Jadzia's Dax Symbiont

[Thestral]

^

Personal interpretation; I respect it. I also understand the other POV. Note his attraction to...the androids in "I, Mudd", for one....

BTW...Chris himself admits in that post that TOS was a '60s television show, and that viewers labeling Kirk as a womanizer were extrapolating based on that. To be blunt...such viewers have good reason to, because of that.

I'm sorry, but 7 women for certain, and splitting the "indeterminate" evenly let's say 11, over his whole life? 5 of whom he was in a serious relationship with, including his marriage to Miramanee?

And I'm not sure what you're referring to in Mudd's Women, but we know from his relationship with Janice Rand that he could be very reserved even when he did find a woman to be desirable and available.

Chris is accounting for the 60s thing by including every woman Kirk had significant contact with, which is why I said split the difference on the "indeterminate" - and even then.

That is expressing a POV, which naturally would color how one interprets a character. How is that "forcing" an agenda? As Spock would say, a viewer expressing a point of view would not change the character.

Fictional characters don't have an objective reality; interpretation is the key part of their existence.

Yeah, but what does Tiger have to do with passive-aggressiveness?

What, indeed? I'd wager it's an example of allowance for leniency regarding a diet leading to a desire for more, which in turn leads to a desire for even more...and before you know it, addiction sets in. I seriously doubt he started out a sex-addict.

The point regarding Tiger is, simply, that allowance of lax standards runs the risk of leading to "active-aggressiveness".

So. Your contention is that because one person becomes a sex addict (leaving aside the wealth and prestige and power Tiger had), anybody with "lax standards" around sexuality (go ahead and say it... "loose morals" ) may become a raging sex addict. Well good god - I hope you never ever ever ever touch alcohol, because you might end up a raging alcoholic and drive drunk and kill somebody!

Bringing this into Star Trek...look at Bashir, in the early seasons. Observe his ways of casual romance with women--as Jadzia herself pointed out in "Dax".

Also note his decided lack of emotional maturity, in those days.

Of course...as he matured over the course of the series...note how his relationships became more substantive, and less matters of "casual flings".

I think you're conflating things that ought not be conflated - Bashir's emotional maturity (or lack thereof), and his interest in casual sex. Correlation =/ causation; can you give some evidence they're related here?

On that note--and Nerys has often expressed thoughts to this effect, as well--Jadzia in the early seasons seemed more emotionally mature than in her "Party Girl" phase. Note "Let He Who Is Without Sin..." (yes, I KNOW it's a "bad" episode--it's canon, nonetheless), "You Are Cordially Invited", and the fact that, in "Change Of Heart", it was painfully clear she couldn't take herself the kind of barbs she threw at Worf....

Would those be the same episodes where she A) was respectful and comforting as Worf unloaded about his issues, B) got married to Worf and pledged her life to him, and C) was dying slowly and painfully from a gunshot wound?

Shhhhh Rush, don't mention MONTANA. Ya know that pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstrap-state. You prolly should have said a nice left-leaning state like: Cali, Michigan, Cuba, or Venezuela....don't want to farther push those conservative values on anyone.....also, you'd be giving out perfect examples of some of the best Keynesian macroeconomics in the world....live long and prosper Comrade Rush-kie

 

[Rush Limborg]

^

Personal interpretation; I respect it. I also understand the other POV. Note his attraction to...the androids in "I, Mudd", for one....

BTW...Chris himself admits in that post that TOS was a '60s television show, and that viewers labeling Kirk as a womanizer were extrapolating based on that. To be blunt...such viewers have good reason to, because of that.

I'm sorry, but 7 women for certain, and splitting the "indeterminate" evenly let's say 11, over his whole life? 5 of whom he was in a serious relationship with, including his marriage to Miramanee?

And I'm not sure what you're referring to in Mudd's Women, but we know from his relationship with Janice Rand that he could be very reserved even when he did find a woman to be desirable and available.

Chris is accounting for the 60s thing by including every woman Kirk had significant contact with, which is why I said split the difference on the "indeterminate" - and even then.

TOS ran for 3 seasons. The frequency therefore is higher.

In "I, Mudd" (not "Mudd's Women--the other one), when Mudd shows all the android models, Kirk expresses verbal admiration for their attractiveness.

