Totally agree. Number One didn't get there on talent. She got there as the producer's girlfriend.
Kirk drift—misremembering a character…
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
- Status
Totally agree. Number One didn't get there on talent. She got there as the producer's girlfriend.
Pike in "The Cage" randomly remarks that he "can't get used" to having a woman on the bridge (while giving a "you're one of the good ones"-type line to Una), then spends the rest of the episode alternating between having incredibly misogynistic fantasies about Vina and fantasizing over his female subordinates so much that the Talosians pick up on it and abduct Una and Colt for him. Then of course the episode is written in such a way that Pike has to assert his dominance over "his" women and get violent to save them all from the Talosians -- and then the episode reassures us that Vina would never want to rejoin human society because she's clearly become too ugly to be accepted.
So, yeah, "The Cage" is full of toxic masculinity. It's just written with a narrative voice which endorses that misogyny.
So, yeah, "The Cage" is full of toxic masculinity. It's just written with a narrative voice which endorses that misogyny.
Nope. I just hold with the notion that men and women are equal.
Actually no. The Cage stresses that women can be in control but does it in a way that was relatable to a 60s audience. Colt has the same training as her male counterparts.
Vina is an impressive female character for the sixties. She's a scientist, she's already tried the various things that Pike tries. She's using tactics to win him over.
Una? There isn't an "Una" in The Cage.
However, a human woman called "Number One" is. I imagine if Roddenberry wanted to name her, he would have...
Thus we see the issue: a 1960's production looked at through modern eyes.
And I await the fallout of this comment
However, a human woman called "Number One" is. I imagine if Roddenberry wanted to name her, he would have...
Thus we see the issue: a 1960's production looked at through modern eyes.
And I await the fallout of this comment
Nothing controversial about your comment. You are stating facts. The only issue at play here is someone (not you) with a preconceived mindset where facts have no meaning and no understanding of historical context. They have bought into a worldview of notions with no connection to reality.
Last edited:
So which is it? The Cage and its approach to gender roles is simply product of its time, or its totally not misogynistic and outdated at all? i’m getting a lot of mixed messages from these responses.
Anyway. It is possible to both accept that The Cage was well-meaning by 1960s standards, and that it doesnt hold up well today. That’s not ‘having no understanding of historical context’. I am not stupid. I understand that the line about not being used to having women on the bridge played differently to an audience in the 60s.
You can be critical of something and still enjoy it! In fact that’s healthy. I personally am quite disheartened that so many people are apparently completely blind to the sexism that pervades much of TOS.
Anyway. It is possible to both accept that The Cage was well-meaning by 1960s standards, and that it doesnt hold up well today. That’s not ‘having no understanding of historical context’. I am not stupid. I understand that the line about not being used to having women on the bridge played differently to an audience in the 60s.
You can be critical of something and still enjoy it! In fact that’s healthy. I personally am quite disheartened that so many people are apparently completely blind to the sexism that pervades much of TOS.
Because people are fragile. They'll tell everyone else not to get offended while getting triggered by sexism even being pointed out
I just want to point out that Sci's comment was entirely about the show. Yours are veering off into personal insults.
Agree or disagree, but remember "post, not poster."
Thanks
Art is always interpreted and reinterpreted by the audience. Yes, the Cage was a product of it's time. And that time reflected a more misogynistic attitude at least in some measure. Also, yes, Number One is a human woman in the episode. There is also no character named Colt in the episode.
I agree, like every example of entertainment media, Star Trek is of its time. For all of the “forward thinking” attributed to the series, Star Trek in retrospect did less at the time for gender and race advancement than Mission: Impossible, I Spy, Julia, Mannix and That Girl. Regardless of The Great Bird wanting to “break boundaries,” one look at the lily white crew in the original pilot (one single non-white in a non-speaking role in the transporter room) shows that he wasn’t interested in making social statements at that time. He wasn’t boosting any non-male other than his girlfriend. The series proper did a little better job by putting non-whites on the bridge and have some decent roles for women. While I wouldn’t call the series “sexist” neither was it feminist. It was about 5 minutes in to the future, but not “ahead of its time.” If it was made in 1956 instead of 1966, then yeah, it would have been. But it was just slightly ahead of its time and more progressive than Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.
Star Trek has been apologizing for the 60’s ever since.
I don’t think it’s worth getting worked up over. Times and attitudes evolve and so has the franchise. SNW, whatever its merits, isn’t a true prequel to the original series. It used “The Cage” and then original series as a springboard, but it is its own show. That’s why Mount’s Pike isn’t the same man as Hunter’s. Peck’s Spock doesn’t resemble Nimoy’s. “Number One” doesn’t even exist anymore, for better or worse, and M’Benga is a totally different person (even the name isn’t pronounced the same). I don’t try to justify how any of these characters fit together because they don’t. The Original Series is its own thing. Always has been, always will be.
The forum would be a calmer place if we just accepted it.
Star Trek has been apologizing for the 60’s ever since.
I don’t think it’s worth getting worked up over. Times and attitudes evolve and so has the franchise. SNW, whatever its merits, isn’t a true prequel to the original series. It used “The Cage” and then original series as a springboard, but it is its own show. That’s why Mount’s Pike isn’t the same man as Hunter’s. Peck’s Spock doesn’t resemble Nimoy’s. “Number One” doesn’t even exist anymore, for better or worse, and M’Benga is a totally different person (even the name isn’t pronounced the same). I don’t try to justify how any of these characters fit together because they don’t. The Original Series is its own thing. Always has been, always will be.
The forum would be a calmer place if we just accepted it.
As someone who's been on the board for a few years now, I suggest you walk away from this discussion. Some posters are more reasonable than others and you're not going to get anywhere with this. Some people think what they want to think, whether it makes sense or not, and there's not much that can be done about it.
