And yet there seems to be the same "TOS can't be questioned attitude" here.
Certainly not from me. There's plenty to
question. I'm looking at you,
Turnabout Intruder.
"Wolf in the Fold" has some pretty nasty remarks about how because a woman screwed up, Scotty might start hating women, so let's take him to a strip club so he won't hate women... Yeah. Ouch.
Look I can't speak for feminists. I'm just saying to me this particular episode seems sexist to me. The whole idea of training a woman to be "a good wife" or person. It happens today. Young girls are not given education or even 'language' training because they are being raised to marry off to some family friend. All they need to know is how to please their husbands and raise babies and only communicate with their immediate family.
There are a few things to keep in mind. The Dohlman is not "just a woman." By that I mean, we're not talking about someone who was just kidnapped off the street and put into this situation by force. She's a part of a royal family, and this is a political arrangement more than anything else. It's expected of her. HERE is where the problem is really befalling. There is a distinct difference between "Star Trek is being sexist/backwards" and "The society that Star Trek is showing us is sexist/backwards."
Now. With that said, do I think that the Dohlman's society is just? Absolutely not. I think both groups come off as rather irrational and they need to get their emotions in check. Clearly, if it's come to an arranged marriage something has gone horribly, horribly wrong here.
Does the show itself endorse the society that the Dohlman comes from as just or a good thing? I don't think it does. I'd say it seems rather indifferent on that point, and the closest it even comes to remarking on it is the sense of tragedy around the Dohlman when she is resigned to her fate. Kirk's job is to do his duty, whether he likes it or not, and that is also reflected in the Dohlman's position.
I think that's the key difference. Portraying something does not necessarily mean the show itself is guilty of believing in it.
Maybe I just have a grudging respect for Elaan as she doesn't seem willing to lie down and accept her fate (until properly trained by Kirk).
I can understand that. However, as has been said, I don't think it's quite the same thing as... Say, having a boss who is forcing you into an uncomfortable work environment. She's the ruling class in an entire society with millions of lives hanging on her decisions. If she chooses to resign, they could all suffer for it. Is that right? No. Does that make the episode itself sexist? I can't really see that.
We could just as easily see a prince going to his princess, and needing the proper training in etiquette and all that. Though, historically, that's not how it generally goes. That certainly might have put a different spin on it from a science fiction perspective though.
Even though I'm making a big deal out of it I know there are reasons that mitigate Kirks actions in this episode:
1.Kirk doesn't exactly go out of his busy day and find a woman to train just for the heck of it. Its not an assignment he asked for. Its not like at the end of the episode he winks and says 'all woman' need a good firm hand or something.
In fact he tries to dodge it as long as possible, because he knows it's only going to be trouble. He just wants to transport the people and be done with it.
2.Elaan is not a child - she seems to have options to get out of the marriage. Consequences not explained.
4.She could theoretically get one of her guards to steal a shuttle if it were that bad.
5.The two planets need to unite for some macguffin reason.
And I don't think its extremist saying that sometimes TOS is sexist looking at standards today. And even within itself. I can't ever see Number One telling Captain Pike or anyone "I'm frightened".
Indeed. I wish they had covered what the consequences might have been to her if she gave up her position. Death? Loss of title? Would have made her a little more sympathetic and balanced the books. The episode would need very little changing for that to be integrated.
Just my opinion of course, but, I have never thought it fair to apply "the standards of today" to a show from the 60s. For the 1960s, Star Trek was ahead of it's time. I think it's a fruitless argument to do that to a show that was clearly more often than not at least trying to break ground in it's time.
...Wait, what happened to 3? In your list, I mean.
I see TNG as being sexist at times too (don't get me started) and it was made 20 years later so had less excuses.
I don't think any of the shows really escaped having some... Really bad sexist moments. Enterprise always sat with me the worst for it's really... In your face sexualisation of Star Trek.
TOS I believe was far ahead of many other shows of the period when it showed working women in the military and even on the bridge. They could have done better but they could have done way way worse.
Did we ever get Commodores or Captains or High Ranking Officials in TOS who weren't insane or incompetent or who didn't have a grudge against Kirk ?

There are a few. Any of whom could have been made into women without any changes required.
Commodore Mendez was fairly level headed (Though half of his appearance turns out to be a Talosian illusion.).
Commodore Wesley, from Ultimate Computer. Neither insane, incompetent, or out to get Kirk at any point.
Commodore Stone, from Court Martial. I don't recall him having a personal vendetta or anything against Kirk, he was just trying to do his job.
Any one of whom could have been played by a contemporary female.