As for Rand...remember, she was a member of his crew, under his command. His duty as a Starfleet officer demanded he refrain from a fling with a yeoman--so much further down the latter of rank. I'd wager there would be many in Starfleet who would have considered such to be, in a sense, akin to statutory rape!

That is expressing a POV, which naturally would color how one interprets a character. How is that "forcing" an agenda? As Spock would say, a viewer expressing a point of view would not change the character.

Fictional characters don't have an objective reality; interpretation is the key part of their existence.

Of course. Nonetheless, that hardly means expressing an opinion about them is akin to "forcing" an agenda on them.

So. Your contention is that because one person becomes a sex addict (leaving aside the wealth and prestige and power Tiger had), anybody with "lax standards" around sexuality (go ahead and say it... "loose morals" ) may become a raging sex addict. Well good god - I hope you never ever ever ever touch alcohol, because you might end up a raging alcoholic and drive drunk and kill somebody!

I might. Which is why, at the very least, I would refrain from touching an a adult beverage unless and until a designated driver is selected.

I think you're conflating things that ought not be conflated - Bashir's emotional maturity (or lack thereof), and his interest in casual sex. Correlation =/ causation; can you give some evidence they're related here?

Just my observation of his attitude towards women, amid those same changes.

On that note--and Nerys has often expressed thoughts to this effect, as well--Jadzia in the early seasons seemed more emotionally mature than in her "Party Girl" phase. Note "Let He Who Is Without Sin..." (yes, I KNOW it's a "bad" episode--it's canon, nonetheless), "You Are Cordially Invited", and the fact that, in "Change Of Heart", it was painfully clear she couldn't take herself the kind of barbs she threw at Worf....

Would those be the same episodes where she A) was respectful and comforting as Worf unloaded about his issues, B) got married to Worf and pledged her life to him, and C) was dying slowly and painfully from a gunshot wound?

"A" is an example of her rolling back the attitude she's expressed earlier in that ep (interestingly enough...a turning point in that ep for her seems to have been Bashir and Quark calling her out).

"B" is a similar example--it's strongly implied that she swallowed her pride and made amends with Sirella. And I respect her character for that.

"C" is a bit of a non sequitur....

 

[Thestral]

TOS ran for 3 seasons. The frequency therefore is higher.

In "I, Mudd" (not "Mudd's Women--the other one), when Mudd shows all the android models, Kirk expresses verbal admiration for their attractiveness.

As for Rand...remember, she was a member of his crew, under his command. His duty as a Starfleet officer demanded he refrain from a fling with a yeoman--so much further down the latter of rank. I'd wager there would be many in Starfleet who would have considered such to be, in a sense, akin to statutory rape!

TOS ran for three years, yes... but 4 of the women he slept with were from before that time period. And of the remaining 7 from that 3-year period, two of them he was deeply committed to. Five (relatively) random sex partners over a three year period? Not so terrible.

Umm... what does expressing admiration for the androids' physical attractiveness matter or prove? I'm pleased as punch to comment on the beauty of the various many beautiful women in this world, does that make me a womanizer?

I think you're very definitely wrong about Rand; specifically the captain/crew part of it. We see in TNG's Lessons that a relationship between a captain and crewmember isn't forbidden - indeed, the ship's counselor encourages things, and the only issue that comes up is Riker's uncertain how Picard's relationship with Darren will affect his (Riker's) ability to do his job as XO - and not that it's inappropriate. And that's from 100 years later when restrictions were tighter, not looser. Now obviously Lessons, well... lesson... is that Picard couldn't make it work effectively and be a good captain, but it's obviously not against regs. (As a note, for a much more... cynical... look at the "Captain in a relationship with crew" I recommend Andromeda's The Mathematics of Tears)

Also look again at TOS Dagger of the Mind. Spock walks in on Kirk and Helen Noel passionately kissing - and seems bemused, not that it's inappropriate. And of course, on a more minor note, we have The Cage and Yeoman Colt - Pike's reaction to her seems similar to Kirk's with Rand (though Colt's much blunter about what she wants at the end). In both cases, the Captain does seem to regard it as deeply inappropriate to engage in a relationship with his Yeoman - and I think that's as it should be - but it's presented as a matter of personal ethics, not Starfleet policy. Number One seems scandalized by Colt's forwardness; Spock just seems generally bemused.

