nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Earth!
- Thread starter SonicRanger
- Start date
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
But the fact is they weren't for the most part. Much like the serving wench of old the Geisha had many roles and most of these poor girls in the past eras were doing it because they were sold into it because their families owed money. Japanese women up until recently have been treated as second class citizens. You can see that reflected in alot of their cutural stories.
Maybe you need to research what you are talking about before you speak. The modern Geisha is a far cry from what they once were.
But the fact is they weren't for the most part. Much like the serving wench of old the Geisha had many roles and most of these poor girls in the past eras were doing it because they were sold into it because their families owed money. Japanese women up until recently have been treated as second class citizens. You can see that reflected in alot of their cutural stories.
Maybe you need to research what you are talking about before you speak. The modern Geisha is a far cry from what they once were.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
No. It's just plain silly. It has nothing to do with how much one knows (or doesn't know) about sex.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
*sigh* I think we're done here...
Wikipedia says, that the situation is more complicated, even to Japanese.
All the same, what's wrong with having a love instructor? Some people know more about sex than others, it's rare to have situation where two people know as much as each other.
It's only a western idea that sex is a dirty act of selfishness and lust that should be kept behind closed doors.
I remember reading of an African tribe where the boys were initiated and taught about the subject by their AUNTIES!!
Love and peace, man!!
All the same, what's wrong with having a love instructor? Some people know more about sex than others, it's rare to have situation where two people know as much as each other.
It's only a western idea that sex is a dirty act of selfishness and lust that should be kept behind closed doors.
I remember reading of an African tribe where the boys were initiated and taught about the subject by their AUNTIES!!
How? How is it silly? If you can have sex education lessons,in school, why can't you take it one step further?
Love and peace, man!!
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
You do know TMP came out in 1979 NOT in the 1960s right?
You do know TMP came out in 1979 NOT in the 1960s right?
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
I don't really know or care about the American culture of the sixties. My space opera future is based on anthropological research about other cultures that have differing sexual mores than Americans/Westerners.
There is no getting around the fact that "love instructor" is a silly phrase and concept (why would you need more than one? if you're not completely incompetent, after the first two or three you should graduate from being a "student of love" to just a lover. Also, what kind of certifications do you have to get to qualify as an instructor?) even for the late seventies. The rest of it is somewhat more reasonable (vaccines for STDs, cybernetics, the idea that TOS was a PR campaign that exaggerated the exploits of the Enterprise as a recruiting tactic, novel naming conventions), but it really depends on the execution whether it works or not. For one thing, it completely erases all other cultures (are humans all becoming swingers, or just Westerners/Americans? oh wait, it's Roddenberry-topia where humanity all speaks English and acts like Westerners... when did that happen and how the hell do you work out the disturbing implications?!) and ignores the fact that not every person even within one culture has the same sexual practices.
One of the perennial problems of Roddenberry's Trek (and most mainstream speculative fiction) is that it tends to paint entire species of sapient beings (even humans!) as having a monoculture. Every planet is a planet of hats. Ferengi are all greedy capitalists. Klingons are all honorable warriors, and they all speak the same language which is all written in the same typeface. Really? Six billion people all speak the same language and have the same culture? Even allowing for alien differences (which aren't that pronounced; everyone's bipedal and has largely the same physiological and cognitive traits) that's strikingly improbable.
I don't really know or care about the American culture of the sixties. My space opera future is based on anthropological research about other cultures that have differing sexual mores than Americans/Westerners.
There is no getting around the fact that "love instructor" is a silly phrase and concept (why would you need more than one? if you're not completely incompetent, after the first two or three you should graduate from being a "student of love" to just a lover. Also, what kind of certifications do you have to get to qualify as an instructor?) even for the late seventies. The rest of it is somewhat more reasonable (vaccines for STDs, cybernetics, the idea that TOS was a PR campaign that exaggerated the exploits of the Enterprise as a recruiting tactic, novel naming conventions), but it really depends on the execution whether it works or not. For one thing, it completely erases all other cultures (are humans all becoming swingers, or just Westerners/Americans? oh wait, it's Roddenberry-topia where humanity all speaks English and acts like Westerners... when did that happen and how the hell do you work out the disturbing implications?!) and ignores the fact that not every person even within one culture has the same sexual practices.
One of the perennial problems of Roddenberry's Trek (and most mainstream speculative fiction) is that it tends to paint entire species of sapient beings (even humans!) as having a monoculture. Every planet is a planet of hats. Ferengi are all greedy capitalists. Klingons are all honorable warriors, and they all speak the same language which is all written in the same typeface. Really? Six billion people all speak the same language and have the same culture? Even allowing for alien differences (which aren't that pronounced; everyone's bipedal and has largely the same physiological and cognitive traits) that's strikingly improbable.
