The Skant in TrekLit

[Gotham Central]

I'm curious if any of the 24th century books make mention of crew members wearing this variation on the Starfleet uniform? I'm particularly curious if any of the male characters are ever described as wearing one?

Is the thought process behind the unisex nature of this uniform ever discussed?

I consider the skant one of the few times that Star Trek tried to be genuinely egalitarian and seemed to run afoul of 20th century mores that could not seem to deal with that level of equality.

 

[Christopher]

Is the thought process behind the unisex nature of this uniform ever discussed?

I'd like to think that by that time, it wouldn't need to be.

 

[Stevil2001]

Michael and I once started an outline for a tNG novel set shortly after "The Neutral Zone." We called it The End of Skants. We didn't get very far, but a few of its plot elements (not the riveting uniform transition, nor the jaw-dropping explanation of how O'Brien became transporter chief) made their way into A Choice of Catastrophes.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Is the thought process behind the unisex nature of this uniform ever discussed?

I'd like to think that by that time, it wouldn't need to be.

Because it would have been generally agreed to be a ghastly mistake, and thus not worth talking about.

 

[Gotham Central]

Is the thought process behind the unisex nature of this uniform ever discussed?

I'd like to think that by that time, it wouldn't need to be.

The Uniforms in the 23rd century were clearly not unisex.

 

[Christopher]

It doesn't have to be one or the other. The point is that hopefully by then they don't feel it necessary to defend or justify a different choice.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Skants? Pfft. I want these uniforms to return!

 

[CorporalCaptain]

So, I take it that there's scant mention of them in TrekLit?

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Is the thought process behind the unisex nature of this uniform ever discussed?

I'd like to think that by that time, it wouldn't need to be.

The Uniforms in the 23rd century were clearly not unisex.

Actually the ones in the two pilots, the TMP, and the TWOK-TUC ones were.

 

[Gotham Central]

I'd like to think that by that time, it wouldn't need to be.

The Uniforms in the 23rd century were clearly not unisex.

Actually the ones in the two pilots, the TMP, and the TWOK-TUC ones were.

No the pilot uniforms were not actually unisex. The uniforms had a much larger collar. However, they were actually closer to unisex than what we got in the series.

The monster maroons were fairly unisex except that they had a skirt option for women (not introduced until ST:V).

It is interesting that given all of the diversity that we see in Trek Lit across the eras, no one has ever bothered to address the fact that mid 24th Century officers actually had the option of a Skant.

 

[Christopher]

I've just remembered that I did mention the skant in The Buried Age; Deanna was described as wearing one when she first met Picard. I didn't mention any male personnel wearing it, but I described it as a "junior officer's skant" rather than a female uniform specifically, so I at least implied that it was unisex.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Simple reason?

Because the skant looked silly. Even in the 21st century, both males and females can wear pants, slacks, jeans, or any other type of lower body garment with two separate legs.

Pants are the unisex garments of the present and future.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The Uniforms in the 23rd century were clearly not unisex.

Actually the ones in the two pilots, the TMP, and the TWOK-TUC ones were.

No the pilot uniforms were not actually unisex. The uniforms had a much larger collar. However, they were actually closer to unisex than what we got in the series.

The monster maroons were fairly unisex except that they had a skirt option for women (not introduced until ST:V).

It is interesting that given all of the diversity that we see in Trek Lit across the eras, no one has ever bothered to address the fact that mid 24th Century officers actually had the option of a Skant.

"Picard gazed into his wardrobe. Today was the day he'd been preparing for. All those nights jogging around the darkened corridors of the Enterprise. The waxing and tanning treatments in sickbay. Today was the day he was going to wear the skant."

 

[RandyS]

A better question is: in a medium where we are unable to see them, why mention them at all?

 

[Christopher]

Simple reason?

Because the skant looked silly. Even in the 21st century, both males and females can wear pants, slacks, jeans, or any other type of lower body garment with two separate legs.

Pants are the unisex garments of the present and future.

The only reason you think pants are less silly-looking is because you're more used to them. That's the kind of ethnocentric bias that the Federation is supposed to have grown beyond. There have been many human cultures in which men and women both wore draped or skirtlike garments -- kilts, saris, togas, kimonos, etc. -- rather than pants/trousers. Trousers were invented by horse-nomad cultures as a more practical type of wear for riding horses. Presumably they caught on among nobles in the West because horseback riding was common among that class as well. But for people who don't habitually ride horses, there's no particular reason to prefer them beyond fashion, and that's arbitrary.

Besides, as I've said many times before, it's illogical to expect the fashions of another century not to look silly and bizarre by our standards. We're chronologically closer to the era of powdered wigs and bustles than we are to the era of TNG, and yet TNG-era fashions seem hardly any different from our own. I've always found that a failure of imagination.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Ironic, really, that the skant should be described as "unisex":

Spoiler: really bad joke

because anyone wearing those damn things, uni-sex is the only kind they're likely to get

 

[Jedi_Master]

Simple reason?

Because the skant looked silly. Even in the 21st century, both males and females can wear pants, slacks, jeans, or any other type of lower body garment with two separate legs.

Pants are the unisex garments of the present and future.

The only reason you think pants are less silly-looking is because you're more used to them. That's the kind of ethnocentric bias that the Federation is supposed to have grown beyond. There have been many human cultures in which men and women both wore draped or skirtlike garments -- kilts, saris, togas, kimonos, etc. -- rather than pants/trousers. Trousers were invented by horse-nomad cultures as a more practical type of wear for riding horses. Presumably they caught on among nobles in the West because horseback riding was common among that class as well. But for people who don't habitually ride horses, there's no particular reason to prefer them beyond fashion, and that's arbitrary.

Besides, as I've said many times before, it's illogical to expect the fashions of another century not to look silly and bizarre by our standards. We're chronologically closer to the era of powdered wigs and bustles than we are to the era of TNG, and yet TNG-era fashions seem hardly any different from our own. I've always found that a failure of imagination.

In all fairness, you don't know anything about my culture or its preferences. Just saying.

With the notable exception of the kilt, the majority of unisex wrapped garments reach the feet, and with good reason. A Middle Eastern style garment, or Pacific Island wrap is very comfortable, practical, and stylish. I would prefer to wear such garments, particularly in the hot climate of my home, but unfortunately Western European styles dominate the "business attire" that is required in my office.

The skant is a very silly and impractical garment.

As for "lack of imagination" when it comes to sci fi clothing design, I don't imagine that the human body is going to change its fundamental shape anytime soon. Fashion is based on the comfort and utility needs of the human body. So although there are some notable exceptions, that is the basic framework for any human clothing.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I have to wonder whether the Inuit invented their traditional fur trousers thousands of years before trousers showed up in recorded history in the 6th century BC according to Wikipedia, and even that wiki acknowledges the possibility of trousers being prehistoric. Unfortunately, Inuit history exists mainly in oral tradition and they live in the land of waste not/want not, so concrete evidence of when and how they developed their art is, according to what little I know, hard to come by.

In any case, the circumstances of inhospitable weather provide non-arbitrary reasons for trousers.

 

[Christopher]

There are legitimate grounds for saying it's impractical for use as a uniform, but calling it silly-looking is an aesthetic judgment, and that's a matter of cultural preference, not universal law. Every fashion, including your own, is going to seem silly-looking to people from another time or culture.

 

[T'Girl]

The skant is a very silly and impractical garment

Never have been able to get past the fact that the slang term "skant" refers to a prostitute who is so unattractive she can't find clients.

A skank who can't.