No, the patent was clearly issued in Leningrad.
TOS myths and misconceptions...
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
No, the patent was clearly issued in Leningrad.
That's ok. Rick Berman still does.
Yeah, I know. Lost in Space was a year ahead of Star Trek, but that and Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea went off at the same time. Land of the Giants wasn't fit to shine Trek's space boots. There wasn't anything else on at the time to really compare it to, and I wasn't really talking about them happening at the same time. LIS started out as a fairly serious and interesting series in the first half of its initial season. Much of the third season still outshines it.And the aired footage bears this out. It is, actually, the most unconvincing kiss on the series. I can see it being devoid of passion, since they were being forced, but it's obvious there's no actual contact of the lips. The Roddenberry part of the myth is kept alive by Nichelle Nichols, who says Roddenberry was there. Nobody else does and her recollection of key events in Trek history has always been rather suspect.
Yeah, true, but man, do some of those effects still hold up today or what? The Jupiter 2 crashing in the desert, the third season shots of it landinga and taking off, the space pod, all still look great. The Seaview, particularly in the color episodes of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, looks 100% convincing (okay, as long as it's not alone in the water tank without any background), and aside from some snatches of wire seen in the DVDs, the Flying Sub is still breathtaking. Watching it burst from the water, dive back down, or actually start to cruise into a city (seen only once) was and is amazing. Models against practical backgrounds hold up better than footage layered over footage and matted against early blue screen or in an optical printer. With very few exceptions, the Irwin Allen shows don't need CGI enhancement (they need script enhancement - ha). The Star Trek effects were really great in their day, and some still hold up. But if LB Abbott and the Lydecker Brothers were on the Trek staff, the model work would still be amazing. But the sets would all have the same Jupiter 2 / Batcave consoles.
But Classic Star Trek, as we all know, was never "about" the effects.
The Gold Key comics had both Kirk and Scotty calling him Bones, but that's the only place I'd seen it.
To be honest, most of the later "myths" stated here I've never heard. I think we're seeing fewer public misconceptions and more examples of "what my friends said."
Last edited:
Warped 9:
No. Not if there was something to be seriously to be gained in helping America in a big way. I said in my post that the Federation would gain some type of rare element or advancement in the process. Everything in this world is motivated by greed, money, or supply and demand. And it is not impossible to imagine the Federation being motivated by similar interests. I am sure if the pot was sweet enough, they would do just about anything to have that particular member join. You have to weigh in how desperate the Federation's need is for what that member is offering if they were to join.
Also, we are talking about an alternate universe here. The Star Trek Universe, although paralleled sometimes with our world, the Star Trek World is a separate fictional universe with an infinite number of possibilities.
Besides, hypothetically speaking: let's say there was a super wealthy country that thought this way in our universe (in regards to women). So are you saying it would be a definite refusal on our part or other NATO members if they opened up hundreds of new jobs within America and other NATO countries?
Plus, the conditions for top female leadership roles within the Federation would be restricted to positions within Starfleet only. Not all female leadership type positions across the Federation.
Side Note:
Furthermore, matters that run this country are run by the President and it's elected officials. Not by Americans themselves. So it wouldn't matter if "we the people" or "Americans" said "sc#*w you" or not.
Yes. I realize why there was no women in the Original Series for this reason. However, we have to accept the world as it is presented to us. We can't make excuses or change the Prime Universe in Kirk's era unless there was some type of manipulation of the time line or something.
Side Note:
Also, we are talking about a fictional universe that operates, thinks, and exists differently than ours. There are many things within Star Trek I am sure that will never happen or behave like it does within the real world.
Plus, comparing America and it's Allies to the Federation or NATO to Starfleet is not a valid comparison. These two organizations are clearly going to operate differently than the two organizations you are comparing it to here on Earth. For one, the Federation is a futuristic membership club with many different and strange alien members that have a diverse set of rules and cultural upbringings that run their respective planets. Starfleet is the exploratory and space military hand of this organization that is going to run a lot differently than NATO ever would (because it doesn't have to deal with any actual aliens from another world).
Last edited:
That's a good one. Non fans grossly exaggerate the presence of the Klingons. They only show up in 7 out of 79 episodes!
Star Trek is about talking through one's problems, not fighting them out. Have people who say this ever watched TOS? This is a TNG idea. Many eps would have Picard lecturing a bunch of people that their way of life is wrong. TOS had battles, action, and excitement pretty much every week!
Myth: Mr. Spock had no emotions.
Reality: Mr. Spock had very deep emotions. He tried very hard to suppress them, even deny that he had them, but they found their out into the open regularly, and not just when he was under the influence of something (The Naked Time, This Side of Paradise). He even admitted, in so many words, that he acted emotionally at the end of Galileo Seven. Not to mention his "being moved" by the Romulan Commander in The Enterprise Incident. I know he was "on a mission", but he admitted privately at the very end of the episode that his feelings were genuine.
And I haven't even mentioned, "THE WOMEN!".
