• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Michael Dorn's performance

You're mistakenly conflating machoism with misogyny. Machoism is not a belief that women are in inferior. Rather, machoism an exaggerated sense of strength and aggression.

While machoism can certainly manifest in misogyny (due to the desire to dominate), they aren't the same -- and one doesn't automatically lead to the other. It's entirely possible to be macho and at the same time consider women the equal of men. They aren't mutually exclusive.

So my characterization of Klingons as macho is valid (due to their exaggerated emphasis on aggression). Characterizing them as macho says nothing about their view of women.

That's eye opening. As I had largely equated to it that it was toxic against women. Mea culpa. Reading up misogyny is a big strand of it, I don't think it's wrong to conflate it, but I appreciate after your comments and reading more it's not exclusively so. There's a lot of self destruction in there too.
 
I thought he got better through DS9. More varied characters pushed Worf out of his comfort zone a little. It was good to see him take a walk on the wild side. *

Yeah I think Worf was way better in DS9. The first year he felt awkward and forced in, but DS9 being a place of misfits of all walks of life fit way better than TNG which was we are earth, we are American Earth, and you need to conform to American Earth.
 
Worf experiencing teenage-esque angst after becoming acquainted with Jadzia? Worf jeopardizing a mission because of his feelings? Worf siding with eco-terrorists? Worf not substantially pushing back against Sisko's war crime*? Worf acting as Sisko's personal iceman?

Those are supposed to be improvements? Say what you will about TNG Worf, but at least he was consistent.

* Though, to be fair, no one else meaningfully protested against that action.
 
I also think Worf was better written and taken more seriously as a character than on TNG.

For one thing, he wasn't tossed around every time the show needed to indicate something was a threat, like Paxan-possessed Troi tossing him across the bridge and breaking his wrist.

On DS9, they remembered Worf was a strong, very physical, and skilled warrior. Which was why it was rare that he was thrown around for kicks. And on the rare occasion he was getting beat, like in "BY INFERNO'S LIGHT", it was only due to being beat on again and again and again, not just becauss of one punch or throw.
 
Hm...

(The New Essentialists were not eco-terrorists.)

Have you changed your tune?

I also think Worf was better written and taken more seriously as a character than on TNG.

For one thing, he wasn't tossed around every time the show needed to indicate something was a threat, like Paxan-possessed Troi tossing him across the bridge and breaking his wrist.

On DS9, they remembered Worf was a strong, very physical, and skilled warrior. Which was why it was rare that he was thrown around for kicks. And on the rare occasion he was getting beat, like in "BY INFERNO'S LIGHT", it was only due to being beat on again and again and again, not just becauss of one punch or throw.

Worf is shown as a capable combatant in exchange for...weird characterization otherwise? In the realm of DS9 discussions, the amount of utterances of "So-and-so character is a badass!" - Worf included - used a justification for certain questionable developments has never ceased to amaze me.
 
Last edited:
Merely specificity.

Edit: Eco-terrorism is a specific thing.
I am not claiming that it is a lesser thing.
 
Last edited:
Hm...



Have you changed your tune?



Worf is shown as a capable combatant in exchange for...weird characterization otherwise? In the realm of DS9 discussions, the amount of utterances of "So-and-so character is a badass!" - Worf included - used a justification for certain questionable developments has never ceased to amaze me.
And in all the examples you listed, those situations made Worf a more rounded character, whether they are good or bad scenarios.

Him jeopardizing the mission to save his wife? Maybe not what a good officer would do, but you can't call him a bad husband for going back to save his wife. (Sisko even said he would have done the same thing, as a husband.)

Being 'Sisko's personal iceman'? I'd hardly call Worf his personal assassin. His actions were correct and within Klingon law and tradition. It was not murder.

Not pushing back 'Sisko's war crime'? Because there was no war crime. While not stated on screen in "FOR THE UNIFORM", General Order 24 grants Sisko the authority to perform the actions he took on that Maquis planet. (Which, by the way, was after the Maquis attacked and crippled TWO Starfleet ships, attacked a Federation convoy and stole its cargo, used said cargo to create biogenic weapons to target Cardassians directly, and poisoned TWO Cardassian colonies with the express intent to poison ALL Cardassian colonies in the DMZ. And that was just what they did in ONLY that episode.) And to be fair to Worf, he DID hesitate to fire.

