• 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!

Narada's Crew

I'm a lawyer so I do understand that discrimination is a complex issue...

Ouch, I'm beyond my league here. :)

The writers seem to choose the sex of their characters and they have always regularly chosen more men in every single incarnation of the franchise.

Sure they are more men in Star Trek, that said there are more Men in the Navy (wiki indicates somewhere around 6:1 ratio), and here is an interesting paragraph i managed to dig up:

Gender is the single best predictor of criminal behavior: men commit more crime, and women commit less. This distinction holds throughout history, for all societies, for all groups, and for nearly every crime category. The universality of this fact is really quite remarkable, even though many tend to take it for granted.

http://law.jrank.org/pages/1256/Gender-Crime.html

So Star fleet would presumably have more men than women, and the villains would presumably be more men then females. Hence, more men leading roles than women.
 
Yeah, if a movie is set in modern times I would agree with a 6:1 ratio. But Trek is set in the future where true equality has been achieved so such a ratio isn't appropriate. In fact in TOS the official ratio was about 66/33 or 60/40 (I forget which). Allegedly, Roddenberry wanted 50/50 but the producers thought that too many women would imply too much hanky panky was going on. By TMP they had officially readjusted the ratio to 50/50.

Given the changes wrought to the time stream and the original reasons behind the imbalance I think 50/50 is how they should go. I'd be appalled if in the 21st century they made a conscious decision to have fewer women than the sixties and seventies and if they did how could that decision not be founded on sexism?

I do agree that there are biological differences between the sexes that might lead more men into service or more men to be criminals so a 60/40 imbalance would probably be ok with me although Trek's idea of an equal utopia would be tarnished somewhat by the spectre of realism. However, I don't agree that such a divide should cross every single species in the same way. There will be species where women are far more common in those roles and it should even out across the board. Trek seems to be too one-sided on that score.

If I can drag the thread kicking and screaming back on track, the Romulans as a race have been portrayed as more human than vulcan and I think that is disappointing. Their relationship with the Remans added a more interesting dimension and the Face of the Enemy gave them a bit more to play with but I find them too generic overall, including modern human attitudes to the roles of their women.
 
I'd like to think that Nero and his posse were a good example of what an average Romulan is like. "Raving lunatic" is the norm for them! And the Romulan military is the exact opposite of Starfleet: it attracts the atypically stable and calm in the population, not the suicidally adventurous and enthusiastic...

On the fourth watching of the movie, I'm growing fonder and fonder of the plot, despite the fact that it relies on a chain of incredible coincidences. The one or two actual plot holes I can hop across or waddle around. And the thing that's getting better at each viewing is Nero. He spent 25 years calming down after losing his former life, yet he and his posse still practice this intriguing sort of lunacy. How come? There's no plot logic to that, no rational explanation being offered - yet there is still a perfect rationale staring right at us with beady, fiery eyes. See, what these Romulans are doing is not human at all...

Timo Saloniemi
 
Yeah I always wondered how the Romulans were able to thrive with their volatile vulcan emotions. In that respect I suppose Nero WAS acting in a proto-vulcan fashion - passion without logic to keep it in check.
 
Yeah, if a movie is set in modern times I would agree with a 6:1 ratio. But Trek is set in the future where true equality has been achieved so such a ratio isn't appropriate.

So we have to first assume that the US military has a quite dramatic sexist policies in place, before we can call the Romulans & starfleet sexist.
 
Yeah, if a movie is set in modern times I would agree with a 6:1 ratio. But Trek is set in the future where true equality has been achieved so such a ratio isn't appropriate.

So we have to first assume that the US military has a quite dramatic sexist policies in place, before we can call the Romulans & starfleet sexist.

