News Season 2 will be the last (show cancelled)

[Jarvisimo]

I hate it when the "sexist", "racist", "fascist" etc card is used against you when you do not like a show.
It is the weakest of arguments. Of course there are people who see shows through their bigotry glasses and IMDB is full with "it is too much wooooooooke" idiotic reviews.
Still, to make everything about politics no matter what is stupid if not dangerous in this "with us or against us logic". Shows can simply suck or just being disliked.
I disliked DISCO (even if I watched it for 3 seasons trying to like it) and I did have to face arguments (even here) like "you do not like DISCO cause you are sexist racist male who doesnt like strong black female leads" (btw I am a woman and my fav ST character is 7). I mean yeah, our world is getting more and more fascist but hell, we can't just like a show because it has good intentions. It must have good writing as well.

I must admit I struggled with Rings of Power and this - it felt like my friends, who are progressive, were saying the same arguments as people that made me feel very unhappy. But of course, Rings of Power isn't good compared to Tolkien's work - I can see that too, now - but it's a shame the debate about whether it's "good" or not gets conflated with the culture wars.

I'd agree Discovery wasn't very good, it's a great shame as it was the first of this generation and set the tone, unfortunately, for much that followed. But it's the same there as with RoP - my generally progressive friends unfortunately making the same critical arguments as many of the more difficult people online.

However with all this, because the latter - the x-phobic - say often horrible things, we tend to ignore the useful critical content within them (however much there is) - and then, worse, suspect that critical content when someone who isn't being an x-phobe says the same as one.

 

[Michael]

I must say, I find that so curious, because I can honestly say that as an ardent critic of Discovery I have never found myself to be faced with any accusations of misogyny, racism or homophobia because of it. In my decades on this board I can’t personally recall ever having come across someone being labeled one of these things purely because they didn’t enjoy Discovery, and I have a hard time imagining that if someone was indeed called something like that, it wasn’t because they actually did frame their dislike of the show in a way that was rooted in some form of bigotry. I’m afraid we would have to look at specific examples of this happening, because I’m not sure I’m able to just take anyone’s word for it. I seriously doubt someone saying something like “Discovery’s first season was poorly plotted, riddled with inconsistencies and off-putting tonal shifts and I found the characters to be utterly boring” was ever met with people calling them a racist, sexist or whatever because of it.

I will say, what I have discovered over the years is that when people are made aware of reproducing some form of bigotry, even if no ill-intent is implied, they will often consider themselves being attacked and unfairly labeled, rather than reflecting on their own statements and beliefs and at least allowing for the possibility that they are exhibiting bigoted thinking. Some people have this notion that in order to have a racist thought, you must necessarily be some raging Nazi, or that you have to be a self-proclaimed Men’s Rights Activist to display some misogynist thinking. If were honest, we are all capable (myself included) of harboring some problematic ways of thinking. Nobody’s perfect. And I often think online discussion about such things would be much more fruitful if we all wouldn’t have this knee-jerk reaction of feeling attacked or labeled every time someone tells us something we said might be problematic.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Do people actually think Klingon society can function without doctors, scientists and all the rest.

Well they did steal warp technology. But yeah they do have those but they aren't exactly plentiful.

I must admit I struggled with Rings of Power and this - it felt like my friends, who are progressive, were saying the same arguments as people that made me feel very unhappy. But of course, Rings of Power isn't good compared to Tolkien's work - I can see that too, now - but it's a shame the debate about whether it's "good" or not gets conflated with the culture wars.

I'd agree Discovery wasn't very good, it's a great shame as it was the first of this generation and set the tone, unfortunately, for much that followed. But it's the same there as with RoP - my generally progressive friends unfortunately making the same critical arguments as many of the more difficult people online.

However with all this, because the latter - the x-phobic - say often horrible things, we tend to ignore the useful critical content within them (however much there is) - and then, worse, suspect that critical content when someone who isn't being an x-phobe says the same as one.

I hate it when the "sexist", "racist", "fascist" etc card is used against you when you do not like a show.
It is the weakest of arguments. Of course there are people who see shows through their bigotry glasses and IMDB is full with "it is too much wooooooooke" idiotic reviews.
Still, to make everything about politics no matter what is stupid if not dangerous in this "with us or against us logic". Shows can simply suck or just being disliked.
I disliked DISCO (even if I watched it for 3 seasons trying to like it) and I did have to face arguments (even here) like "you do not like DISCO cause you are sexist racist male who doesnt like strong black female leads" (btw I am a woman and my fav ST character is 7). I mean yeah, our world is getting more and more fascist but hell, we can't just like a show because it has good intentions. It must have good writing as well.