I might. Which is why, at the very least, I would refrain from touching an a adult beverage unless and until a designated driver is selected.

Um, ok. And when you're at home or staying the night somewhere? You have to acknowledge then that you're paranoid and people shouldn't expect to follow your standards

Just my observation of his attitude towards women, amid those same changes.

Which would be...? Unless your contention is that interest in casual sex does, in fact, indicate emotional immaturity.

..."Let He Who Is Without Sin..."..."You Are Cordially Invited"... in "Change Of Heart", it was painfully clear she couldn't take herself the kind of barbs she threw at Worf....

Would those be the same episodes where she A) was respectful and comforting as Worf unloaded about his issues, B) got married to Worf and pledged her life to him, and C) was dying slowly and painfully from a gunshot wound?

"A" is an example of her rolling back the attitude she's expressed earlier in that ep (interestingly enough...a turning point in that ep for her seems to have been Bashir and Quark calling her out).

"B" is a similar example--it's strongly implied that she swallowed her pride and made amends with Sirella. And I respect her character for that.

"C" is a bit of a non sequitur....

So just to clarify - you're admitting that (whether or not she was wrong in the first place) Jadzia Dax in fact showed emotional maturity in those two examples? I'm not sure what you're referring to with "Change of Heart" btw... all I remember is the "slowly bleeding out" parts.

 

[Rush Limborg]

TOS ran for 3 seasons. The frequency therefore is higher.

In "I, Mudd" (not "Mudd's Women--the other one), when Mudd shows all the android models, Kirk expresses verbal admiration for their attractiveness.

As for Rand...remember, she was a member of his crew, under his command. His duty as a Starfleet officer demanded he refrain from a fling with a yeoman--so much further down the latter of rank. I'd wager there would be many in Starfleet who would have considered such to be, in a sense, akin to statutory rape!

TOS ran for three years, yes... but 4 of the women he slept with were from before that time period. And of the remaining 7 from that 3-year period, two of them he was deeply committed to. Five (relatively) random sex partners over a three year period? Not so terrible.

Five relatively random sex partners over a period of 79 episodes. That's all we can go by.

Umm... what does expressing admiration for the androids' physical attractiveness matter or prove? I'm pleased as punch to comment on the beauty of the various many beautiful women in this world, does that make me a womanizer?

He's...kinda on duty, isn't he? It's hardly professional, to make such remarks on duty, in front of your subordinates.

I think you're very definitely wrong about Rand; specifically the captain/crew part of it. We see in TNG's Lessons that a relationship between a captain and crewmember isn't forbidden - indeed, the ship's counselor encourages things, and the only issue that comes up is Riker's uncertain how Picard's relationship with Darren will affect his (Riker's) ability to do his job as XO - and not that it's inappropriate. And that's from 100 years later when restrictions were tighter, not looser. Now obviously Lessons, well... lesson... is that Picard couldn't make it work effectively and be a good captain, but it's obviously not against regs. (As a note, for a much more... cynical... look at the "Captain in a relationship with crew" I recommend Andromeda's The Mathematics of Tears)

First, it seems that restrictions seemed to have been looser regarding such. I refer you to "The Naked Time", in which Kirk, stripped of his reserve, bemoans that "A captain's not permitted a woman to touch, and hold...."

The implication is that in the 23rd century, standards are more strict regarding the captain and relationships with his crew.

Also look again at TOS Dagger of the Mind. Spock walks in on Kirk and Helen Noel passionately kissing - and seems bemused, not that it's inappropriate. And of course, on a more minor note, we have The Cage and Yeoman Colt - Pike's reaction to her seems similar to Kirk's with Rand (though Colt's much blunter about what she wants at the end). In both cases, the Captain does seem to regard it as deeply inappropriate to engage in a relationship with his Yeoman - and I think that's as it should be - but it's presented as a matter of personal ethics, not Starfleet policy. Number One seems scandalized by Colt's forwardness; Spock just seems generally bemused.

In Spock's case, I think it's a matter between friends. He knows personally that Kirk and Noel are fine. He's the one being lax.

I might. Which is why, at the very least, I would refrain from touching an a adult beverage unless and until a designated driver is selected.

Um, ok. And when you're at home or staying the night somewhere? You have to acknowledge then that you're paranoid and people shouldn't expect to follow your standards

The point, sir, is that one must be sure to keep one's own desires in check. You either master your desires, or your desires master you. "Paranoia" has nothing to do with it.

