Have the new Star Treks lost the progressive edge?

[JeffinOakland]

Yeah, one is never sure if T ' Pol is reluctant to speak up because she is ashamed of having been violated or because she doesn't want people thinking she can mind meld. Not to mention a careful distinction between the actions of the individual who assaulted her and the vast majority of the minority who would never assault anyone isn't clearly presented. This episode is somewhat typical of the ST franchises dubious reputation of being progressive. They mean well but are disconcertingly tone deaf.

 

[Lexx Shrapnel]

Was Trip's pregnancy progressive? Showing a male dealing with pregnancy?

 

[Maurice]

Marcello Mastroianni in L'Événement le plus important depuis que l'homme a marché sur la Lune (aka A Slightly Pregnant Man) (1973), Billy Crystal in Rabbit Test (1978) and Ahnuld in Junior (1997) all beat Enterprise's "Unexpected" to the punch on the male pregnancy thing, by 21, 23 and 7 years, respectively.

 

[Jeyl]

Was Trip's pregnancy progressive? Showing a male dealing with pregnancy?

Was Trip a willing participant who knew that the act in which he and the alien were about to partake in would result in him becoming pregnant?

 

[Shaka Zulu]

Since Star Trek Into Darkness included a full-throated denouncement of drone strikes and the lack of due process, I think it's fair to say that Abrams' two films are at least as 'progressive' as Trek that has come before them.

Where do you factor in the voyeuristic fanservice of Alice Eve's underwear in all this progressivism?

Same place as Shahna's Outift in The Gamesters of Triskelion or Droxine's Outfit in The Cloud Minders?

Where do you factor in the voyeuristic fanservice of Alice Eve's underwear in all this progressivism?

Same place as Shahna's Outift in The Gamesters of Triskelion or Droxine's Outfit in The Cloud Minders?

Or Ilia's short robe in TMP.

Let's not forget:

*Spock's bare chest in 'Patterns of Force'.

*Riker's bare chest in 'Angel One'.

*Picard's bare chest and sexy legs in 'Q Who?' and 'Chain of Command', part 1.

*Archer's bare chest in 'A Night In Sickbay'.

*Khan's bare chest in Wrath of Khan

*Sulu's bare chest in 'The Naked Time'.

*And last but not least, Kirk's bare chest in almost every episode of TOS.

Against all of this, Carol Marcus being in her undies is a small blip.

I wonder sometimes about Full House and My Two Dads, both of which ran at the same time as TNG. Both shows went to lengths to emphasize that the men raising the kids together were not gay. But, looking at it in hindsight, I wonder if they were actually shows about same sex couples adopting that couldn't come right out and say that is what they were about. They did get society ready for the idea of same sex parents raising kids together. Full House was even set in San Francisco... Maybe that was actually a clever way to go about it. If the goal is to get people who aren't comfortable with homosexuality comfortable with it, maybe that's the right way to do it- first get them used to the idea that same sex relationships can be loving, that they can raise kids, and whatnot, and then leave delving into the sexual aspect until last.

I don't actually remember the shows well at all, so maybe that is totally off base though...

I'm sorry, but to me, Full House & My Two Dads was in the same vein as My Three Sons, Bachelor Father, Family Affair, The Courtship of Eddie's Father, Eight Is Enough (from season 2) and Smart Guy-all of these shows being about widowed fathers raising kids. There was nothing gay/progressive about Full House or any of them, Kate & Allie included (and Uncle Jesse/Uncle Joey could be considered similar to Uncle Charley on My Three Sons.)

If TV wants to show gay fathers/lesbian mothers raising families, then the medium should just do a series about it, and tell the Religious Right to go and fuck itself. Star Trek needs to do the same with gay and lesbian relationships if and when it comes back to TV.

After seven hundred hours, I'm honestly burned out on Trek on TV. I'm more than happy to see a movie every few years and to pick up an occasional novel or comic to scratch my Trek itch.