The only time I agree that he was written badly was in "LET HE WHO IS WITHOUT SIN...".
 
Oh. I thought the allegation of a war crime was in reference to "In the Pale Moonlight", even though that didn't seem to make any sense... :p

I'm so tired of the "Sisko poisoned a planet!!!" hyperbole. It was inaccurate at the time and it's inaccurate now, and it particularly bugs me when the people who bring it up know they're being hyperbolic.
 
Oh. I thought the allegation of a war crime was in reference to "In the Pale Moonlight", even though that didn't seem to make any sense... :p

I'm so tired of the "Sisko poisoned a planet!!!" hyperbole. It was inaccurate at the time and it's inaccurate now, and it particularly bugs me when the people who bring it up know they're being hyperbolic.
Exactly! Sisko gave ample warning, there were no casualties, AND it restored balance to the region (as stated in his log entry at the end).

What the Maquis were doing was the exact opposite of all three things.
 
More importantly, to me, is the fact that what he did made the planet poisonous to humans, but there's no mention of it being made toxic to anyone else. It clearly was not toxic to Cardassians, as evidenced, so the "poisoned a planet!!!" line is clearly erroneous on the face of it.

It's like the equally fallacious logic used by those who claim that people who support Black Lives Matter are saying that no other lives matter.
 
Worf experiencing teenage-esque angst after becoming acquainted with Jadzia? Worf jeopardizing a mission because of his feelings? Worf siding with eco-terrorists? Worf not substantially pushing back against Sisko's war crime*? Worf acting as Sisko's personal iceman?

Those are supposed to be improvements? Say what you will about TNG Worf, but at least he was consistent.

* Though, to be fair, no one else meaningfully protested against that action.

I love TNG but then DS9 became my favourite. And part of me wants to go into TNG and shake them. Oh you're at another classical musical recital... live a bit. Get drunk. Have a bit of fun. TNG was in some ways the antithesis of Worf.

So I think some of that can be atttibuted to him not being in a room of fuddy duddies. Personally I felt he had way more in common with Sisko than Picard.

However, let's not talk of the terrorist episode... it's best forgotten for all DS9 fans.
 
aside from the 'Q' episodes, I find myself watching the "Worf" episodes the most....

Sins of the Father, Redemption, Reunion...

I find the Geordi and Beverly episodes to be bland, and the Troi ones to be too melodramatic.

my list would be:

Q (which are typically 'Picard' episodes as well)
Worf
Riker
Picard (sans Q)
Data
Troi
Geordi
Beverly
 
Reading up misogyny is a big strand of it, I don't think it's wrong to conflate it, but I appreciate after your comments and reading more it's not exclusively so. There's a lot of self destruction in there too.

That's fair. Although they are different concepts, machoism can lead to misogyny, so I certainly understand why someone would associate them.
 
You're mistakenly conflating machoism with misogyny. Machoism is not a belief that women are in inferior. Rather, machoism an exaggerated sense of strength and aggression.

While machoism can certainly manifest in misogyny (due to the desire to dominate), they aren't the same -- and one doesn't automatically lead to the other. It's entirely possible to be macho and at the same time consider women the equal of men. They aren't mutually exclusive.

So my characterization of Klingons as macho is valid (due to their exaggerated emphasis on aggression). Characterizing them as macho says nothing about their view of women.
well said, In the current zeitgeist, nearly any sort of masculinity is considered misogynistic,
while reality has far more nuance. One can be overly masculine in the traditional sense and be completely respectful in their actions....As far as (TNG) Klingon culture, there are hints of genuine discrimination but also inconsistency:

Gowron says to Picard: "Women many not serve on the Council...." but we have Lursa and B-Tor who nearly toppled the traditional Empire

then we have K'Ehleyr who was not intimidated any any other Klingon

So it seems strange that "Women cannot serve on the council" (my guess is that this line was simply a plot device)
but there are Klingon women in other positions of authority (Duras even offers K'Ehleyr her own command if she plays along)

other inconsistencies are when Worf talks about Klingon mating and how Women are the aggressors (while the men read poetry)

yet in Voyager..when seven becomes the Klingon warrior personality, she simply grabs B'Lanna and demands that she mate with her...
(side note, if Seven grabbed me and wanted to mate, I'd probably capitulate!!)
 
