark grew up as a Ferengi and Worf did not grow up as a Klingon. Worf and Odo have more in common in that regard. Quark wants to be a more traditional Ferengi but he keeps bucking the system. Worf wants the other Klingons to be more traditional Klingons and follow the system they say they have.

Here's one: Worf is a poser. (A poseur?) Almost all of his knowledge of Klingons is second hand at best and propaganda from the Klingons or the Federation at worst. (He lived with his birth family as a kid, right?)

The fact that after growing up on Earth surrounded by humans (or other Federation races) and even going to Starfleet Academy he still "needed to hunt" and all of that other "it's in your blood" nonsense is an indication of a "reality" of stereotypes that we as viewers wouldn't accept anyplace else. Klingons are inherently violent , El-Aurians are good listeners, Scotts are good engineers. Hmmm, I wonder who the really good bankers are?

Mind you, Klingons are a race like cats, dogs, humans, or whales, not like black, white, Irish, or Japanese. Like an actual different physiological race. Another species. (Leave the Preservers out of this.) Maybe McCoy was right and we really do "all know what a Klingon is." But that's not how Star Trek tends to roll.

 

[Amaris]

I don't think wanting to see more romantic relationships, especially among same sex groupings, cheapens character development. Quite honestly, I'm tired of TV's prolonged history pushing the notion of Sappho and her friends, while just gorging on every kind of will they/won't they heterosexual relationship.

 

[eschaton]

Here's one: Worf is a poser. (A poseur?) Almost all of his knowledge of Klingons is second hand at best and propaganda from the Klingons or the Federation at worst. (He lived with his birth family as a kid, right?)

While he was not written as such, Worf is an interesting parallel to someone with autism. Basically, since he grew up outside of Klingon culture he took it both seriously and literally. In contrast, people who are raised Klingon understand to take it seriously, but not take it literally. He is completely blind to the subtext within Klingon culture - he just takes the publicly-stated ideals as a given.

 

[Tallguy]

while just gorging on every kind of will they/won't they heterosexual relationship.

While that's certainly true it would also be nice if it wasn't and still for the same reasons that @Captain Kris Kringle Pike mentioned. "Will they or won't they" was always a given since the pairs in question had (conventionally) compatible parts. If you now take another step and say "Everyone has compatible parts of some kind" then you start getting "WTOWT" all over the place.

Yes, Trek has written its casts this way since day one (two?). Kirk and Rand. Picard and Crusher. Riker and Troi. Geordi and... Awww, poor Geordi.

But it was nice seeing super strong friendships like Sisko and Dax. Or for that matter, Kirk and Spock. I'd put Garak and Bashir in there but even the actors are fighting me on that one.

Incidentally, I've seen it pointed out that when they cast Kirstie Alley on Cheers that they refreshingly wound up deviating from WTOWT (even if Sam's initial attitude was "WHEN will I?").

 

[fireproof78]

I don't think wanting to see more romantic relationships, especially among same sex groupings, cheapens character development. Quite honestly, I'm tired of TV's prolonged history pushing the notion of Sappho and her friends, while just gorging on every kind of will they/won't they heterosexual relationship.

Except it was talking about Kirk and Spock specifically, and I stated my preference for the strong friendships and different types of love, as @Tallguy notes. You want more romantic relationships? That's fine, though not my preference. I prefer strong friendships and camaraderie and such to romance, which I can find pretty much anywhere.

 

[Trekker09]

Despite often reading complaints that Trek writers aren’t any good at portraying romantic relationships, I have found them to be a vital, humanizing element to the overall story arcs--the extended ones, like Trip and T'Pol, especially. Without knowing any of the newer series, the only affair that really didn’t ring true to me was Neelix and Kes.

I've seen it pointed out that when they cast Kirstie Alley on Cheers that they refreshingly wound up deviating from WTOWT (even if Sam's initial attitude was "WHEN will I?").

Mentioning Kirstie Alley in Cheers immediately brings to mind the scene with her chiding Sam about his one track mind focused on sex-- his excuse, “It’s in the genes,” and her comeback, “And that’s where it’s going to stay!”

 

[Dee1891]

Despite often reading complaints that Trek writers aren’t any good at portraying romantic relationships, I have found them to be a vital, humanizing element to the overall story arcs--the extended ones, like Trip and T'Pol, especially. Without knowing any of the newer series, the only affair that really didn’t ring true to me was Neelix and Kes.

Which is probably why their relationship didn't last beyond mid-Season 3. And Neelix did find happiness with someone else.