Right if it was just about culture and politics why didn't more progressive and younger viewrers show up to watch the show? If people are claiming what they are claiming. Sometimes a show just isn't written well. Too many silly things like an alien throwing up glitter(it looks just like human manufactured glitter and even Johnathan frakes thinks its strange. Warp slugs. Sigh) Also the tech in the 32nd century looks primitive and frankly stinks. Lol

 

[tenmei]

However with all this, because the latter - the x-phobic - say often horrible things, we tend to ignore the useful critical content within them (however much there is) - and then, worse, suspect that critical content when someone who isn't being an x-phobe says the same as one.

If people get called X-phobic it's because they're saying and doing X-phobic things, not because they didn't like the flashback framing sequence in 1x04 or the use of a play as a narrative device in 1x08.

 

[Bgt]

I seriously doubt someone saying something like “Discovery’s first season was poorly plotted, riddled with inconsistencies and off-putting tonal shifts and I found the characters to be utterly boring” was ever met with people calling them a racist, sexist or whatever because of it.

Well, since you seriously doubt....

Spoilers - Star Trek: Discovery 3x01 - "That Hope Is You, Part 1"

"You may not be aware of this, Lieutenant, but I once conceived a half-human, half-Vulcan child with a former shipmate of whom I was quite fond. Our offspring was the first known child conceived with human and Vulcan DNA." "Fascinating. Your service record failed to mention that." "For reasons...

www.trekbbs.com

I took me almost a year to come back to TrekBbs and never again in Disco forums, where let's say you didn't feel very welcome if you were criticizing the show.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

Well, since you seriously doubt....

Spoilers - Star Trek: Discovery 3x01 - "That Hope Is You, Part 1"

"You may not be aware of this, Lieutenant, but I once conceived a half-human, half-Vulcan child with a former shipmate of whom I was quite fond. Our offspring was the first known child conceived with human and Vulcan DNA." "Fascinating. Your service record failed to mention that." "For reasons...

www.trekbbs.com

I took me almost a year to come back to TrekBbs and never again in Disco forums, where let's say you didn't feel very welcome if you were criticizing the show.

Unfortunately a lot of people were saying what you said entirely for the wrong reasons and given that complaining about how much screen time the literal protagonist of the show gets is an unsual and pretty thin complaint often deployed by these kind of people it is understandable your motivations were questioned at the time.

But it does seem more like it was posited as a theory to explain the slightly odd criticism and not an outright accusation. Perhaps a reminder to us all that intent is seldom clear in text based communication.

 

[Michael]

Well, since you seriously doubt....

Spoilers - Star Trek: Discovery 3x01 - "That Hope Is You, Part 1"

"You may not be aware of this, Lieutenant, but I once conceived a half-human, half-Vulcan child with a former shipmate of whom I was quite fond. Our offspring was the first known child conceived with human and Vulcan DNA." "Fascinating. Your service record failed to mention that." "For reasons...

www.trekbbs.com

I took me almost a year to come back to TrekBbs and never again in Disco forums, …

First of all, thanks for pointing me to that. I agree that they are questioning whether your statements about Burnham were rooted in some form of misogyny or even racism. I personally wouldn’t have made that leap, but I’m also not exactly sure if I would call what they did “playing the racism/sexism card to you” or “calling you a chauvinistic, racist pig”.

Look, I certainly understand your frustration, but as someone who wasn’t born yesterday and has been around on the ’net I can kind of see why someone might make that leap and at least ask the question (which they certainly could have done with more tact instead of just assuming). You have to realize that in many cases racists and misogynists online won’t come out and straight up make a clearly racist/sexist remark. Instead they’ll often use codes and dog whistles that dress up their problematic viewpoints in a way that can’t be recognized as plainly. Mostly they’ll try to leave room for plausible deniability. And in that kind of environment I think it’s at least understandable how people might have read you that way.

I understand that you didn’t mean it that way, but can you see how basically saying “The main character of the show is too central to the show” and saying she hasn’t “earned it” to be that central, when the main difference to most of the earlier main characters seems to be her gender and ethnicity, could lead someone to at least wonder if you’re maybe applying a double standard? What I wonder is, would you have been as upset and feel attacked if someone had just more politely asked you if your criticism was maybe based on a bigoted belief? Or would the mere insinuation that it could be so made you equally as angry?

I personally don’t think there’s anything racist or misogynistic about not being a fan of Burnham. My own opinion of her is that I liked Sonequa Martin-Green and I liked the concept of the character (being raised on Vulcan as Spock’s sister), but that they wrote her in a way that often wasn’t very appealing to me as a viewer. I will say, though, watching the show I often wondered if my dislike of the character was possibly rooted in some form unconscious bias against her being a woman and if I would view the character differently if she was a man. I ultimately don’t think I would, but I also don’t think it would be intellectually honest of me to completely free myself of at least the possibility that me being raised in a misogynistic world might have influenced my unconscious biases.