Well if we look back at the navy 30 years ago, what was the male/female ratio I'm sure it was less than 6:1. It was a combination of sexist attitudes of the military and sexism in the socialisation of women. That's not to say that you'd have 50/50 if you removed all those barriers (and we can't legislate for the way families socialise their daughters so it isn't likely to be a sitatuation that is ever realised in the short term). Even so, the passage of time and removing barriers to women have led to the significant increase. But women are also biologically and emotionally distinct from men so I think we would still have an imbalance, albeit even more reduced than it is now.

The point is in sci fi we shouldn't have to look for reasons to justify an imbalance. An actress is equally capable of playing a Romulan miner as an actor. There is no significant material reason why the imbalance we see on screen should exist. The writing and casting is sexist and gives the impression that the Romulans might be sexist because we have to invent an excuse to justify the imbalance.
 
Talking about sexism in the movie and to add some more data to the table...
There are at least 6 female crew members permanently stationed on the bridge of the Enterprise (not counting Uhura) that we can see in the movie.



Granted, none of them are main characters and most don't have lines but still, they did put them there and for a bridge I think it makes for a pretty good male/female ratio.

Not to count the various female crew members we see coming & going from the bridge or in other parts of the Enterprise.
 
I do agree on this point! They did a decent job of equalising the ratio of the background characters on the Enterprise, although the Kelvin fared quite poorly on this score. I don't think it makes up for the fact that the women are purely decorative but they can easily rectify this by giving more speaking parts to the women. That would certainly satisfy one of my minor gripes. :)

Well that and Rand!

As I said before, I expect the Klingons to be sexist. I don't expect the humans, vulcans, and romulans to give that 'impression' too.

Plus we have to separate out those that give the impression of sexism from the actual sexism of the writers and casters. It's aruable that the Enterprise is equal because of the number of women visible. It's arguable that the writing and casting is sexist because they are given very few lines and aren't allowed to participate in the story much. I think if they can get a handle on equal men and women in engineering and in security teams that will be another step forward. I'd quite like to see an all female security team as a counterpart to the dozens of all male teams we've seen over the years.
 
Last edited:
Plus we have to separate out those that give the impression of sexism from the actual sexism of the writers and casters.

The screenwriters know better than to write scripts (esp. for TV and lower budgets) that will be impossible to cast.

There are simply less females and minorities in the pool of Los Angeles actors than males. Thus the pool contains less good and available females than males.

There are reasons why we see actresses such as Suzie Plakson return (as Selar, K'Ehleyr, Lady Q and Tarah) over and over. Not only is she talented, and extraordinarily tall, but she doesn't complain bitterly about the trials and tribulations of having to get put into all that alien makeup - and can then do the job that is asked of her by the director.

If a screenwriter handed in a script with lots of major roles for females and minorities, one of the first things likely to happen at the budget meeting is for the quantity of female actors, extras and stunt people to be questioned. Auditioning costs money and time, and what happens if they go through the available pool and none are suitable?

One example from the extended ST franchise: the casting of Bashir's mother in DS9. A script was written with a prominent role for a mature woman of Middle Eastern descent and when casting went to the pool of actresses, then were no women of the correct age and ethnicity registered with the Screen Actors Guild! They were about to scrap the role completely, when they found Fadwa El Guindi, a female university lecturer and professor of anthropology, who had had public speaking experience. But not a working actress!

Things are changing, and there are lots of out-of-work actors and stunt people, male and female - but budgets are not inexhaustible, and producers will attempt to ensure they don't have to embark on almost-impossible tasks. (Unless the search itself ends up being good publicity.)
 
Lol! That's terrible! Still, she was pretty good in the part. But it's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy. There are fewer suitable women to cast because there are never any roles for them to fill. Why would they want to hang around in a city where there is no work? It doesn't really carry much weight as a genuine reason for not having female characters. It's a chicken and egg scenario.

