I don't understand the hate Disco gets / still gets.

Sorry.. More people belive that we haven't landed on the moon than are true racists bigots or homophobes. So those being the top reasons are wrong.

Opinion polls taken in various locations have shown that between 6% and 20% of Americans, 25% of Britons, and 28% of Russians surveyed believe that the crewed moon landings were faked.

 

Oh no that's fine I kind of agree with a fair few of your points but still find I enjoyed my time watching the show. As the other poster said you can still love a show and find valid things to criticize in that same show. It's a perfectly reasonable stand to take.

To this day I find this quite bizarre. Would be a good discussion topic for TNZ where people can have a bit more leeway with what they can say. I'd really love to know why people think this beyond your average conspiracy theorists.

 

That's almost as stupid has hating someone because of the color of their skin or who they chose to love.

But I don't want to derail the thread, so let's pretend nobody needs to respond to that. Good idea to just move on to discuss why people don't like DSC....or whatever.

 

The topic title refers to the hate Discovery gets. Hate. So naturally people who don't like it but aren't rabidly frothing about it assume it must be talking about them. If you don't actively hate Discovery, maybe this isn't about you.

There very clearly and obviously are people who rabidly hate Discovery (and recent Doctor Who) for misogynistic and racist reasons, and many of them are really fucking loud about it. I've quit going to certain online hangouts because those people dominated the comments. You folks who found it just doesn't work for you, the way I felt about Voyager and Enterprise to an extent, are not those people, so stop getting your knickers in a twist. No one said that everyone who expresses any criticism of a Star Trek show is a baby-eating Nazi.

Now, I'll admit that I personally do think that some of the reasonable sounding people who express quiet concern about the quality of the writing, or canon issues, or not caring for the degree of serialization, or whatever, are people who are lying through their teeth when they say it's not about race or sex or whatever, because some of them just can't stop themselves from letting it slip out. Like the guy who posted somewhere very reasonably and politely, taking two paragraphs or so to say that the problem with the current Doctor Who is not the woman Doctor, that's fine, but ended up saying the show was so bad with a woman Doctor that he's happy he doesn't have to worry about ever seeing another female Doctor. He forgot that he was pretending to be okay with the idea, just not the execution.

The same things are happening in both fandoms. People are condemning new Trek and new Who in the same ways, saying they're only criticizing poor writing and changes to canon. Then many of them drop the mask by complaining about wokeness. Complaining about wokeness doesn't say anything about the show you're watching, but it certainly says something about you.

But again: if the show just doesn't work for you but you don't go screaming about it everywhere online, this is not about you.

 

There’s a certain subsection of fandom that just sucks. Not just Trek fandom but more or less any group of fans. I think things are much worse in the social media era. Too many people thrive on negativity, outrage and inflating their ego by imposing their perceived superiority to the thing or people they object to. It’s like that whole “owning the Libs” thing but with Star Trek as the focus.

This isn’t new. Many TOS fans loathed and protested TNG when it arrived, although I wasn’t around for that. Apparently many even hated and protested The Wrath of Khan too, which is hard to imagine given its celebrated status. Back when DS9 was airing it got so much hate I often felt I was one of the only people who truly loved it and considered it peak Trek. But the criticism was relentless.

Trek fans are just exhausting at times. In years to come, DIS will probably be looked back on at the bold beginning of a golden age for Trek and celebrated for its guts and grit. Heck, even VOY and ENT seem to be held in high esteem these days, even though a lot of the criticism they got was, in my view, legitimate. I didn’t waste my time bitching about them though. I just stopped watching and watched other shows I did like (hello Farscape!).

I love Trekbbs because it is more balanced and positive than, say, Reddit or the comments sections of sites like Trekmovie. Places like that make me wonder why these people even still bother with Star Trek and don’t switch to some other franchise they’d actually enjoy.

 

Trekbbs is FAR more reasonable and balanced than any other Trek-related corner of cyberspace I have ever encountered.

It's not even close.

 

That's bullshit.

1. Those are not the only three reasons people hate DISCO. Bad writing has been discussed fairly extensively as a problem also, bad writing having literally nothing to do with any of the three things you listed.

2. Some of us Star Trek fans feel it necessary to watch every episode at least once, even in the parts of the franchise that we don't particularly care for overall. It gives us an informed opinion about the parts we don't like, and it opens us up to the possibility of surprises when something is better than expected. That does not mean that we're watching it to obsess over keeping everything in continuity collated, assuming we're not racists, sexists, or bigots, for fuck's sake.