Which would be...? Unless your contention is that interest in casual sex does, in fact, indicate emotional immaturity.

What it indicates is a desire for physical gratification, without much regard for emotional connections. As Bashir grows over the course of the show, we see him take prospective relationships more "seriously", if you will.

All this, of course, is my own analysis, rooted in my own philosophy. You're free to disagree--it is not, nor has it ever been, my desire to "force" this philosophy on anyone.

Would those be the same episodes where she A) was respectful and comforting as Worf unloaded about his issues, B) got married to Worf and pledged her life to him, and C) was dying slowly and painfully from a gunshot wound?

"A" is an example of her rolling back the attitude she's expressed earlier in that ep (interestingly enough...a turning point in that ep for her seems to have been Bashir and Quark calling her out).

"B" is a similar example--it's strongly implied that she swallowed her pride and made amends with Sirella. And I respect her character for that.

"C" is a bit of a non sequitur....

So just to clarify - you're admitting that (whether or not she was wrong in the first place) Jadzia Dax in fact showed emotional maturity in those two examples?

She showed emotional maturity in making amends for her previous actions, yes.

I'm not sure what you're referring to with "Change of Heart" btw... all I remember is the "slowly bleeding out" parts.

Here we go. Near the very end of that scene, Worf gives a barb of his own--and it becomes VERY clear that Jadzia can't take a dose of her own medicine.

 

[DonIago]

With all due respect, while I would greatly enjoy the opportunity to enjoy an emotional connection, it's not always a viable option. That being the case, why should I forego physical gratification that all involved parties enjoy and that harms nobody?

If that's a sign of me being immature, then I guess there's something to be said for immaturity.

 

[Timo]

I'm sorry, but 7 women for certain

Five relatively random sex partners over a period of 79 episodes.

Care to give a list?

At best, I can count two sex partners of any sort in the episodes: Miramanee (but with Kirok, not with Kirk) and Neela (but at gunpoint). Zero "relatively random" ones. Zero voluntary ones, really.

With Keeler, Jimmy boy just had some walks with stargazing and poetry. In wooing Miranda Jones, Rayna the Android, Sylvia, Kelinda, etc. etc. Kirk was just attacking an enemy operative's weak point, and never got particularly far physically. With Drusilla the Roman slave girl, Kirk would have had every motivation not to have sex.

In any case, it seems Kirk prefers older women, or at least not anybody who looks much under thirty. This already disqualifies a lot of the TOS guest characters. (Jim probably owes his life to this preference, or else Lenore Karidian would have ticked off another name in her list of nine easily enough.)

Kissing pretty girls is what starship captains do for a living. It's as integral to getting the mission accomplished as gunning down Klingons (although always on stun!) and outsmarting supercomputers. It's hardly something dependent on Kirk's personality.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Rush Limborg]

With all due respect, while I would greatly enjoy the opportunity to enjoy an emotional connection, it's not always a viable option. That being the case, why should I forego physical gratification that all involved parties enjoy and that harms nobody?

Well, first, there's the assumption that it harms nobody. Aside from the risk (however slight) of STDs and unplanned pregnancies (though it seems to be implied in Trek that those issues have already been dealt with)--there is the emotional effect. Like it or not, there is--or is supposed to be--a bond resulting from the act. Hence Worf's description of it to Ezri as "a deeply spiritual act".

(Ezri, as it were, seems all too aware of the emotional connection, as well--hence her demanding an answer from Worf on "Do you love me?"...and her conclusion that if the answer is "no"...then what had happened on Goralis was a mistake. This, of course, is not suprising--she is a psychologist, after all.)

My point is that the more sex is indulged in for "physical gratification", the more the act is "cheapened"--by that I mean, the effect is deadened for the participants, because its significance--emotional, or "spiritual"--is downplayed. Thus, when one does find an emotional connection, the act of intercourse becomes less meaningful.

