I never said it was.
You said that the mindset of the time, as shown in the writing, was that Leah should actually appreciate being sexualized. I see no evidence for that, neither from the episode itself nor from anything any of the writers have ever said. As to the overall matter of the 90's, I was referring to several comments made by posters here in this thread, not just to your comments.
From goo
From google: 1990s marked a major transitional period for women's attitudes toward male attention, driven by the rise of third-wave feminism, the "Girl Power" movement, and increasing workplace independence. While traditional norms from previous decades still influenced many to view male attention as inherently flattering, the 1990s saw a massive societal push toward female autonomy. The central shift was about agency—the idea that women should have the right to define what attention was welcome and what was not.
Okay, and I just disagree with that. I think it's just wrong.
But that still doesn't address the specific issue, which is whether the episode and the writers behind it were coming from the perspective that Leah should appreciate being sexualized. That is the Trek-specific topic being discussed here. And I just do not see any evidence of that.
Leah thought he was a skeevy predator and was ready to cut his balls off. At some point before she got around to doing just that, she figured out that despite the evidence, that Geordi was just a moron.
I think it's also worth noting that in the broader discussion of whether or not Trek sexualizes women -- not about Leah, but Trek in general -- that standards do change and evolve. From today's point of view, it would be entirely reasonable to look back at TOS and think that all the women running around in miniskirts was sexualizing them in a degrading way, but at the time, as confirmed numerous times by Nichelle Nichols, the miniskirts were viewed as an expression of female empowerment.
To give some context to the cultural climate when this episode was broadcast, I think it is useful to look at some examples from films of that time.
- Revenge of the Nerds (1984): The nerds install hidden cameras in a sorority house to watch the women naked, then sell pies with a nude photograph of Betty concealed underneath. Lewis also impersonates Betty’s boyfriend to have sex with her. (Secret filming, the distribution of intimate images without consent, and violations of sexual consent are presented as clever revenge and romantic triumph.)
[* Sixteen Candles (1984): Jake hands his heavily intoxicated girlfriend over to Ted; their conversation the following morning suggests a sexual encounter she cannot clearly remember.(Her inability to consent becomes part of a comic sexual conquest.) - The Breakfast Club (1985): Bender insults and sexually harasses Claire, including an implied unwanted sexual touching under a table, yet they become romantically involved. (His aggression becomes part of his rebellious appeal without a meaningful apology)
- St. Elmo’s Fire (1985): Kirby persistently pursues Dale despite her lack of interest, eventually tracking her down during a vacation with her boyfriend. It culminates in an unsolicited kiss framed as a personal victory. Billy also makes unwanted physical advances toward Jules.
- Overboard (1987) : A man exploits a woman’s amnesia, convincing her that she is his wife and the mother of his children, then putting her to work caring for them. (The story transforms manipulation and exploitation into a beneficial lesson in humility and the foundation of a happy family)
- True Lies (1994): Harry uses intelligence-service resources to surveil his wife, have her abducted and interrogated, and manipulate her into performing a striptease through a fabricated assignment (Jealous surveillance and humiliation become entertainment and part of a marital reconciliation)
Last edited:
The oldest article I've found mentioning "rape" in an article is from 2009 (more than 30 years after the movie).
The "Sixteen Candles" date rape scene? - Salon.com
Reassessing the weird sexual politics of Hughes' classic teen comedies
www.salon.com
There's this thread on a forum (2004).
Revenge of the Nerds - Making a Joke of Rape - Cafe Society - Straight Dope Message Board
What is wrong with this movie? How can people make a joke out of rape? I am so sure that the cheerleader would fall in love with the nerd after he raped her. And let’s not forget these nerds also broke into the sorority …
boards.straightdope.com
By the way, the use of the word "rape" isn't hyperbole. The protagonist would be in prison today in some states for what he did (It would seem so at the time, too, but I doubt anyone would have condemned him. Maybe they would have given him a high five)
Last edited:
I was rereading DeCandido's review of the episode (I really didn't want to watch it again so I read it because he gives such detailed summaries) and, wow! he expresses my thoughts on the episode in much better words than I did.
[...] And then she goes to the holodeck, and sees the fateful program. She tears La Forge a new one, and it’s one hundred percent justified. Her questions are all legitimate: how far did it go? how many Leah Brahms programs does he have? As viewers who watch every week, we’re pretty sure La Forge didn’t take it any further (if it was Reg Barclay, it might be a different story…), but Brahms only just met the guy, and he’s mostly been creepily flirting with her, so she has no way of knowing how far this personal violation has gone.
Right after that, the episode goes directly into the toilet. Instead of apologizing, instead of throwing himself on Brahms’s mercy, instead of admitting that he’s been kinda creepy, La Forge gets his dander up. He tries to blame her for being such a meanie to him, even after he was nice to her (while using his holographic blow-up doll to help him flirt better with her), and makes it all her fault for not accepting his incredibly creepy attempts at friendship.
So it’s bad enough that they’ve turned La Forge into an unrepentant virtual rapist. The events of “Booby Trap” were indeed creepy (in case, y’know, I didn’t make that clear), but at least you can make an argument that La Forge was caught up in the heat of events and stuff happened. I don’t know that I’d buy that argument, but you can make it. This, though, is despicable, to be confronted with your awful behavior and to respond by trying to claim the high ground.
But then the problem is compounded by the rest of the episode taking La Forge’s side. Brahms helps La Forge solve a crisis, they work well together, and she decides that all is forgiven and they have a good laugh about it in Ten-Forward. Uh, no.
