What behind-the-scenes detail(s) do you remember being particularly interesting or surprising to learn?

[NCC-73515]

The concept that love includes physical attraction to one specific body that doesn't keep changing is not problematic. The way it was written, adding potential future bodies and her not being able to keep up, leaves it open that her limitation (which is quite common I think, therefore "our" limitation) is not just based on this new body being female, but that the bodies would keep changing.

 

[DonIago]

Calling it "our" limitation implies that everyone has such a limitation. I don't think any of us is qualified to speak for the rest of humanity in this manner.

At best, Bev chose her words poorly.

 

[Laughing Dragon]

Please don't rationalize Beverly's line to me. It was a terrible line that's only become more terrible in time.

I absolutely don't believe TPTB were doing the best they could, and if you're going to make a claim of that nature, I would like some hard evidence to that effect.

BTW, I'm almost 50, so I definitely wouldn't say I'm young, and I don't appreciate what feels like an attempt to delegitimize my opinion by playing the, "You weren't there; it was a different time..." card.

In my earlier post I made it clear how TPTB could have easily made it about Bev's personal boundaries and limitations. But instead they chose to have her make a broad statement about humanity that's frankly at odds with what we've (thankfully) seen on many other occasions.

I am laughing at hard evidence, its FICTION, lol, not long ago there were pages about Garashir being disputed when I provided examples from themselves in my own thread. I even provided links to interviews, Where were you? I think you need to chill, Intent is really important, and the line is fine. Also, back then all there was was basically straight and gay and maybe bi. It was a start. Like to see you try better back then. Oh, ad lets accuse gays back then of being homophobic or stupid.

Calling it "our" limitation implies that everyone has such a limitation. I don't think any of us is qualified to speak for the rest of humanity in this manner.

At best, Bev chose her words poorly.

Its TREK. That was how it was done. It would not have the same effect if it was just her. There were a lot more homophobes then. I did not need some long speech like someone running for president. It's weird. Why heck are you so angry? Just focus on intent. Geeze. It feels like people are spoiled nowadays.

Calling it "our" limitation implies that everyone has such a limitation. I don't think any of us is qualified to speak for the rest of humanity in this manner.

At best, Bev chose her words poorly.

Looks are important to many people even homosexuals of course. Thats why they are hated. They prefer the looks of men. Same with gay women. Are you omnisexual?

And, lol,"rationalize." Let's not get overdramatic.

 

[NCC-73515]

Calling it "our" limitation implies that everyone has such a limitation. I don't think any of us is qualified to speak for the rest of humanity in this manner.

At best, Bev chose her words poorly.

what's your estimate of the % of the global population that loves people regardless of their bodies? it already includes only bi/pan, and excludes everyone with filters on dating apps (age, body type, hairiness, ethnicity,...)

 

[DonIago]

what's your estimate of the % of the global population that loves people regardless of their bodies? it already includes only bi/pan, and excludes everyone with filters on dating apps (age, body type, hairiness, ethnicity,...)

As PIcard would say, "How many people does it take?"

 

[NCC-73515]

enough to be "representative" for "humanity in general", which you claimed before

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Crusher's line in "The Host" is absolutely awful:
"Perhaps it is a human failing, but we are not accustomed to these kinds of changes. I can't keep up. How long will you have this host? What would the next one be? I can't live with that kind of uncertainty. Perhaps, someday, our ability to love won't be so limited."

She could have worded it as though speaking purely to her own preferences and limitations, but her use of "a human failing", "we" and "our" is a clear indication that she's speaking for humanity in general, or at least thinks she is. Coming from a medical professional in particular, this is deeply disappointing. Don't ever claim to represent me, Bev.

Better would have been: "It's my failing, but I'm not accustomed to these kinds of changes. I can't keep up. How long will you have this host? What would the next one be? I can't live with that kind of uncertainty. Perhaps, someday, my ability to love won't be so limited. I'm sorry."

"The Outcast" is also pretty bad for several reasons.

Say what you want about Discovery, but at least it embraced non-heteronormative individuals and relationships.

I completely agree with everything here.

 

[DonIago]

enough to be "representative" for "humanity in general", which you claimed before

Don't twist my words. All I said was that Crusher shouldn't be speaking for all of humanity based on her personal comfort levels.

 

[DonIago]

I completely agree with everything here.

Thank you. <3

 

[CorporalCaptain]

The kiss between Uharua and Kirk they banned it in most southern states.

That's completely untrue.

 

[NCC-73515]

Alright, here's the quote:

Perhaps it is a human failing, but we are not accustomed to these kinds of changes. I can't keep up. How long will you have this host? What would the next one be? I can't live with that kind of uncertainty. Perhaps, someday, our ability to love won't be so limited.