 

[Timo]

I don't see how the emotional effect would be affected if the sex is agreed to be for physical gratification only. It would be in a wholly separate category of activities in that respect. One can hardly argue that going to see a touching movie or taking a strenuous hike detracts from the love you feel towards your partner... (Although the world is not short on arguments against movies and hiking and the like, all ending with "it ruins you for good, as it's not the real thing but a perversion thereof". )

On the other hand, it may well be that every sex act Jadzia was involved in had great emotional and spiritual significance to her and to her partners. Why would "cheapening" take place? We're not talking about an exhaustible natural resource here at all. Or even about the laws of supply and demand. If one act is meaningful, another can be as well. Although it needn't.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[DonIago]

With all due respect, while I would greatly enjoy the opportunity to enjoy an emotional connection, it's not always a viable option. That being the case, why should I forego physical gratification that all involved parties enjoy and that harms nobody?

Well, first, there's the assumption that it harms nobody. Aside from the risk (however slight) of STDs and unplanned pregnancies (though it seems to be implied in Trek that those issues have already been dealt with)--there is the emotional effect. Like it or not, there is--or is supposed to be--a bond resulting from the act. Hence Worf's description of it to Ezri as "a deeply spiritual act".

(Ezri, as it were, seems all too aware of the emotional connection, as well--hence her demanding an answer from Worf on "Do you love me?"...and her conclusion that if the answer is "no"...then what had happened on Goralis was a mistake. This, of course, is not suprising--she is a psychologist, after all.)

My point is that the more sex is indulged in for "physical gratification", the more the act is "cheapened"--by that I mean, the effect is deadened for the participants, because its significance--emotional, or "spiritual"--is downplayed. Thus, when one does find an emotional connection, the act of intercourse becomes less meaningful.

Funny. I'd argue that if one is used to (not necessarily happily) physical gratification without emotional fulfillment, then it's possible that finding a combination of both could be more meaningful.

According to whom is there supposed to be a bond resulting from it? That Worf thinks so hardly makes it universal.

 

[RoJoHen]

Probably Jesus.

 

[DonIago]

Ah. Well, if I wasn't Agnostic I'd probably be Jewish, so the opinion of Jesus means about as much to me as Worf's opinion on the subject.

 

[RoJoHen]

Indeed. Sex is supposed to be used to make babies. It has no other intended purpose beyond that.

 

[Rush Limborg]

I don't see how the emotional effect would be affected if the sex is agreed to be for physical gratification only. It would be in a wholly separate category of activities in that respect. One can hardly argue that going to see a touching movie or taking a strenuous hike detracts from the love you feel towards your partner... (Although the world is not short on arguments against movies and hiking and the like, all ending with "it ruins you for good, as it's not the real thing but a perversion thereof". )

Seeing something, and partaking in something, are two different things. You can watch action films without being desensitized to real-life violence. It is a lot harder to not be desensitized were you to partake in such violence: a gangster is probably more desensitized to violence than someone who enjoys gangster flicks.

On the other hand, it may well be that every sex act Jadzia was involved in had great emotional and spiritual significance to her and to her partners.

Except, as Worf himself noted to Ezri, "I realize that Jadizia saw physical love differently than I. To her, it could mean many things--but to me, it was always a deeply spiritual act."

Ezri never corrects him on Jadzia's views. You'd think she would...after all, it would have been the right time, to reassure him of Jadzia's character and integrity.

But in fact, Ezri's responses accepts the premise that Worf's and her "impulse" on Goralis--was a mistake.

Why would "cheapening" take place? We're not talking about an exhaustible natural resource here at all. Or even about the laws of supply and demand. If one act is meaningful, another can be as well. Although it needn't.

Timo Saloniemi

Habitual activity, by its very nature, has less significance to someone then an activity partaken in as an exception to the rule.

As a rule, the more someone does something--the more regular the basis in which the action is partaken in--the less significant that action is emotionally, for that person.

With all due respect, while I would greatly enjoy the opportunity to enjoy an emotional connection, it's not always a viable option. That being the case, why should I forego physical gratification that all involved parties enjoy and that harms nobody?

Well, first, there's the assumption that it harms nobody. Aside from the risk (however slight) of STDs and unplanned pregnancies (though it seems to be implied in Trek that those issues have already been dealt with)--there is the emotional effect. Like it or not, there is--or is supposed to be--a bond resulting from the act. Hence Worf's description of it to Ezri as "a deeply spiritual act".

(Ezri, as it were, seems all too aware of the emotional connection, as well--hence her demanding an answer from Worf on "Do you love me?"...and her conclusion that if the answer is "no"...then what had happened on Goralis was a mistake. This, of course, is not suprising--she is a psychologist, after all.)