Same to @tonk'peh
Just walk away. There's more fruitful discussions to be had elsewhere on the board.
I assumed Sci was attempting a bit of humor by referring to the Number One character as "Una," the feminine form of "one" in Spanish and Italian.
Laurel Goodwin was credited as playing Yeoman J.M. Colt, although that name is never mentioned in the dialogue.
Which is fine. But name in dialog is all I care about.
I know the assumption exists and I only mildly push back against it.
I'm so angry right now...
That's fine. They work together for me close enough.
Well, yes. A dramatization of Kirk's logs, as Gene intended
Much of TOS was very sexist but the Cage was sort of the high point. It got worse after this...
I had to do a double take when I saw what Harlan Ellison had planned for Rand in the early draft of City on the Edge of Forever. The yeoman was actually portrayed as technically competent and as a senior non-commissioned officer with the rank to command a security team. Compare that to Yeoman Mears whose only job was to switch on the tricorder. Or Yeoman Zahra who was sent into a dangerous scenario as the only unarmed member of the landing party. They didn't think girls could multitask I suppose.
“The Cage” is largely a one-off production that was likely never to be seen again given NBC was sold on the concept although they wanted it tried again with a different story. It resurfaced when Roddenberry and company bought themselves some time in backed up production by recycling the bulk of “The Cage” for the two-part “The Menagerie.”
As has been mentioned often NBC did not object to the character of Number One, but rather the actress cast in the role. Roddenberry could easily have recast Number One with someone else and NBC would have been fine with it given women were starting to get prominent roles in television. Number One could have been an American version of The Avengers’ Emma Peel played by Diana Rigg—a smart and capable woman who could easily take care of herself. Or she could have been a more evolved version of Cinnamon Carter played by Barbara Bain on Mission: Impossible.
But we’ll never know because Roddenberry opted to drop Number One rather than recast her when NBC objected to Majel Barrett in the role.
The fact that both Colt and Number One might have had fantasies about Pike is not in itself sexist—people have private thoughts and fantasies all the time about people they might know or even people they might not even know well. It’s totally human. It becomes an issue only if those thoughts are not kept private and are inappropriately verbalized or acted on. We learn of Number One and Colt’s fantasies not from them, but from the Talosian keeper who evidently understands nothing about human privacy.
Nowhere in the episode are we given any indication Pike is fantasizing about any of the women under his command. If he is he is keeping it to himself as he should. The awkwardness we see between Pike and Colt is born of over eagerness on Colt’s part—she is green and not yet in sync with anticipating her commanding officer’s work habits. She is like a puppy dog getting underfoot. Pike obviously has no issue with Number One or any other women we see under Pike’s command.
That one line of Pike’s referring to not being accustomed to having a woman on the bridge is totally out of place and it’s soon contradicted by how Pike interacts with Number One and another woman we see on the bridge. Is it any surprise the line is dropped when we finally the first pilot later in “The Menagerie”? So do we count “The Cage” as canon or only what we see in “The Menagerie” as canon?
Vina is not really Pike’s fantasy although the Talosians present Vina in different ways to tempt Pike. At best they got hints of things Pike might have thought about and channeled those though Vina.
Pike is totally Vina’s fantasy man. He checks off all the boxes for her. Vina’s fantasies could well be heightened because she knows in her true image she could never hope to make her dreams a reality. Vina even says it aloud that our strongest fantasies are likely about the things we would or could never do or have.
The whole story is about the lure of illusion, of fantasy.
So just where is the toxic masculinity in all this?
As has been mentioned often NBC did not object to the character of Number One, but rather the actress cast in the role. Roddenberry could easily have recast Number One with someone else and NBC would have been fine with it given women were starting to get prominent roles in television. Number One could have been an American version of The Avengers’ Emma Peel played by Diana Rigg—a smart and capable woman who could easily take care of herself. Or she could have been a more evolved version of Cinnamon Carter played by Barbara Bain on Mission: Impossible.
But we’ll never know because Roddenberry opted to drop Number One rather than recast her when NBC objected to Majel Barrett in the role.
The fact that both Colt and Number One might have had fantasies about Pike is not in itself sexist—people have private thoughts and fantasies all the time about people they might know or even people they might not even know well. It’s totally human. It becomes an issue only if those thoughts are not kept private and are inappropriately verbalized or acted on. We learn of Number One and Colt’s fantasies not from them, but from the Talosian keeper who evidently understands nothing about human privacy.
Nowhere in the episode are we given any indication Pike is fantasizing about any of the women under his command. If he is he is keeping it to himself as he should. The awkwardness we see between Pike and Colt is born of over eagerness on Colt’s part—she is green and not yet in sync with anticipating her commanding officer’s work habits. She is like a puppy dog getting underfoot. Pike obviously has no issue with Number One or any other women we see under Pike’s command.
That one line of Pike’s referring to not being accustomed to having a woman on the bridge is totally out of place and it’s soon contradicted by how Pike interacts with Number One and another woman we see on the bridge. Is it any surprise the line is dropped when we finally the first pilot later in “The Menagerie”? So do we count “The Cage” as canon or only what we see in “The Menagerie” as canon?
Vina is not really Pike’s fantasy although the Talosians present Vina in different ways to tempt Pike. At best they got hints of things Pike might have thought about and channeled those though Vina.
Pike is totally Vina’s fantasy man. He checks off all the boxes for her. Vina’s fantasies could well be heightened because she knows in her true image she could never hope to make her dreams a reality. Vina even says it aloud that our strongest fantasies are likely about the things we would or could never do or have.
The whole story is about the lure of illusion, of fantasy.
So just where is the toxic masculinity in all this?
Last edited:
- Status