3. If you'd said there are some people posting about DISCO on the BBS who seem to fall into one or more of the three categories you listed, why, clearly that would have been true (and let's be frank, we don't even know whether many of the people who've trolled us with racist, sexist, and bigoted posts and gotten quickly banned have actually even seen the show).

But, no. You had to go and imply that anyone who doesn't like DISCO but still watches it is a racist, a sexist, a bigot, and/or a fan resistant to new interpretations of old canon. That's bullshit, and more than a little offensive.

4. The sort of a fan who I'm describing, such as myself, doesn't feel it necessary to post very often in the DISCO forum. I have posted multiple times in the DISCO forum, but as I don't like most of the episodes, despite there being a few episodes that I think are pretty good, I don't feel the need to waste my time posting about the show, especially about the majority of episodes that I don't like. I fully expect the type of Star Trek fan and DISCO viewer with opinions like mine to be underrepresented relative to the posters who want to provoke reactions involving your issues 1 and 2, and maybe even 3. Perhaps this has lulled you into the false understanding about the various reasons there are that people don't like DISCO.

 

You know, you can absolutely loathe a TV series, even Star Trek, and not have a single issue with GLBTQ representation or non-white people (even - GASP - women) in the lead.

Some people hate the show because they just feel overall that it sucks.

Weird, right?!

 

As someone who really likes DSC (and PIC for that matter), I feel I can openly gripe about some of the things that frustrate me about the series and certain episodes without people thinking I'm a "hater." I'm just very comfortable with the fact that as much as I enjoy the shows, not every episode/season/character/etc is going to be a winner.

I love TOS. It's easily my favorite televison show of all time. But, it still has some episodes that absolutely suck (Mudd's Women, Plato's Stepchildren, Miri, Turnabout Intruder).

No series, movie, book, etc is completely isolated from criticism (and certainly none is perfect).

 

The Left "thinks" otherwise. But then, I've never met a Leftist who wasn't a bigot.

 

I just read a great column by someone who is not a fan of what liberalism has led to (hyper-individualization, anomie, lost deep connections, hedonism, commodification of everything, et al). But said the old, classic toleration-of-thought liberalism that did lead to or allow this — when we look at the rise of extremism and lack of liberality … we’re still gonna miss that when it’s gone.

It’s sure fading here from both ends of the political spectrum like Charlie X “I want to stay … stay … stay …”

fade to gone

 

Personally I lost interest in the show a while back. It happens. People's tastes differ. But I have a life and I'm not going to drain my energy and waste my time actively hating something on TV, loudly moaning on and on and on about an ephemeral piece of pop culture and getting myself worked up practically to the point of giving myself a heart attack.

If you don't like something, why are you expending so much time on it? Just move on with the positivity of enjoying the things that you do like. And let other people enjoy what they like in peace instead of pointlessly crapping all over it.

Kor

 

I'm begging people to have opinions on politics that aren't just actually "opinions on entertainment". Please. Read a goddamned book.

 

My big gripe with Discovery (and Kurtzman Trek in general) has nothing to do with the skin color or gender of the lead, or the presence of gay characters, etc.

It's the emotional immaturity, lack of basic professionalism, and overall 'emo' behavior and demeanor of the characters the way they are written- it breaks my suspension of disbelief (I know- warp drive and transporters ) that they would have ever been accepted into Starfleet in the first place, made it through an institution like Starfleet Academy, or promoted out of the 'lower decks' to achieve the positions they have. To be fair, that's not a gripe unique to Disco, but it's much more prevalent on this show than the others. I have the same complaint about Picard (Rios and Raffi in particular), and to a large degree the Kelvin-verse movies- look at the Kobayashi Maru scene in that one for a prime example of what I'm talking about, or just the idea that a cadet would leapfrog the entirety of Starfleet and be promoted to command of a starship.

When you go back to TOS and TNG era Trek, they found ways for the characters to have issues without making them appear and act like petulant kids going through puberty. Those crews were comprised of mature, functioning adults. Too many of the characters we're getting in this era are not. Some of them seem and act like they are mentally unstable- and that's not okay. Especially when you want positive portrayals of minorities and LGBTQ characters. We need more TOS Uhuras, and fewer Disco Tillys.

 

Somebody above was right, I don’t hate DSC with the heat of a nova. Though I do use the word casually. I can’t imagine … oh, yes I can, never mind — I do viscerally hate some entertainment. Nothing I watch, though, haha. Cuz I hate it, duh.