My point is that the more sex is indulged in for "physical gratification", the more the act is "cheapened"--by that I mean, the effect is deadened for the participants, because its significance--emotional, or "spiritual"--is downplayed. Thus, when one does find an emotional connection, the act of intercourse becomes less meaningful.

Funny. I'd argue that if one is used to (not necessarily happily) physical gratification without emotional fulfillment, then it's possible that finding a combination of both could be more meaningful.

According to whom is there supposed to be a bond resulting from it? That Worf thinks so hardly makes it universal.

And Ezri's awareness of the emotional effects--and her assertion that the act on Goralis, if it were not backed up by Worf actually loving her, was therefore a mistake--helps give credibility, as, again, she is the psychologist, there.

 

[DonIago]

Given Ezri's emotional state at the time I'm frankly not sure I'd consider her a particularly credible witness.

 

[Rush Limborg]

^Oh? She...seemed quite sane in that sequence, to me. Remember, the entire point of said sequence was that they were calling what had happened before into question--in a rational, hindsight-20/20 fashion. With clear heads, if you will.

 

[Thestral]

He's...kinda on duty, isn't he? It's hardly professional, to make such remarks on duty, in front of your subordinates.

Is it now?

First, it seems that restrictions seemed to have been looser regarding such. I refer you to "The Naked Time", in which Kirk, stripped of his reserve, bemoans that "A captain's not permitted a woman to touch, and hold...."

The implication is that in the 23rd century, standards are more strict regarding the captain and relationships with his crew.

That's obviously Kirk's own delirious state making him universalizing his own personal code - the point of the scene, after all, is that Kirk's profound dedication to his ship and duty, almost a Batman-like marriage as it were, prevents him from forming normal romantic relationships.

The point, sir, is that one must be sure to keep one's own desires in check. You either master your desires, or your desires master you. "Paranoia" has nothing to do with it.

So then, red herrings like Tiger Woods aside, evidence that people with a more relaxed sexual ethics are letting their desires master them?

As Bashir grows over the course of the show, we see him take prospective relationships more "seriously", if you will.

All this, of course, is my own analysis, rooted in my own philosophy. You're free to disagree.

So it's your contention that sex outside of a committed relationship is - by it's very nature - immature.

So just to clarify - you're admitting that (whether or not she was wrong in the first place) Jadzia Dax in fact showed emotional maturity in those two examples?

She showed emotional maturity in making amends for her previous actions, yes.

Obviously I don't agree she had to make "amends" in the first place (my god, in You Are Cordially Invited everything is Klingon and she's apparently conceding all Trill elements in her own wedding), but it's good we can agree that in fact Jadzia Dax is an emotionally mature person.

I'm not sure what you're referring to with "Change of Heart" btw... all I remember is the "slowly bleeding out" parts.

Here we go. Near the very end of that scene, Worf gives a barb of his own--and it becomes VERY clear that Jadzia can't take a dose of her own medicine.

Oh, piffle. Really, arguments and sniping between a married couple, that's what you're reduced to? Because as we all know, perfectly stable, emotionally healthy relationship between married couples never ever see that.

I'm sorry, but 7 women for certain

Five relatively random sex partners over a period of 79 episodes.

Care to give a list?

It's based on a post by Christopher here. I'm perfectly willing to concede the number though.

My point is that the more sex is indulged in for "physical gratification", the more the act is "cheapened"--by that I mean, the effect is deadened for the participants, because its significance--emotional, or "spiritual"--is downplayed. Thus, when one does find an emotional connection, the act of intercourse becomes less meaningful.

And you're perfectly free to think that - but not everybody agrees with you and Worf (and Ezri for that matter) there.

You'd think [Ezri] would...after all, it would have been the right time, to reassure him of Jadzia's character and integrity.

Stop there. Why should she have to "reassure him" about anything? Worf knew Jadzia's and his sexual ethics didn't entirely mesh (conceding for the moment that he's right and an Ezri who was confused by memories and feelings from being married to Worf in a past life would have corrected him if he were wrong) and he dated and married her anyway. How was her integrity at question in any way?

Habitual activity, by its very nature, has less significance to someone then an activity partaken in as an exception to the rule.

Oh really? Not familiar with the ritual of communion, I take it?