Are >50% of the world population accustomed to changing entire bodies in a relationship?
When she said "I", did she say "I" or did she say "we"?
Does >50% of humankind have a much less limited ability to love?

 

[somebuddyX]

I don't have a problem with what Beverly said because I get what the writer was trying to say, whether at the time or now we might think differently. Maybe now they writer would say something differently and not have it be about humanity as a whole, but yeah I think a lot of people would struggle with someone changing bodies and genders in so quick a time as Odan did.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Speaking of 'bloopers' I would have loved it had they kept this one as the actual end of the episode for once ... just as a joke to long time fans ....

(And yes, I know this is not the final scene of Unification, part 1 , but still ...)

That's bloody brilliant. Just keeping this in character imagine that alien's reaction at Riker randomly bursting into song.

 

[Michael]

Alright, here's the quote:

Perhaps it is a human failing, but we are not accustomed to these kinds of changes. I can't keep up. How long will you have this host? What would the next one be? I can't live with that kind of uncertainty. Perhaps, someday, our ability to love won't be so limited.

Are >50% of the world population accustomed to changing entire bodies in a relationship?
When she said "I", did she say "I" or did she say "we"?
Does >50% of humankind have a much less limited ability to love?

Hm, I don’t know. I tend to agree with @DonIago that the writers chose Beverly’s lines poorly. In your microanalysis of her lines you kinda have to ignore the context provided in the episode to arrive at the conclusion that she’s only referring to “changing bodies in a relationship”. This comes right after she just did in fact accept her lover in a changed body. It’s only now that she just learned that her lover is now in a female body that she absolutely can’t accept it. Another piece of evidence is the look on her face when Odan’s new host arrives at sickbay: She’s clearly very enthusiastic to meet “him”, but then super disappointed when she realizes it’s a woman. Evidently the idea of changing bodies wasn’t the only problem, or the most important one, but the sex of the new host.

Also, your idea of looking at percentages of world population seems off to me. As an example, clearly not >50% of the world’s population are homosexual, but still a line saying that it’s a “human failing” that “we” just can’t love someone of the same sex would be super wrong.

Here’s the entire scene, for everyone who needs their memory refreshed …

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Just wow... Dropped the ball there I think

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Defining human norms in terms of the traits of the majority is outrageous.

For example, it would be disgraceful to say that being left-handed is not normal.

The truth is that being left-handed is a perfectly natural trait to have, that occurs about ten percent of the time.

In my Federation, humans have a developed enough culture to be accepting of the complete diversity of human traits, however many or few people there are who have them. If only we did.

 

[NCC-73515]

In your microanalysis of her lines you kinda have to ignore the context provided in the episode to arrive at the conclusion that she’s only referring to “changing bodies in a relationship”. This comes right after she just did in fact accept her lover in a changed body. It’s only now that she just learned that her lover is now in a female body that she absolutely can’t accept it. Another piece of evidence is the look on her face when Odan’s new host arrives at sickbay: She’s clearly very enthusiastic to meet “him”, but then super disappointed when she realizes it’s a woman. Evidently the idea of changing bodies wasn’t the only problem, or the most important one, but the sex of the new host.

Also, your idea of looking at percentages of world population seems off to me. As an example, clearly not >50% of the world’s population are homosexual, but still a line saying that it’s a “human failing” that “we” just can’t love someone of the same sex would be super wrong.

The context of this conversation is just as important. The point I challenge is that her limitation is rare and not widespread. She literally says it's the ongoing changes with that uncertainty that is her problem. That Bev is straight doesn't change anything about that, but illustrates her problem. The point here is that such a problem is not just hers, and even it not 100% of people have the same issues, it would still be >50%. Is she to be blamed for being straight? Would an LG person be blamed for rejecting heterosexual partners? I think not, my opponent apparently thinks yes. For non-bi/pan people, the partner's sex does matter. It's how orientation is defined. >50% of gays and lesbians would reject a hetero partner. >50% of straights would reject a straight partner. Otherwise, they're all on the bi/pan spectrum and not gay, or lesbian, or straight. Somehow, in contrast to others, I find this makes sense...

 

[AntonyF]

I think this is overcomplicated, personally.

Most people wouldn't cope with multiple entire body changes in quick succession. Or the prospect of a loved one turning up in a new body generally. If it's a gender thing most people wouldn't be able to have their lover switch gender like that to the opposite sex, and maybe do it again in the future. Most people are attracted to the opposite gender... you may like that person inside on some level but you can't just switch off gender preference. Sure some people can, most people can't.

I don't think she's precluding loving someone who changes body, but it's just not something we as a race are used to. Perhaps if it were the norm our concept of what love is and how it transfers would change, but we're not there.

So I think Beverley is right to talk about her own experience, but also to say most people wouldn't cope with it well. Because quite frankly we know this to be true of humans.