----------------------------------------------------------
And then he added in the comments
---------------------------------------------------------
La Forge learned from the re-creation in “Booby Trap” that Brahms likes fungili. When he offers her dinner in “Galaxy’s Child” he offers her fungili. Brahms is suprised, and says, “I love fungili.” La Forge’s answer is to feign surprise and say, “Really?”
He doesn’t say, “I know, I did a little research on you and found that out.” He lies to her and misleads her and makes her think that he came up with that totally on his own and look, doesn’t that make us simpatico, because I also like fungili just like you, and we should totally have sex now.
That’s why La Forge’s behavior is so awful. Not because of his fantasies, not because of his thoughts — though if it’s not such a big deal, why was he so guilty and nervous about letting Brahms see the simulation from “Booby Trap”? — but because of his actions.
And do people really believe that what Leah did was much worse?
[...] And then she goes to the holodeck, and sees the fateful program. She tears La Forge a new one, and it’s one hundred percent justified. Her questions are all legitimate: how far did it go? how many Leah Brahms programs does he have? As viewers who watch every week, we’re pretty sure La Forge didn’t take it any further (if it was Reg Barclay, it might be a different story…), but Brahms only just met the guy, and he’s mostly been creepily flirting with her, so she has no way of knowing how far this personal violation has gone.
Right after that, the episode goes directly into the toilet. Instead of apologizing, instead of throwing himself on Brahms’s mercy, instead of admitting that he’s been kinda creepy, La Forge gets his dander up. He tries to blame her for being such a meanie to him, even after he was nice to her (while using his holographic blow-up doll to help him flirt better with her), and makes it all her fault for not accepting his incredibly creepy attempts at friendship.
So it’s bad enough that they’ve turned La Forge into an unrepentant virtual rapist. The events of “Booby Trap” were indeed creepy (in case, y’know, I didn’t make that clear), but at least you can make an argument that La Forge was caught up in the heat of events and stuff happened. I don’t know that I’d buy that argument, but you can make it. This, though, is despicable, to be confronted with your awful behavior and to respond by trying to claim the high ground.
But then the problem is compounded by the rest of the episode taking La Forge’s side. Brahms helps La Forge solve a crisis, they work well together, and she decides that all is forgiven and they have a good laugh about it in Ten-Forward. Uh, no.
----------------------------------------------------------
And then he added in the comments
---------------------------------------------------------
La Forge learned from the re-creation in “Booby Trap” that Brahms likes fungili. When he offers her dinner in “Galaxy’s Child” he offers her fungili. Brahms is suprised, and says, “I love fungili.” La Forge’s answer is to feign surprise and say, “Really?”
He doesn’t say, “I know, I did a little research on you and found that out.” He lies to her and misleads her and makes her think that he came up with that totally on his own and look, doesn’t that make us simpatico, because I also like fungili just like you, and we should totally have sex now.
That’s why La Forge’s behavior is so awful. Not because of his fantasies, not because of his thoughts — though if it’s not such a big deal, why was he so guilty and nervous about letting Brahms see the simulation from “Booby Trap”? — but because of his actions.
And do people really believe that what Leah did was much worse?
That for me is probably the most succinct and balanced explanation of the episode.
I think another strand to this story is the need for conflict. The writers have discussed ad Infinitum that it was hard to have no conflict, and then they started countering this by having external forces that aren't the crew provide that conflict.
So here they had Leah provide the conflict in two ways: one being an arse about the engine changes, then making her look over the top and hysterical (and I use that word deliberately) over our boy Geordi who we are meant to side with as he's our regular.
The trouble is in using her as the conflict vehicle, it makes Leah look less sympathetic.
If it were a male character we wouldn't have the issue. If they had removed the conflict and had Geordi bumbling about it may have been okay. But the mixture of wanting conflict and making her the vehicle, and putting that up against Geordi's admiration for her/crush on her when he's our main star and is the good guy... you get the ugly result.
It also is anchored in another episode which was likely never intended to have a sequel.
So here they had Leah provide the conflict in two ways: one being an arse about the engine changes, then making her look over the top and hysterical (and I use that word deliberately) over our boy Geordi who we are meant to side with as he's our regular.
The trouble is in using her as the conflict vehicle, it makes Leah look less sympathetic.
If it were a male character we wouldn't have the issue. If they had removed the conflict and had Geordi bumbling about it may have been okay. But the mixture of wanting conflict and making her the vehicle, and putting that up against Geordi's admiration for her/crush on her when he's our main star and is the good guy... you get the ugly result.
It also is anchored in another episode which was likely never intended to have a sequel.
Um, sorry, did he have a certain reputation for similar topics? (Genuine question, I don't remember reading anything specific about it)
EDIT
Just read wikipedia page...
In Star Trek: The Next Generation, Hurley was the series' first head writer and show runner. His influence was substantial as he introduced creative elements on the series that became part of the franchise, like the Borg. Hurley was responsible for firing Gates McFadden, who played the role of Dr. Beverly Crusher, at the end of the show's first season.[4] Executive producer Rick Berman recalled that Hurley "had a real bone to pick" with McFadden and did not like her acting.[4] McFadden clashed with Hurley's take on her character during filming, stating, "I definitely pissed off Hurley. Because I kept saying 'Why is it that I've raised this genius kid... and yet every time there's anything serious it's only the male characters who talk to him?'"[5] He left the series after its second season, which left the door open for Rick Berman to rehire McFadden after dismissing her replacement Diana Muldaur. Hurley was replaced by Michael Wagner for four episodes and ultimately by Michael Piller.
Did he write the subsequent episodes of trek where Leah is mentioned as his wife ?
Similar threads