… where let's say you didn't feel very welcome if you were criticizing the show.

On this I will agree. I checked out sometime around the end of season two, when it really became no fun to be there as someone who didn’t like the direction of the show. There were just a handful of posters who managed to make it an unpleasant experience.

 

[TRON JA307020]

First of all, thanks for pointing me to that. I agree that they are questioning whether your statements about Burnham were rooted in some form of misogyny or even racism. I personally wouldn’t have made that leap, but I’m also not exactly sure if I would call what they did “playing the racism/sexism card to you” or “calling you a chauvinistic, racist pig”.

Look, I certainly understand your frustration, but as someone who wasn’t born yesterday and has been around on the ’net I can kind of see why someone might make that leap and at least ask the question (which they certainly could have done with more tact instead of just assuming). You have to realize that in many cases racists and misogynists online won’t come out and straight up make a clearly racist/sexist remark. Instead they’ll often use codes and dog whistles that dress up their problematic viewpoints in a way that can’t be recognized as plainly. Mostly they’ll try to leave room for plausible deniability. And in that kind of environment I think it’s at least understandable how people might have read you that way.

I understand that you didn’t mean it that way, but can you see how basically saying “The main character of the show is too central to the show” and saying she hasn’t “earned it” to be that central, when the main difference to most of the earlier main characters seems to be her gender and ethnicity, could lead someone to at least wonder if you’re maybe applying a double standard? What I wonder is, would you have been as upset and feel attacked if someone had just more politely asked you if your criticism was maybe based on a bigoted belief? Or would the mere insinuation that it could be so made you equally as angry?

I personally don’t think there’s anything racist or misogynistic about not being a fan of Burnham. My own opinion of her is that I liked Sonequa Martin-Green and I liked the concept of the character (being raised on Vulcan as Spock’s sister), but that they wrote her in a way that often wasn’t very appealing to me as a viewer. I will say, though, watching the show I often wondered if my dislike of the character was possibly rooted in some form unconscious bias against her being a woman and if I would view the character differently if she was a man. I ultimately don’t think I would, but I also don’t think it would be intellectually honest of me to completely free myself of at least the possibility that me being raised in a misogynistic world might have influenced my unconscious biases.


On this I will agree. I checked out sometime around the end of season two, when it really became no fun to be there as someone who didn’t like the direction of the show. There were just a handful of posters who managed to make it an unpleasant experience.

She was a mutineer, her actions got her captain killed and touched off a deadly war that got more people killed. A season later everyone is saying how amazing she is. In my opinion it doesn't matter her gender, race or anything else beyond what her crimes were. Its like everyone forgot and she's a great starfleet hero right up there or surpassing Kirk, Picard, Sisko and Janeway. Nope. She was self absorbed, everyone around her were constantly gushing about someone who caused a lot of damage and death. I couldn't see past that. Even she got to thinking she was amazing. Not after what she did. Nope. Anyone man, woman of an race etc. I would say the same.

 

[cooleddie74]

Whatever Michael Burnham did at least her heart and intentions were in the right place. Emperor Georgiou's little fawning fan club before she went back in time to join Section 31, that was downright idiotic and arguably the stupidest thing DSC ever did, and that's saying something for that series.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Whatever Michael Burnham did at least her heart and intentions were in the right place. Emperor Georgiou's little fawning fan club before she went back in time to join Section 31, that was downright idiotic and arguably the stupidest thing DSC ever did, and that's saying something for that series.

Yup. Even stupider. But both characters really are in my opinion. So glad STD is gone.

 

[Danja]

Sometimes a show just isn't written well. Too many silly things like an alien throwing up glitter(it looks just like human manufactured glitter and even Johnathan frakes thinks its strange.

The glitter vomit was Tawny Newsome's idea (She doesn't like seeing people throw up.)

Speaking of Tawny, now that SFA has bit the dust, I can't see her Star Trek sitcom going anywhere.

 

[Bgt]

Burnahm was Burnham. Some people like her some don't. That is not the point.

First of all, thanks for pointing me to that. I agree that they are questioning whether your statements about Burnham were rooted in some form of misogyny or even racism. I personally wouldn’t have made that leap, but I’m also not exactly sure if I would call what they did “playing the racism/sexism card to you” or “calling you a chauvinistic, racist pig”.

Look, I certainly understand your frustration, but as someone who wasn’t born yesterday and has been around on the ’net I can kind of see why someone might make that leap and at least ask the question (which they certainly could have done with more tact instead of just assuming). You have to realize that in many cases racists and misogynists online won’t come out and straight up make a clearly racist/sexist remark. Instead they’ll often use codes and dog whistles that dress up their problematic viewpoints in a way that can’t be recognized as plainly. Mostly they’ll try to leave room for plausible deniability. And in that kind of environment I think it’s at least understandable how people might have read you that way.