 

[Alexander Corrino]

What bothers me about the whole thing is not so much the aspect that I also indeed think Crusher would not have gone on about "humanity's ability to love being limited" if Odan had walked in with another male host, it's the fact this show is supposed to be set in the future and that TNG in particular always hits you over the head with "we humans are soooooo much more advanced than we used to be". This clashes rather harshly with Crusher's entire attitude.

What bothers me even more tho is that to me this isn't so much a gay issue first and foremost (although it is, of course), it's a trans issue. Being with someone who can't cope with the fact that that your gender is not the one you "had when you met them" and that you need to be yourself and that this means you might lose the person you love in the process is one of the most heart-wrenching things on an emotional level. In the end it's a choice between being who you really are and losing the person you love or remaining someone you aren't/living a lie but keeping the person you love. And Crusher's flippant way of saying "ugh no thanks" to Odan just REALLY rubs me the wrong way, especially since, like I said, this show is supposed to be set in the future. DS9 had a much, much better scene where the Klingons (the KLINGONS, who aren't really portrayed as folks who seem overly open-minded) are like "oh hi Jadzia" when Dax briefly explains that she's now Jadzia and no longer Curzon. Yes, there is the criticism of this being aliens accepting aliens and no humans are involved, but still. That scene is a far more welcoming one whereas Crusher slamming the door in Odan's face without even wanting to TRY to accept Odan with a female host and then blatantly stating that humanity can't deal with this sort of thing is just... unfortunate for a show set in the future that also constantly claims to be super accepting and enlightened and whatnot.

Yes, I realize that a lot of people in this day and age can't deal with the person they love being trans. That's an unfortunate reality, as much as it saddens me, and while I myself would have no issues with the person I love being trans (I love the person, not the gender), I realize that I can't speak for the rest of humanity on this one. If only Crusher realized the same. I'd be far less bothered if she had said "sorry I know many of my fellow humans are cool with this these days, it's the future, after all, but I'm just not, I can't cope". THAT would have been a statement IMO. Regardless of whether this is a gay or a trans issue or both.

 

[Laughing Dragon]

What bothers me about the whole thing is not so much the aspect that I also indeed think Crusher would not have gone on about "humanity's ability to love being limited" if Odan had walked in with another male host, it's the fact this show is supposed to be set in the future and that TNG in particular always hits you over the head with "we humans are soooooo much more advanced than we used to be". This clashes rather harshly with Crusher's entire attitude.

What bothers me even more tho is that to me this isn't so much a gay issue first and foremost (although it is, of course), it's a trans issue. Being with someone who can't cope with the fact that that your gender is not the one you "had when you met them" and that you need to be yourself and that this means you might lose the person you love in the process is one of the most heart-wrenching things on an emotional level. In the end it's a choice between being who you really are and losing the person you love or remaining someone you aren't/living a lie but keeping the person you love. And Crusher's flippant way of saying "ugh no thanks" to Odan just REALLY rubs me the wrong way, especially since, like I said, this show is supposed to be set in the future. DS9 had a much, much better scene where the Klingons (the KLINGONS, who aren't really portrayed as folks who seem overly open-minded) are like "oh hi Jadzia" when Dax briefly explains that she's now Jadzia and no longer Curzon. Yes, there is the criticism of this being aliens accepting aliens and no humans are involved, but still. That scene is a far more welcoming one whereas Crusher slamming the door in Odan's face without even wanting to TRY to accept Odan with a female host and then blatantly stating that humanity can't deal with this sort of thing is just... unfortunate for a show set in the future that also constantly claims to be super accepting and enlightened and whatnot.

Yes, I realize that a lot of people in this day and age can't deal with the person they love being trans. That's an unfortunate reality, as much as it saddens me, and while I myself would have no issues with the person I love being trans (I love the person, not the gender), I realize that I can't speak for the rest of humanity on this one. If only Crusher realized the same. I'd be far less bothered if she had said "sorry I know many of my fellow humans are cool with this these days, it's the future, after all, but I'm just not, I can't cope". THAT would have been a statement IMO. Regardless of whether this is a gay or a trans issue or both.

But we have to realize trans was not even an issue back then. Not because there were people that did not care it was not thought of much. If this is what it's about. Thought it was more of anger from omnisexuals or non binary. People are going to have to come to terns that there were gays and their allies that appreciated that back then. And yes, IS a good "excuse." You may not have had a show that could not slip these stories under the radar. Again Re: Ellen - "I'm gay!" Sci Fi , fantasy and superheroes has always been about allegories and stand ins to teach though, that may be too strong a word. Its more in your face now with newer writers.

That's completely untrue.

Uhhhh, are you from there? Surprise the socially aware on not disputing this.