 

[Rush Limborg]

He's...kinda on duty, isn't he? It's hardly professional, to make such remarks on duty, in front of your subordinates.

Is it now?

I'd say so! Especially in an organization such as Starfleet.

First, it seems that restrictions seemed to have been looser regarding such. I refer you to "The Naked Time", in which Kirk, stripped of his reserve, bemoans that "A captain's not permitted a woman to touch, and hold...."

The implication is that in the 23rd century, standards are more strict regarding the captain and relationships with his crew.

That's obviously Kirk's own delirious state making him universalizing his own personal code - the point of the scene, after all, is that Kirk's profound dedication to his ship and duty, almost a Batman-like marriage as it were, prevents him from forming normal romantic relationships.

Not so "obvious". Look at what he says--he refers to Rand, and notes that Spock's allowed to notice her--but a captain's not permitted to.

So then, red herrings like Tiger Woods aside, evidence that people with a more relaxed sexual ethics are letting their desires master them?

How is Tiger Woods a "red herring"?

I could also point to Bill Clinton, if you like.

On screen: Julian Bashir, as I said.

How many times had James Bond's eye for women gotten him into trouble?

As a rule, though, I'm saying that that has the risk of occurring. One has to be careful, so as to ensure it doesn't. Pleasure invariably has the risk of becoming addicting--precisely because it is pleasurable. Enjoyment of food...to gluttony. Enjoyment of drink...to alcoholism. Enjoyment of cheap sex...

So it's your contention that sex outside of a committed relationship is - by it's very nature - immature.

It could be. Immaturity comes in many different forms. It doesn't mean the person, as a whole, is immature. It means that they are expressing immaturity in that sense.

Obviously I don't agree she had to make "amends" in the first place (my god, in You Are Cordially Invited everything is Klingon and she's apparently conceding all Trill elements in her own wedding), but it's good we can agree that in fact Jadzia Dax is an emotionally mature person.

Not as a rule. Refer again to the scene in "Change of Heart"--

Oh, piffle. Really, arguments and sniping between a married couple, that's what you're reduced to? Because as we all know, perfectly stable, emotionally healthy relationship between married couples never ever see that.

It is--as I have stated, over and over--a visual example of the fact that Jadzia can't stomach a dose of her own medicine. Indeed, that sort of thing happened previously, in "Let He Who Is Without Sin...", when Bashir and Quark let her have it.

And you're perfectly free to think that - but not everybody agrees with you and Worf (and Ezri for that matter) there.

Really? You don't say!

You'd think [Ezri] would...after all, it would have been the right time, to reassure him of Jadzia's character and integrity.

Stop there. Why should she have to "reassure him" about anything? Worf knew Jadzia's and his sexual ethics didn't entirely mesh (conceding for the moment that he's right and an Ezri who was confused by memories and feelings from being married to Worf in a past life would have corrected him if he were wrong) and he dated and married her anyway. How was her integrity at question in any way?

"Penumbra"? The campfire sequence? Captain Boday?

"Till Death"? "I KNEW it! Jadzia had feelings for him as well!"


As for Ezri being "confused"--remember, by that point, Ezri had become aware of the fact that, on Goralis, "part of me--the part that was your wife...wanted very much to be close to you." The implication is that, by that point, she'd gotten over that.

Habitual activity, by its very nature, has less significance to someone then an activity partaken in as an exception to the rule.

Oh really? Not familiar with the ritual of communion, I take it?

*sigh* I'm very familiar with it. I am ALSO aware of all the times pastors as a rule have to emphasize the meaning behind communion, so that it doesn't lose its significance in the minds of the congregation.

 

[Star_Trucker]

My thoughts are this about the symbiont(s):
Dax had been 'around the block' a few times. Enough times for quite a few good and bad ( okay, not so good ) habits to form. Plus some depends on the host, too. If they're more straight laced or not.

Without going back and searching, I think there was a bit on one episode where Jadzia talked with Curzon about why he turned her down for the symbiont program at first and, for me at least, it seemed that that might have been when Jadzia might have loosened up a little bit. And for her to end up getting the Dax symbiont from Curzon was just icing on the cake for her relaxed mores.

 

[Rush Limborg]

^Hmm. Interesting point....

BTW--welcome aboard the BBS, Star Trucker!