I understand that you didn’t mean it that way, but can you see how basically saying “The main character of the show is too central to the show” and saying she hasn’t “earned it” to be that central, when the main difference to most of the earlier main characters seems to be her gender and ethnicity, could lead someone to at least wonder if you’re maybe applying a double standard? What I wonder is, would you have been as upset and feel attacked if someone had just more politely asked you if your criticism was maybe based on a bigoted belief? Or would the mere insinuation that it could be so made you equally as angry?

I personally don’t think there’s anything racist or misogynistic about not being a fan of Burnham. My own opinion of her is that I liked Sonequa Martin-Green and I liked the concept of the character (being raised on Vulcan as Spock’s sister), but that they wrote her in a way that often wasn’t very appealing to me as a viewer. I will say, though, watching the show I often wondered if my dislike of the character was possibly rooted in some form unconscious bias against her being a woman and if I would view the character differently if she was a man. I ultimately don’t think I would, but I also don’t think it would be intellectually honest of me to completely free myself of at least the possibility that me being raised in a misogynistic world might have influenced my unconscious biases.


On this I will agree. I checked out sometime around the end of season two, when it really became no fun to be there as someone who didn’t like the direction of the show. There were just a handful of posters who managed to make it an unpleasant experience.

You really love this community, right ?
I am sorry, but I am not gonna see it otherwise when someone argument's against my opinion is that I do not like women or/and people of color.
And closing it here, my point is not if Burnham was a good or a bad TV character, whatever rocks everyone's boat. My point is that in the times we live, people have trouble debating and just use the racism/sexism/woke/whatever cards cause they simply cannot think otherwise or they have nothing to say. And since this is a big community, we have people like this here as well. That's all.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Discovery had serious issues, but sadly they were magnified 100fold by the racists, homophobe and sexist scumbags review bombing and whatnot. It made for a challenging time critiquing the show.

My biggest issue was when, mid-crisis, they'd all stop and have a heart-to-heart or personal revelation time. I get the idea of it, but in one episode giant monsters literally stopped their approach so Tilly and the cadets could sort out their issues and it was infuriating. Ditto Michael and Book having a relationship chat while infiltrating the Breen supership.

Into Darkness got a lot of flak for Spock and Uhura discussing their relationship issues on their flight around Kronos, but at least they were doing it without the baddies pausing for them to finish (plus it was funny)

 

[Turtletrekker]

The glitter vomit was Tawny Newsome's idea (She doesn't like seeing people throw up.)

Speaking of Tawny, now that SFA has bit the dust, I can't see her Star Trek sitcom going anywhere.

I seem to recall that it was Noga Landau who came up with the glitter vomit idea. As for the sitcom, I never expected to see that anyway.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

Discovery had serious issues, but sadly they were magnified 100fold by the racists, homophobe and sexist scumbags review bombing and whatnot. It made for a challenging time critiquing the show.

And all under the guise of just "expressing their opinion" often with no context 'these characters are bad' 'this isn't real Star Trek' and no explanation as to what they mean. A red flag.

As someone who really does not like DSC season 1 there are plenty of reasons to be critical of it but some critiques were just nonsensical and thinly veiled bigotry. And Academy has suffered the same.

 

[Moopsy]

I didn't find Discovery as rewatchable as some other Trek series, but I always supported it because of Sonequa Martin-Green, who is from the same Alabama town (Russellville) as me. We also went to the same high school (many years apart, though!) and she was her graduating class's salutatorian.

 

[Turtletrekker]

...and she was her graduating class's salutatorian.

If it hadn't been for that post-ganglionic fiber...

 

[Steve Roby]

I didn't find Discovery as rewatchable as some other Trek series

I've already rewatched the first couple of seasons, and I'll rewatch the others. I've got all of Star Trek on DVD or blu ray (what's been released so far, anyway), and while there are Voyager and Enterprise discs in this house that may never feel the warmth and light of a laser, all the Discovery ones will. It's not perfect but I like it anyway.

 

[Danja]

My biggest issue was when, mid-crisis, they'd all stop and have a heart-to-heart or personal revelation time. I get the idea of it, but in one episode giant monsters literally stopped their approach so Tilly and the cadets could sort out their issues and it was infuriating. Ditto Michael and Book having a relationship chat while infiltrating the Breen supership.

TNG would have these deep philosophical discussions while the ship was under attack.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

TNG would have these deep philosophical discussions while the ship was under attack.

TNG was fond of its observation lounge scenes in a crisis, to the point where viewers did notice, but they typically worked well and felt natural in the episode. Disco's scenes didn't.