 

[Amaris]

While that's certainly true it would also be nice if it wasn't and still for the same reasons that @Captain Kris Kringle Pike mentioned. "Will they or won't they" was always a given since the pairs in question had (conventionally) compatible parts. If you now take another step and say "Everyone has compatible parts of some kind" then you start getting "WTOWT" all over the place.

Yes, Trek has written its casts this way since day one (two?). Kirk and Rand. Picard and Crusher. Riker and Troi. Geordi and... Awww, poor Geordi.

But it was nice seeing super strong friendships like Sisko and Dax. Or for that matter, Kirk and Spock. I'd put Garak and Bashir in there but even the actors are fighting me on that one.

Incidentally, I've seen it pointed out that when they cast Kirstie Alley on Cheers that they refreshingly wound up deviating from WTOWT (even if Sam's initial attitude was "WHEN will I?").

Except it was talking about Kirk and Spock specifically, and I stated my preference for the strong friendships and different types of love, as @Tallguy notes. You want more romantic relationships? That's fine, though not my preference. I prefer strong friendships and camaraderie and such to romance, which I can find pretty much anywhere.

I'm replying to both here so it's easier for me to keep track.

You can have strong friendships and romance in the same series, among the main characters without diminishing anything. I'm pansexual, so for me, most people are "will they / won't they?" unless specifically shown otherwise. It's honestly just a jump to the left (and then a step to the right) and it opens up countless possibilities for character development, and to "normalize" the lives of often marginalized people who have lived and seen the world this way for generations.

Star Trek needs to explore a frontier that doesn't get enough attention, and I believe it needs to shake away some of the old monogamous, heterosexual, cisgender tropes that it has dealt with in the past to get there. One major complaint I've had for many years is that for being a show about human rights and exploring the vastness of infinite diversity in infinite combinations, it plays far too safe with humanity's traditions.

Hell, I bet Jonathan Frakes would be up for it.

 

[Farscape One]

Frakes would have been. I heard him do an interview where he would have preferred Soren in "The Outcast" be played by a man.

 

[fireproof78]

You can have strong friendships and romance in the same series, among the main characters without diminishing anything.

This is definitely a mileage thing. I generally do not enjoy romance any more in Trek, and find it off putting at best regardless of orientation and/or gender identity.

Star Trek needs to explore a frontier that doesn't get enough attention, and I believe it needs to shake away some of the old monogamous, heterosexual, cisgender tropes that it has dealt with in the past to get there. One major complaint I've had for many years is that for being a show about human rights and exploring the vastness of infinite diversity in infinite combinations, it plays far too safe with humanity's traditions.

Go for it. I'm just not going to want to watch it because that's not what draws me in to Trek. Romances of the week, among the main characters, or whatever, are things that I really struggle with showing in the shows. I hated it in TOS, I found it eye rolling in TNG, and I flat out skipped it in Discovery.

Sorry, romance in stories has long worn out its welcome with me. And let me emphasize in stories. I think the last one I found any enjoyment in was Captain Holt and Kevin in Brooklyn 99. Probably comes from working in the human relationships part of the workforce.

 

[Amaris]

This is definitely a mileage thing. I generally do not enjoy romance any more in Trek, and find it off putting at best regardless of orientation and/or gender identity.


Go for it. I'm just not going to want to watch it because that's not what draws me in to Trek. Romances of the week, among the main characters, or whatever, are things that I really struggle with showing in the shows. I hated it in TOS, I found it eye rolling in TNG, and I flat out skipped it in Discovery.

Sorry, romance in stories has long worn out its welcome with me. And let me emphasize in stories. I think the last one I found any enjoyment in was Captain Holt and Kevin in Brooklyn 99. Probably comes from working in the human relationships part of the workforce.

That's perfectly okay.

 

[Orphalesion]

Honestly, I don't for romances of the week either. They are poorly developed and, really...why should we even care about them? We know they're gonna be over by the end of the episode and we're very unlikely to ever see the guest love interest ever again.
But a well developed romance between two main characters or regulars? Yes please. In any possible constellation.
As I said before making them the first gay character in Trek and giving them an ongoing romantic subplot would have been a good way to add some more complexity and attract some more attention to under-developed characters like Harry Kim or Gordi LaForge.

 

[TheForge]

Wesley Crusher is one of my favorite characters.

 

[Orphalesion]

Wesley Crusher is one of my favorite characters.

I quite like Will Wheaton tbh. And wish they would have developed his character better.