Although I wouldn't mind a a new animated show (similar to Star Wars: Rebels but set at Starfleet Academy) I pretty much agree with you.

 

[Devon]

Was Trip's pregnancy progressive? Showing a male dealing with pregnancy?

Was Trip a willing participant who knew that the act in which he and the alien were about to partake in would result in him becoming pregnant?

These are real life and deep philosophical issues you know. Team Roddenderpy!

 

[Lexx Shrapnel]

It was certainly a derpy idea.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

Where do you factor in the voyeuristic fanservice of Alice Eve's underwear in all this progressivism?

Same place as Shahna's Outift in The Gamesters of Triskelion or Droxine's Outfit in The Cloud Minders?

Let's not forget:

*Spock's bare chest in 'Patterns of Force'.

*Riker's bare chest in 'Angel One'.

*Picard's bare chest and sexy legs in 'Q Who?' and 'Chain of Command', part 1.

*Archer's bare chest in 'A Night In Sickbay'.

*Khan's bare chest in Wrath of Khan

*Sulu's bare chest in 'The Naked Time'.

*And last but not least, Kirk's bare chest in almost every episode of TOS.

Against all of this, Carol Marcus being in her undies is a small blip.

Sorry, but to say the sexual objectification of men is the same as sexual objectification of women is terribly naive. There's such a thing as historical context.

 

[JoeZhang]

I think Enterprise's 2nd Season episode "Stigma" can very easily be seen as a Homosexuality/AIDS story. In it, T'Pol has a treatable but ultimately fatal disease that she contracted when she was assaulted by a member of a stigmatized minority.

Lumping homosexuality and AIDS together is problematic to start with. AIDS doesn't discriminate and is a straight issue just as much as it is a gay issue. That they tried to promote an AIDS metaphor as being a gay story was kind of insulting imo.

I agree. But you're obviously intelligent and educated. Most people aren't either and AIDS, to this day, is generally stigmatized as a "gay disease". So, you agree w me on the fairly obvious parallels that were meant by the episode, regardless of how we feel about those parallels?

But by the time that episode was made - what is progressive about thinly veiled stories concerning issues that people had been tackling openly And directly by that point.

 

[borgboy]

Same place as Shahna's Outift in The Gamesters of Triskelion or Droxine's Outfit in The Cloud Minders?

Let's not forget:

*Spock's bare chest in 'Patterns of Force'.

*Riker's bare chest in 'Angel One'.

*Picard's bare chest and sexy legs in 'Q Who?' and 'Chain of Command', part 1.

*Archer's bare chest in 'A Night In Sickbay'.

*Khan's bare chest in Wrath of Khan

*Sulu's bare chest in 'The Naked Time'.

*And last but not least, Kirk's bare chest in almost every episode of TOS.

Against all of this, Carol Marcus being in her undies is a small blip.

Sorry, but to say the sexual objectification of men is the same as sexual objectification of women is terribly naive. There's such a thing as historical context.

There is a difference in how male and female bare skin is shown, the way it's filmed and the context. It's called the male gaze and it's a real thing. The camera work invites the audience to ogle Carol in a way that wasn't done when Spock took his shirt off.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Marcello Mastroianni in L'Événement le plus important depuis que l'homme a marché sur la Lune (aka A Slightly Pregnant Man) (1973), Billy Crystal in Rabbit Test (1978) and Ahnuld in Junior (1997) all beat Enterprise's "Unexpected" to the punch on the male pregnancy thing, by 21, 23 and 7 years, respectively.

Also, "Alien Nation" the TV series, which had a very pregnant George (Sam) Francisco.

Was Trip's pregnancy progressive? Showing a male dealing with pregnancy?

No. Not at all.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

Let's not forget:

*Spock's bare chest in 'Patterns of Force'.

*Riker's bare chest in 'Angel One'.

*Picard's bare chest and sexy legs in 'Q Who?' and 'Chain of Command', part 1.

*Archer's bare chest in 'A Night In Sickbay'.

