You might find this relevant.
https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/a-question-of-guilt-trek-style.305613/
https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/a-question-of-guilt-trek-style.305613/
I understand it is meant to be a complex, moral conundrum - but I cannot for the life of me understand how it is Trip's fault. The cogenitor spent her entire life being controlled, limited by her peers. Trip showed her just what she is capable of, and helped to actually start living. When Captain Archer denies her asylum, he is essentially sentencing her to a life of servitude.
It's possible that in the past, the cogenitors did stage an uprising to try to control society, or gain a more respected position, due to their essential nature - but it didn't go well. Maybe the pendulum swung far in the other direction, and the cogenitors not only lost whatever favored status they had, but lost all rights, even the right to an education. And eventually they reached their present "pet" status in society. Might be that some cogenitors were still pampered and valued tremendously, while others were just taken for granted and treated like living bric-a-brac, mostly ignored on the shelf. (Like pets in our society today.)It would have been interesting if things turned sideways and the cogenitors banded together and withheld their rare ability from the others, to gain a more honored position in their society.
Kor
We simply don't know enough about their culture to draw any solid conclusions. We got less than an hour of exposure to it.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.