 

I must be on a lot of block lists. I mean, I'm not the OP, but I did make a comment about how not everyone who has issues with a Trek show is a frothing hater. And, sure enough, people are rolling in saying things like, oh, so you're calling us all frothing haters because we have reasonable criticisms of the new shows? Well, fine, we're going to hate frothily and it's all your fault.

This is not a topic about people who have criticisms of a Trek show. It's about people who hate Discovery. Do you really not see the difference? I thought Enterprise was poorly conceived, badly written, and had the weakest cast of any Star Trek series, but I didn't hate it. I was disappointed by it, I criticized it, but I didn't demand it be taken off the air or go off on people who liked it or turn every discussion of it into a hatefest.

If you're going to have a thread that's basically about toxic fandom, toxic fandom will reveal itself.

TOS gave us mature, functioning adults like the interfering "diplomats" and senior officers who made every situation they were involved with worse, not to mention the likes of Ben Finney and Janice Lester. TNG let Worf commit murder and get away with it. And Geordi's Leah Brahms fixation... nothing creepy or embarrassing there. Not to mention that, unlike almost any character in TOS or TNG or Voyager or Enterprise, Tilly -- who started as a cadet, not a full officer -- grew and developed over the course of the seasons, becoming a professional and a leader.

 

I see the charge of “bad writing” used so much these days by disgruntled fans. I find it a lazy, undefined, blanket statement. What one person sees as bad writing another may appreciate as good writing, because tastes differ and people look for different things. Art is subjective. And for all NuTrek gets charged with “bad writing”—and I agree it’s not perfect or even close to perfect, people seem to forget that 1966-2005 Trek has, among the gems, some utter, utter stinkers on a level of awfulness that DIS has never got remotely close to and I hope never does. Again, I acknowledge that art is subjective as I said and some people like Trek’s hall of shame episodes. But let’s not pretend Star Trek in times past has been uniformly brilliant.

Wow, that’s quite a statement. I find it fascinating how some people can be vehemently anti-Left while reconciling that with Star Trek’s vision and values. But IDIC and all that. I’m left leaning (although critical of a lot of left standpoints) but I would never class anyone who didn’t share that perspective as being bigots. I believe we should discuss differences, rather than dehumanise others.

 

Ben Finney had a mental breakdown. Janice Lester was clinically insane, and when the matter was resolved she was treated with compassion. I've got no answer to the Worf one- TNG fell on its face there. As for Geordi's fixation with Brahams- the point is that his behavior was recognized as below standards and he was called out on it, and was remorseful. He didn't make excuses for it- he stepped out line, was called out, corrected his behavior, and moved on- like a functioning adult.

Cadet Tilly- don't even get me started. I wouldn't hire her to work as a barista, much less let her into starfleet academy.

If you disagree, that's okay. But when someone asks the question: "Why don't I like Disco?" There's a good part of the answer.

 

Sorry, you all don't get to gatekeep what constitutes my personal experience of hatred.

We can observe outward antisocial signs such as posting bigoted, sexist, racist things and/or posting hopes that the show fail or get canceled. You can call people on that, if that's what floats your boat. You can say you think people should lighten up and not get so hung up on canon or continuity issues. That's all well and good.

But you can't know what's in the heart of a troll who posts things to get a rise out of people who like a show. You might assume they hate the show, because they seem obviously racist. You might call it hate-posting, trolling, or something like that, but you can't know whether they actually hate the show or they couldn't care less about it but just get a kick out of winding up people who probably love the show and take it seriously.

If I feel so negatively about a swath of episodes that I never want them on, that may be close enough to hatred to me, especially in the limited context of "hating" a TV show, that it's rather pedantic to split hairs about it, but that's neither here nor there when it comes to how I post about the show or discuss it with others.

The pertinent issue here is how people discuss the show, not how they feel about it.

 

The point at issue wasn't whether it could be defined objectively.

The point at issue was whether a person could dislike the show because to them the writing is bad.

Playing the "let’s not pretend Star Trek in times past has been uniformly brilliant" card is a straw man. Heck, since I wasn't claiming that bad writing could be defined objectively, bringing that up is also a straw man.

Also, my post did not represent an attempt to enumerate the ways that I think the writing is bad. It was a declaration of the existence of that angle of criticism. The discussions I have participated in in which that topic has been materially discussed better represent my thoughts on it, and I certainly wasn't intending to recap them.