Last edited:
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
The phrase is silly. Sex therapists exist today--they don't call themselves "love instructors". And, really, "love" instructor? Why beat around the bush (pun intended)? "Sex" instructor would have been far more descriptive (or have humans regressed in the 23rd century to the point of needing instruction on how to "love" as opposed to how to have sex?).
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
It's what's called these days a "non-denial denial."
It's what's called these days a "non-denial denial."
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
Interesting thread...I'm glad somebody made the connection between GR and modern Geishas. That was a connection that was screaming out to be made.
Interesting thread...I'm glad somebody made the connection between GR and modern Geishas. That was a connection that was screaming out to be made.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
Oh, Ya, Sure pick on dead man why don't you.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
This is history being written here and now. Cool.
This is history being written here and now. Cool.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
And then we have Cheapjack, who seems not to understand humor at all:
On the other hand, there are plenty who, after many months, still haven't caught on to Wormhole. Go figure.
And then we have Cheapjack, who seems not to understand humor at all:
You're slipping, Cheapjack. It took you all the way until Post #94 to come charging to the rescue of Gene Roddenberry's reputation, but only two posts more to yank the thread off-topic with geishas and Reagan. (Remember the 'no politics in the Trek XI forum' rule?) Knock it off and go practice using the Quote and Multi-Quote functions, so I don't have to clean up any more of your posts.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/mediaview?id=4613
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/mediaview?id=4613
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
Then let the more experienced partner teach the other. Third parties don't need to get involved.
Besides, as has been pointed out, the phrase 'love instructor' sounds like (as Cartman would say) "tree-hugging hippie crap". Perhaps a more descriptive term would be something like "whore".
Then let the more experienced partner teach the other. Third parties don't need to get involved.
Besides, as has been pointed out, the phrase 'love instructor' sounds like (as Cartman would say) "tree-hugging hippie crap". Perhaps a more descriptive term would be something like "whore".
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
Oh man, that's great. It really does fit the Borg-enhanced Narada from 'Countdown' and the plot of the new movie perfectly. Well played, sir. 
Oh man, that's great.
It really does fit the Borg-enhanced Narada from 'Countdown' and the plot of the new movie perfectly. Well played, sir. 
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
I agree 100%. Gene was a never-ending fountain of bad ideas in his post TOS days. For example:
1. Always wanting to make a movie about the crew going back to the JFK assasination and having Spock be the shooter on the grassy knoll.
2. The dramatic dead-end of "perfect" 24th century humans that can never argue or have conflict with one another.
3. Not considering movies like TUC because of it portraying corruption in Starfleet command. (He read the script before he died)
4. The God Thing
Star Trek was always much better off in the hands of someone else than Roddenberry. Sometimes other people can see things more clearly than those who thought of the concept in the first place.
I agree 100%. Gene was a never-ending fountain of bad ideas in his post TOS days. For example:
1. Always wanting to make a movie about the crew going back to the JFK assasination and having Spock be the shooter on the grassy knoll.
2. The dramatic dead-end of "perfect" 24th century humans that can never argue or have conflict with one another.
3. Not considering movies like TUC because of it portraying corruption in Starfleet command. (He read the script before he died)
4. The God Thing
Star Trek was always much better off in the hands of someone else than Roddenberry. Sometimes other people can see things more clearly than those who thought of the concept in the first place.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
I agree most of those ideas are kind of weird. The idea of humans "moving past monogamy" is like saying humans should also "move past" education or structured societies or having families altogether...
anyway, the idea of some one else taking over from the original creator could also have been applied to the SW Prequels. Think about how awesome those movies would have been if someone other than Lucas had done it.
I dare say I might have come up with a better plot...
I agree most of those ideas are kind of weird. The idea of humans "moving past monogamy" is like saying humans should also "move past" education or structured societies or having families altogether...
anyway, the idea of some one else taking over from the original creator could also have been applied to the SW Prequels. Think about how awesome those movies would have been if someone other than Lucas had done it.
I dare say I might have come up with a better plot...
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
Just think if a lot of people took Roddenberry's writing the same way they'd take Hubbard's, there'd be one hell of a religion going on there...
Just think if a lot of people took Roddenberry's writing the same way they'd take Hubbard's, there'd be one hell of a religion going on there...
Similar threads