*Khan's bare chest in Wrath of Khan

*Sulu's bare chest in 'The Naked Time'.

*And last but not least, Kirk's bare chest in almost every episode of TOS.

Against all of this, Carol Marcus being in her undies is a small blip.

Sorry, but to say the sexual objectification of men is the same as sexual objectification of women is terribly naive. There's such a thing as historical context.

There is a difference in how male and female bare skin is shown, the way it's filmed and the context. It's called the male gaze and it's a real thing. The camera work invites the audience to ogle Carol in a way that wasn't done when Spock took his shirt off.

But it can be argued that female Trekfans also ogle Spock, Kirk, and Sulu the same way when they watch all three guys on TV (as well as Chris Pine's Kirk in the 2009 movie)-it does work both ways.

 

[JeffinOakland]

Sorry, but to say the sexual objectification of men is the same as sexual objectification of women is terribly naive. There's such a thing as historical context.

There is a difference in how male and female bare skin is shown, the way it's filmed and the context. It's called the male gaze and it's a real thing. The camera work invites the audience to ogle Carol in a way that wasn't done when Spock took his shirt off.

But it can be argued that female Trekfans also ogle Spock, Kirk, and Sulu the same way when they watch all three guys on TV (as well as Chris Pine's Kirk in the 2009 movie)-it does work both ways.

Not really

 

[Shaka Zulu]

^And how do you know this?

 

[fireproof78]

Sorry, but to say the sexual objectification of men is the same as sexual objectification of women is terribly naive. There's such a thing as historical context.

There is a difference in how male and female bare skin is shown, the way it's filmed and the context. It's called the male gaze and it's a real thing. The camera work invites the audience to ogle Carol in a way that wasn't done when Spock took his shirt off.

But it can be argued that female Trekfans also ogle Spock, Kirk, and Sulu the same way when they watch all three guys on TV (as well as Chris Pine's Kirk in the 2009 movie)-it does work both ways.

Yes, it can. Leonard Nimoy was surprised by the number of more suggestive fan letters that he received regarding Spock and his sex appeal.

 

[Amaris]

There is a difference in how male and female bare skin is shown, the way it's filmed and the context. It's called the male gaze and it's a real thing. The camera work invites the audience to ogle Carol in a way that wasn't done when Spock took his shirt off.

But it can be argued that female Trekfans also ogle Spock, Kirk, and Sulu the same way when they watch all three guys on TV (as well as Chris Pine's Kirk in the 2009 movie)-it does work both ways.

Yes, it can. Leonard Nimoy was surprised by the number of more suggestive fan letters that he received regarding Spock and his sex appeal.

Indeed. Isaac Asimov even wrote a short article about how his daughter said that "Mr. Spock is dreamy."

 

[JoeZhang]

^And how do you know this?

if you are suggesting that there is a 'female gaze' that is functionally the same as the 'male gaze' I suggest reading less sci-fi and more things about the real world.

 

[Set Harth]

STID had Chris Pine in a wetsuit, for whatever that's worth.

 

[JeffinOakland]

A rather silly argument. Women are objectified in a completely different way men are simply because we live in a traditionally patriarchal society. Don't take my word for it. Turn off you Star Trek episodes and read a book (or several) on the subject.

 

[borgboy]

Sorry, but to say the sexual objectification of men is the same as sexual objectification of women is terribly naive. There's such a thing as historical context.

There is a difference in how male and female bare skin is shown, the way it's filmed and the context. It's called the male gaze and it's a real thing. The camera work invites the audience to ogle Carol in a way that wasn't done when Spock took his shirt off.

But it can be argued that female Trekfans also ogle Spock, Kirk, and Sulu the same way when they watch all three guys on TV (as well as Chris Pine's Kirk in the 2009 movie)-it does work both ways.

Sure some female fans - and some male fans - can ogle Spock, Kirk, etc - but they're not being filmed the same way.
I suggest you look up "the make gaze" and read up on it. It's a a complicated but real issue of how women are objectified in film in a way that men aren't.