But with Worf that was his direct parents, and he was brought up by them, and was then transplanted to an entirely different race and planet. There could be an entire thread about the ethics of that.
Birthright is one of my favourite episode(s), at least in season 6 of TNG. Worf was only six years old in 2246 when when his biological parents were killed during the Attack on Khitomer. They had only been living there for a year before the Romulans essentially masacred the Colony, and Worf was one of only 2 survivors, the other being Khalest, a House Mogh "housemaid/nanny". A distress call from Khitomer was recieved by the USS Intrepid, of which Sergey Rozhenko Was Chief Petty Officer. Both Worf & Khalest were rescued by the Intrepid. Sergey adopted Worf and treated him equally to his own son, Nickolai. Worf viewed Nickolai as his Brother.

- Paraphrased from Memory Alpha.

He may have been Initially brought up by his biological parents on Klingon worlds, but only until he was 6. Humans only start forming true memories from roughly this age. Worf remembers being mauled on Khitomer by a beast, and having a pet Targ, though these are lilely his first true memories of his childhood. Its doubtful he would have remembered anything significant about his Klingon heritage before the attack, and even if he did, he would have been too young to understand most of it properly.

Worf was an orphan and him & Kahlest would have almost certainly died if they were left on Khitomer. Hypothetically, if the Intrepid never recieved the distress call, maybe a Klingon rescue party was sent to the Colony to rescue survivors, but we don't know. If Worf & Khalest were rescued by the Klingons, its unclear if they would have been rehomed or even rehabilitated in the first place. Klingon culture may view orphans as having no value, especially as Khalest says to Picard in 'Sins of the Father', that she considered herself "dead" as her house was gone, despite Worf still being alive. Its true that this is also because House Mogh was accused of being the reason for the Khitomer Massacre, but i'm not going to get into that.:hugegrin:

Anyhow, Sergey was clearly being compassionate when he adopted Worf. If he didn't adopt him, he would likely have been take to some futuristic foster home anyway. The Federation would never have treated Worf badly anyway, since it was allied with the Klingons, and he was only a small child! The fact that Worf considers Nickolai a father figure as much as Mogh just proves that he and his wife was always treated Worf as an equal.

Worf has mentioned multiple times that he still had trouble adjusting to Human life. At first he wouldn't eat any human meal Helena made so she learnt how to make Rokeg Blood Pie, which Worf greatly appreciated. This clearly shows that they respected Worf's Klingon Heritage and they also allowed him to freely research Klingon culture (they had no reason not to anyway since they were again allies of the Federation). When worf was 13 he was takkng part in his school's soccer championship, and he went to head the ball at the same time as a human child, Mikel. Worf collided with Mikel so violently that he snapped Mikel's neck and the boy died the next day. This had a large impact on Worf and how he viewed humans. He was now old enough to understand that he was living in an Alien Culture and that humans were biologically more fragile than him. Worf then learnt to exercise self-restraint in his daily life, to avoid anything like that from ever happening again.

All of these things are explored in TNG and mentioned further in DS9. There was no reason to further explore the ethical issues of him being rescued as thats what it was. And as much as the 6 year old worf struggled to adapt to human life, he was very young and didn't fully understand what had happened to him. Worf also likely had some buried childhood trauma from Khitomer, which wouldn't have helped his behaviour either.

He was definitely "transplanted" although that is a strange term to use in this context. Considering he no longer had any Klingon family and the Klingons may have just killed him anyway for being of House Mogh, and an orphan, the Federation literally saved his life and Sergei gave him a new family. Not a Klingon family, but as I just said they most likely wouldn't have wanted him anyway. This also is supported by the fact that Khalest is present and allows Sergei to adopt Worf. If there were any Klingon Cultural values or customs being ignored, she wouldn't have given Sergei permission in the first place.

As far as cultural appropriation is involved, worf never claimed anything in human culture to be his own, nor did his human parents do the opposite. That entire argument is rediculous.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top