Re: A Hater Revisits Voyager
I know I'm a little late to the Kes discussion, but I just wanted to offer the following point of view on the "If I'm ever going to have a child it has to be now!" quote. From the very first time I saw this ep, I always took that to mean if she ever wants to have children she has to conceive the first time she ovulates.
I never thought the story was trying to tell us she could only have one child in her lifetime. I took it to mean that if she wants to continue to have children in the future, she needs to conceive the first time her body allows for that possibility, otherwise, her body would shut down and go menopausal.
Such a physiological restriction on breeding is not that outlandish of a concept. Un-neutered female ferrets, for example, must conceive on their first heat. If they don't, they will contract aplastic anemia and die.
It would make sense that such a short-lived species would have this biological rule. I'll turn everyone's attention to horse breeding for a moment. I know a horse breeder whose 28 and 30 year old mares turned out healthy fat foals this year with nary a problem (In human years, think of these mares as being 80+ years old). Why are these pregnancies considered relatively risk free? Because these mare's bodies have been conditioned to give birth. Year after year they have produced healthy foals for decades.
Conversely, would any breeder ever dare think to breed a maiden mare for her first time at age 28? Of course not! You might as well dig the hole now, because it's unlikely mare or foal will survive parturition. Not to mention the fact that such a mare probably stopped ovulating years ago.
If four years old is considered middle age for an Ocampa, it makes sense that the BPTB (biological powers that be) would decide that was a good turning point in that Ocampa's life. If there are no eligible mates by 4 years of age . . . well, then it's probably not a good idea someone slated to die at age 9 have her first child at six, seven, eight years of age. But if you've already had a child at 4, that older child can help raise your younger children, and provide a family support structure after you've died at age 9 (which I agree is stupidly short lifespan). If you had your first and perhaps, only, child much later than age 4, that child would be family-less relatively early in life.
Has any fan ever confirmed that the writers actually meant Ocampa to only have one child each? Because I am really quite surprised to see you all accepting that as what they intended. As I previously stated, the thought never would have occurred to me to interpret it that way.