Reality: Mr. Spock had very deep emotions. He tried very hard to suppress them, even deny that he had them, but they found their out into the open regularly, and not just when he was under the influence of something (The Naked Time, This Side of Paradise). He even admitted, in so many words, that he acted emotionally at the end of Galileo Seven. Not to mention his "being moved" by the Romulan Commander in The Enterprise Incident. I know he was "on a mission", but he admitted privately at the very end of the episode that his feelings were genuine.
And I haven't even mentioned, "THE WOMEN!".
I still don't buy your argument. There's no way in hell the American people would accept another country dictating the roles it's citizens can function in. In like manner Earth, Vulcan, Andor and the rest of the Federation and Starfleet would never buy it either. Maybe the TNG era, but not TOS. You have to have evidence that spells it out and it isn't there. This subject has been done to death for decades--it's not a new discussion.
The evidence onscreen suggests it's possible for a woman to command in Starfleet even though it wasn't actually seen. After all we did see female Federation officials (Commissioner Nancy Hedford from "Metamorphosis"). But we don't see or hear any evidence that nails it that they cannot command. Given TOS' generally optimist outlook I think the subtext suggests they can command even though we didn't get to see it. And if TOS had survived another season it's possible we might finally have seen it. After all other programs being broadcast at the time also were showing women in strong roles.
And the transporter pads would have been those translucent hexagonal panels recycled from the miniaturizer floor in Fantastic Voyage. And this familiar bit of hardware would have shown up in Engineering.. . . if LB Abbott and the Lydecker Brothers were on the Trek staff, the model work would still be amazing. But the sets would all have the same Jupiter 2 / Batcave consoles.
Warped 9:
I disagree. If this country was given something by another country that was extremely profitable, it would impose whatever it liked on it's citizens. In fact, just look inside our own country and you will see we really don't have any say how things should be. The President and elected officials say it is so, than we would have to obey it. Just look the health care bill that is going to go into effect in the future. It is going to take away the freedom of which this country was founded upon. Sure health care is a good thing, but it shouldn't fine it's citizens if they don't have it. And it won't stop there. There has already been proposals to put chips in people's cars to keep track of their whereabouts (mileage), too.
Now, don't get me wrong. I love my country. But lately it seems like certain freedoms are going to be slowly taken away from us. Which is the very point I am trying to make with Starfleet not allowing women to take up top lead positions within it's ranks because of a new member's wishes. If the Federation had something major to gain from a new member joining, it could impose whatever regulations it liked within Starfleet (whether you would agree or believe that it could happen or not).
I mean, just look at the death penalty law involving Talos IV. I mean, aren't there other planets that are equally as dangerous?
In other words, laws are created by the elected officials at the time and don't always make sense when things change over the passage of time.
Nancy Hedford was an Assistant Commissioner. She was in an assistant position and was not a full fledged Commissioner. In other words, she was an assistant manager, and not the general manager, who makes the final call.
As for woman being starship Captains: it is pretty clear in this video that they were not allowed to be Captains...
http://www.tubechop.com/watch/60122
And this video just re-enforces that too many women on the bridge is not a normal or acceptable thing...
http://www.tubechop.com/watch/60123
Now, later on: In Star Trek 4 there was a woman Captain shown. But that was many years later, though.
Healthcare:
http://www.healthcarechange.org/dont-want-health-insurance-itll-cost-you/
Big Brother in Your Car:
http://charlotte.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid:5507
Nancy Hedford:
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Nancy_Hedford
Talos IV
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Talos_IV
Last edited:
Well, personally I don't have to use this excuse, because I consider Star Trek: Enterprise to be an Altered First Contact Time Line.
In other words, women were not allowed to be starship Captains in the Prime Time Line of Star Trek because that is just the way it was.
In other words, women were not allowed to be starship Captains in the Prime Time Line of Star Trek because that is just the way it was.
There's some doubt as to whether that actually went out - it's been suggested that it was either edited out of the transmission tape or (possibily more likely for a live-ish soap like Emergency Ward 10) that they only kissed in the rehearsal when the PR photos were taken, and were ordered not to repeat it for the take/transmission.
Either way, its status as a breakthrough is rather undermined because the audience reaction to a mixed-race relationship was so hostile that the producers ordered that the couple be split up and written out ASAP.
Last edited:
It's simply your interpretation because there's nothing onscreen that explicitly establishes that.
Janice Lester was a loon. When she says Kirk's world of starship command doesn't include women it doesn't mean Starfleet excludes women from command. It means Kirk's life and career of starship command excludes serious relationships. She wasn't just a loon, she was also a vindictive bitch as evidenced by what she tried to pull off.
Upon viewing "The Cage" NBC didn't object to the character of Number One or the fact that she was the ship's second in command. Neither did they object to Number One actually exercising command when Pike is absent. NBC objected to the blatant favouritism of Roddenberry casting his extramarital girlfriend in the role.