I've always understood that women have more difficulties with the prosthetics than men so I suppose I expect to see fewer alien women played by actual women. B5 suffered a bit in that respect and it was a real blow to lose a great character like Na'toth. Suzie Plakson is a real trooper and has a great screen presence. I was rather miffed when they offed Khey'lar after only her second appearance. Still, I'm not sure I buy it as an excuse for having fewer human women in the franchise. Soap operas and even Heroes have multiple female characters without struggling to cast them. Battlestar Galactica muddled through somehow. If there really was a problem of lack of local women the word on the street would have them flocking in.
 
I do agree on this point! They did a decent job of equalising the ratio of the background characters on the Enterprise, although the Kelvin fared quite poorly on this score. I don't think it makes up for the fact that the women are purely decorative but they can easily rectify this by giving more speaking parts to the women. That would certainly satisfy one of my minor gripes. :)

.
Outside of the main cast ( the regular crew plus Pike) how many speaking roles were there on the Enterprise? Other than Olsen and one line from Cupcake, I think most of those speaking were female.
 
Well, the Enterprise isn't the best example to look at in isolation because the main cast does most of the speaking anyway. Leaving out the characters whose sex is set by the nature of their role (mums, dads, Gaila), I suppose overall you had Keenser, Olsen, an admiral, Robau, a number of officers on the Kelvin, vulcan bullies, a vulcan scientist, Nero, nero's henchman. I think the girls got a doctor/midwife on the Narada, a transporter operator, and an officer on the bridge of the Enterprise. It isn't that the gulf is wide, it's more that it makes the existing imbalance worse plus the women's roles still tend to be a bit stereotypical (secretarial or caring profession).
 
There have been other lamentable examples too. Like the female Romulan commander who inexplicably hits on Shinzon - he's a man, she's a woman in the military, why wouldn't she hit on him... wtf? Or Khan's genetic supermen who were pretty much all men even though logically having a greater number of superwomen would be far more important to his plans for universal domination.
 
Last edited:
Khan didn't have plans for universal domination - he had plans of escaping extinction on Earth by hurriedly leaving in a spaceship. It might be fallacy to see any sort of planning to the makeup of his posse.

As for Commander Donatra's attempts at seducing Shinzon, what's "inexplicable" about that? She's performing a standard military maneuver in trying to gain a more powerful position in the new and unstable world order. Perfectly legit, completely plausible, and certainly what I'd do if I were Donatra. Too bad Shinzon was crazy as a cuckoo. But then again, Donatra wouldn't have gained that valuable intel if she hadn't attempted the seduction.

Timo Saloniemi
 
As for Commander Donatra's attempts at seducing Shinzon, what's "inexplicable" about that? She's performing a standard military maneuver in trying to gain a more powerful position in the new and unstable world order. Perfectly legit, completely plausible, and certainly what I'd do if I were Donatra. Too bad Shinzon was crazy as a cuckoo. But then again, Donatra wouldn't have gained that valuable intel if she hadn't attempted the seduction.

LOL! Having sex with a male superior is only a 'standard military maneuver' in porn and in the minds of male chauvanists. The writers could have had her learn the information you mention without demeaning what should be a military character. We have no evidence of Shinzon's sexual preferences at this point either (refer to the Picard is Gay thread :rolleyes:) but if a male Romulan had attempted seduction for the same reasons I'm sure people wouldn't suggest that this was a 'standard military maneuver'...
 
Last edited:
demeaning

What is this strange "sex is demeaning" thing?

Male chauvinism? Male chauvinism is saying that women cannot seduce men in order to gain security in life, because that's "demeaning". Male chauvinism is saying that women must keep their legs together until a male gives moral permission to open them. Male chauvinism is saying that a woman cannot credibly serve in the military if she has a sex life.

That's a disgusting attitude to hold. I'm glad that we have good role models such as Donatra to break the demeaning stereotype and show those male chauvinists a thing or two.

Timo Saloniemi
 
LOL! Touche! :)

EDIT: Hang on though, wasn't it Janeway who said that logic can be used to justify just about anything?
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top