Misogyny and Racism in STU
- Thread starter thewanderingjack
- Start date
I just came to speak in defense of Tasha Yar. Here are the reasons I identified with her character and looked up to her as a preteen/teen:
1. She had trauma, was able to be open about it, and wasn't afraid to let her experience guide her.
2. She could defend herself physically against men / tactical officer - I loved that she had what would ordinarily be a man's job.
3. She was angry and pissed off frequently. I suppose this may not have been endearing to others but as an oft-angry woman, I appreciated seeing one on tv.
4. I appreciated the representation of a character who wasn't sexualised in the same way as Troi. Obviously, it's been twenty years and I realize that being sexualised differently isn't better, but it opened a space in my mind for different ways of being a woman, being 'sexy', etc..
I loved that she was fetishized for her strength and ability to fight instead of breasts/body parts.
4, a. Data - I loved that she had sex with Data. Even though she had the virus, it just lowered inhibitions so I assume the desire was genuine. I totally get it. Data is a 'man' that is also completely not a man. It's totally hot, and I stand by it.
4, b. for similar reasons I stand by the kind of hitting on Picard - women are allowed to like sex. Yes, it's 80s workplace harassment, but it WAS the 80s. Additionally, many female characters kind of hit on Picard, he was sort of treated like a sex object in his own way. He rarely had sexual flings and even then always managed to maintain his 'purity' in a very un-kirk-like manner...
5. As for the 'rape-gangs' of Turkana IV I think they realized that was excessively dramatic and they became 'the cadres' according to her sister, which made it sound like it was Tasha's word to describe them...
It was an early representation of an action female and I think they should have developed her character further. I would like to have seen her stay and have a more nuanced role.
1. She had trauma, was able to be open about it, and wasn't afraid to let her experience guide her.
2. She could defend herself physically against men / tactical officer - I loved that she had what would ordinarily be a man's job.
3. She was angry and pissed off frequently. I suppose this may not have been endearing to others but as an oft-angry woman, I appreciated seeing one on tv.
4. I appreciated the representation of a character who wasn't sexualised in the same way as Troi. Obviously, it's been twenty years and I realize that being sexualised differently isn't better, but it opened a space in my mind for different ways of being a woman, being 'sexy', etc..
I loved that she was fetishized for her strength and ability to fight instead of breasts/body parts.
4, a. Data - I loved that she had sex with Data. Even though she had the virus, it just lowered inhibitions so I assume the desire was genuine. I totally get it. Data is a 'man' that is also completely not a man. It's totally hot, and I stand by it.
4, b. for similar reasons I stand by the kind of hitting on Picard - women are allowed to like sex. Yes, it's 80s workplace harassment, but it WAS the 80s. Additionally, many female characters kind of hit on Picard, he was sort of treated like a sex object in his own way. He rarely had sexual flings and even then always managed to maintain his 'purity' in a very un-kirk-like manner...
5. As for the 'rape-gangs' of Turkana IV I think they realized that was excessively dramatic and they became 'the cadres' according to her sister, which made it sound like it was Tasha's word to describe them...
It was an early representation of an action female and I think they should have developed her character further. I would like to have seen her stay and have a more nuanced role.
Just imagine what would have happened any time anyone on the ship got freaky.
The Federation officers' dismissal of Sisko and the Bajorans' religious beliefs.
When were Starfleet officers dismissal of Sisko?
My reading of that was largely due to Prime Directive issues rather than anything else, though there was some anti-religious elements in TNG.
I have to agree that was more Starfleet not liking the idea that a command level officer was seen as a religious icon to another world. In addition to the Prime Directive, it's also a matter of someone having that kind of power and sway over another world that can lead to disastrous consequences.
It was proven correct, somewhat, when Sisko stopped Bajor from entering the Federation in "RAPTURE".
(Despite it being done to protect Bajor from the Dominion later, it was still interfering in the internal affairs of another world. In a big way. That admiral was very much within his rights to court martial him. And I'm saying this as a huge defender of Sisko.)
It was proven correct, somewhat, when Sisko stopped Bajor from entering the Federation in "RAPTURE".
(Despite it being done to protect Bajor from the Dominion later, it was still interfering in the internal affairs of another world. In a big way. That admiral was very much within his rights to court martial him. And I'm saying this as a huge defender of Sisko.)
Last edited:
..and within another species, one would assume emotional state / reaction differ greatly from one individual to the other, even when experiencing a similar external event, so there would be no way to "train" anyone of Troi's species to read / sense the thought and/or emotional state of others. You'd be better off using the Universal Translator and hope you can get your message across rather than rely on something as unreliable (if analyzed as we do now) as Troi's power
Yes, and with that goes a boatload of major ST characters.
Before Roddenberry embarked on his revisionist ST history tour during the convention era of the 1970s, his own series featured open racism from one species to another: from Stiles and Boma toward Spock ("Balance of Terror" and "The Galileo Seven", respectively), to the Blish novelization & early scripts for "The Omega Glory" having Captain Tracy make openly disdainful comments about Spock and his race, while Spock often made disrespectful comments about humans (not just McCoy). It was no hand-holding Space Utopia, and one the reasons TOS felt grittier and closer to reality than any ST series to follow.
Take a look at who dreamed up the Kazon: I find such a creation / depiction based on sweeping stereotypes of a minor aspect of a culture the result of pampered White Liberals who believed they had the knowledge and understanding to make such a (unironically) racist commentary and shovel it into their ever-so-enlightened Voyager world. They (the Berman-Trek group behind that sickening creation) may have viewed themselves as operating from a "correct" mindset, but their output illustrated a tendency to push long-lived stereotypes similar to their allegedly ideological opposites in American society.
Last edited:
And even before TNG. As far back as THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK, Starfleet Command was uncomfortable with "Vulcan mysticism" with regards to Spock's katra and all that.
I always viewed Admiral Morrow's statement to be revealing of Starfleet's gross ignorance (or willing dismissal) of that which--by that time in the history of human / Vulcan relations--should not have been written off as something akin to carrying around a rabbit's foot for luck. It would have been very interesting to see the reactions from the Morrows of Starfleet after Spock was revived.
What would he do--shift his arguments to: "I've never been comfortable with resurrecting dead men" or something along that line?
What would he do--shift his arguments to: "I've never been comfortable with resurrecting dead men" or something along that line?
To be fair, even the Vulcans were unsure if that was going to work. If someone came up to me with that idea, I'd find it difficult to take fully seriously because it does sound like mysticism.
Its not like Vulcans are forthcoming.
Yet, if one just takes all the 1701 crew experienced during their 5-year mission (including TAS), there's no way a 23rd century Starfleet could continue to be such a collective brick wall against anything that's not a button to push. Then again, its not uncommon for people to deny that which they cannot see or understand, even when its clear that misunderstood subject or element sits in front of their face.
I understand that fully. It's hard to believe something unless you have proof or have seen it yourself.
True. And even the Vulcan High Priestess points out that it's only been done in ancient days, and then only in myth.
More they deny it because they can't control it. And the Vulcans would not disclose more than absolutely necessary and possibly it only happened because of Sarek's position and pull with the Vulcan government.