What I'd really like to know is if during three years of production if anyone had ever suggested a woman cast in a Starfleet command role as a guest star. And if it had ever been suggested why wasn't it done? That would be very telling.
It's also quite possible that no one may have ever even suggested the idea (until third season's "The Enterprise Incident") because they assumed no one (particularly network suits) would accept it.
Has anyone ever asked DC Fontana about this subject?
Upon viewing "The Cage" NBC didn't object to the character of Number One or the fact that she was the ship's second in command. Neither did they object to Number One actually exercising command when Pike is absent. NBC objected to the blatant favouritism of Roddenberry casting his extramarital girlfriend in the role.
What I'd really like to know is if during three years of production if anyone had ever suggested a woman cast in a Starfleet command role as a guest star. And if it had ever been suggested why wasn't it done? That would be very telling.
It's also quite possible that no one may have ever even suggested the idea (until third season's "The Enterprise Incident") because they assumed no one (particularly network suits) would accept it.
Has anyone ever asked DC Fontana about this subject?
Last edited:
That first one is usually interpreted as being more about Kirk than about Starfleet: his desire to be a Captain meant there was no room in his life for a permanent romantic partner. I grant that it lends itself to your interpretation, but I think it is easier to explain it as "she misspoke" than to rationalize Starfleet having such a ban, even informally.
The second one is internally contradictory: Pike isn't used to a woman on the Bridge, but his First Officer is a woman. This shows that Pike doesn't think about Number One as a potential mate, just as a fellow officer (but apparently he does consider this new Yeoman as a potential mate, and that's what bothers him about her).
In fact, that may be the best evidence against Starfleet having any such ban: if women weren't allowed to command, there is no way they'd let one be somebody's XO.
Luther Sloan;3977229Nancy Hedford was an [U said:
uh from watching the episode she may have been an assitant commissioner but one that carried a lot of weight and authority.
she was going to help set up a treaty.
not help someone else do it.
and yeah lester was a lunatic of the first order.
heck if you believe what she said about women not being allowed to be captains just how much does one believe about what she said about kirk wanting to kill her.
she was so off the bend she killed her own team and almost killed herself in her mad scheme.
another way to look at it is janice lived in her own little alternate universe.
tainted by her madness.
she was probably rejected by starfleet and shipped out of an attempt to be an officer.
so in her madness it becomes no woman is welcome ..
and to me the bottom line is no service that would not allow a female captain would never allow a female in the primary chain of command as first officer.
especially in a ship of the line that spends a lot of time out on the frontier.
because she may have to become acting captain for a long period of time at any moment.
Ha, ha, ha... it's funny when an episode's original meaning is twisted around to fit what a person wants to see rather than what it really is.
I know. I did it with Star Trek: Enterprise because it is a horrid show that doesn't make any sense in the context of the Core Trek Time Line.
However, there is no good reason to take an Original Series episode out of context. Kirk doesn't disagree with her or look at her funny when she says what she says. In fact, he agrees with her that it isn't fair.
Kirk isn't treating her like an insane person. He is treating her with openness, honesty, and genuine care.
I mean, honestly. Show your parents and friends this episode and have them pay close attention to this scene. Replay it for them again at the end if necessary and ask them what they think this scene means before sharing your hypothesis with them.
Also, the show was made when women were not accepted in certain leadership type positions in the work force yet.
Clearly the series is a reflection or product of the times. That is one of the reasons why the pilot episode "The Cage" was not aired in the first place. The network didn't believe a woman should have had a leadership role on board a starship. And no. It wasn't because she was Gene's girl friend either. Here is a quote taken from Making of Star Trek Pilots.
Oh, and also, Assistant Managers can carry out General Manager duties. Doesn't make em General Managers, though.
Quoted Source:
http://www.earthsmightiest.com/fansites/startrek/news/?a=6323
I know. I did it with Star Trek: Enterprise because it is a horrid show that doesn't make any sense in the context of the Core Trek Time Line.
However, there is no good reason to take an Original Series episode out of context. Kirk doesn't disagree with her or look at her funny when she says what she says. In fact, he agrees with her that it isn't fair.
Kirk isn't treating her like an insane person. He is treating her with openness, honesty, and genuine care.
I mean, honestly. Show your parents and friends this episode and have them pay close attention to this scene. Replay it for them again at the end if necessary and ask them what they think this scene means before sharing your hypothesis with them.
Also, the show was made when women were not accepted in certain leadership type positions in the work force yet.
Clearly the series is a reflection or product of the times. That is one of the reasons why the pilot episode "The Cage" was not aired in the first place. The network didn't believe a woman should have had a leadership role on board a starship. And no. It wasn't because she was Gene's girl friend either. Here is a quote taken from Making of Star Trek Pilots.
Oh, and also, Assistant Managers can carry out General Manager duties. Doesn't make em General Managers, though.
Quoted Source:
http://www.earthsmightiest.com/fansites/startrek/news/?a=6323
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
