No conflict on TNG? Ha!

[GalaxyX]

GalaxyX, i am so with you on sisko.

i hated him from episode one, when he acted like the world's biggest bitch to a man whose probably saved his life (and the rest of earth) more than anyone will ever know.

I mean, if you're a starfleet commander, you'd think you woulnd't be such an emotional baby... you would think he would REALIZE that the borg are KNOWN for STEALING free will from ANYONE who has it. Does sisko think he woulnd't have killed his own wife if he was assimilated? Of course he would have. He was just such a punk.

it was insulting how the ds9 writers made picard act like a little cowardly bitch. i agree that is not in his personality at all to back down like that.

i agree that he was always shouting for no reason, and that kira chick was worse than ensign ro. then again, i find ALL Bajorans to be annoying. it seems like nearly every single bajoran character save one or two is some kind of walking cliche (that was true on TNG, so you can imagine my distaste when i discovered how prominent they are in the story of ds9.. ughhh)

you are so right about how contrived and fake it is for this lame trend in sci fi to make female characters butcher than any man on the show, ala starbuck, kira.

I don't mind strong female characters, but you don't have to make them unrealistically butch. it's more demeaning to women imo than so called "weak" women like counselor troi, because it just reeks of political correctness and insecurity. tasha yar said it best.. "you taught me how to be strong, without losing touch with my feminine side" (Sorry, not an exact quote)

Also agree with the conflict on TNG. I thought there was a good amount of conflict for people who are professional. Professionals don't bicker and whine over little minutia like in DS9.

dont get me started on all the religious BS in ds9. that's just NOT star trek

i apologize to any DS9 fans if i offend you. There WERE a lot of things about the show i liked. worf, odo, quark, tribbles episode, some other things here and there.

I think there is more of a rift between ds9 fans and TNG fans than the fans of any of the other treks, which is ironic because they were on at the same time. One just seems to cater to the viewer who needs DARKNESS and CONFLICT and EMOTIONALLY driven decisions... the other focuses more on wonder, and exploration, and striving to improve yourself.. IMO the latter is what star trek is about. i also thought TNG did comedy wayyy better. and comedy is huge for me in star trek.

the only thing ds9 does better is the theme music

Well, I think both those Treks were definitely written for different audiences. I'm in the "wonder and exploration" boat. I have no need to see a Sci-Fi show to watch people shouting and strangling each other. There's TONS of other no Sci-Fi shows that will cater to that need to see drama (All the Law & Orders and their clones come to mind?). For me TNG was a freakin' oasis in a desert full of "character drama" (sometimes melodrama). DS9 simply became lost in that desert to me.

It was hard for me to like DS9 from the get got because I already dissaproved of a Sci-Fi show becoming a drama. But insult was added to injury when DS9 became a soap opera.

Sisko was an ass a lot of the time. Kira was always angry (but yes in later episodes she toned it down). Someone above me had mentioned how she was willing to carry someone else's baby. I don't see that as being a strong point in the character, because it's clear that it was written to accommodate Nana Visitor's real pregnancy. This is as idiotic as when Teyla from SG:A becomes pregnant with some random guy she "loves" from her village simply to accommodate Rachel Luttrell's real life pregnancy. I HATE IT when they do that. Voyager was smart to hide/ignore Roxann Dawson's pregnancy instead.

I agree with the comment about Tasha Yar. There's a perfect example of a tough chick that could hold her own in a fight, yet not be a bitch. Samantha Carter is another good example. Both can kick major ass, but both are likeable as women and as humans.

 

[Mr_Homn]

"Conflict" in TOS was mainly about mission details, not usually about personal issues, its really not hard to extrapolate STNG from TOS's era.

RAMA

I disagree a bit.

I remember some very distinct, personal arguments between McCoy and Spock. Those two genuinely didn't like eachother at first. I mean, there were even racist insults. Yeah, most of the time it was played off as just friendly jibing, but I recall a few mean spirited moments between the two as well.

A lot of very hurtful guilt tripping sometimes by doctor mccoy too! always testing the boundaries with spock, seeing how hurtful he could be before the vulcan showed some hint of an emotional response...

 

[DevilEyes]

So, to summarize... after 6 pages of your thread called "No conflict on TNG? Ha!", you're still not providing any examples of conflict on TNG, but trying to prove how awesome the lack of conflict is and how much shows that feature conflict suck?

I think you started the thread in the wrong subforum. Since it's obviously about attacking DS9, and has nothing to do with TNG, why don't you ask the mod to transfer it to the DS9 subforum? The name should also be changed to something like "DS9 sucks", "I hate DS9", etc.

I don't mind strong female characters, but you don't have to make them unrealistically butch.

Yeah, I mean we all know that every woman in the world is a delicate ladylike flower who never sweats, swears or shouts or (god forbid) gets angry, and when there's a fight, every woman in the world will stay out of it or leave the fighting to the big strong men who'll be there to protect her. It's completely unrealistic to portray a woman who's unlike that.

Kira was always angry (but yes in later episodes she toned it down). Someone above me had mentioned how she was willing to carry someone else's baby. I don't see that as being a strong point in the character, because it's clear that it was written to accommodate Nana Visitor's real pregnancy.

Nice escape tactic, you focus on the pregnancy and ignore everything else about Kira we've listed in the last few pages.

This is as idiotic as when Teyla from SG:A becomes pregnant with some random guy she "loves" from her village simply to accommodate Rachel Luttrell's real life pregnancy. I HATE IT when they do that. Voyager was smart to hide/ignore Roxann Dawson's pregnancy instead.

Yeah, I think it would be a really good idea if the characters on screen had all been acting like they didn't notice at all that Kira had a huge bump on her belly that grew and grew, and then just disappeared one day. Or maybe they should have said: Oh, hi, Kira, what's up with you? Oh, I just ate this weird Ferengi dish, didn't know it makes your belly swell. It's going to be like that for the next few months, so just carry on like nothing's happened, ha ha.

 

[Mr_Homn]

So, to summarize... after 6 pages of your thread called "No conflict on TNG? Ha!", you're still not providing any examples of conflict on TNG, but trying to prove how awesome the lack of conflict is and how much shows that feature conflict suck?

I think you started the thread in the wrong subforum. Since it's obviously about attacking DS9, and has nothing to do with TNG, why don't you ask the mod to transfer it to the DS9 subforum? The name should also be changed to something like "DS9 sucks", "I hate DS9", etc.

I don't mind strong female characters, but you don't have to make them unrealistically butch.

Yeah, I mean we all know that every woman in the world is a delicate ladylike flower who never sweats, swears or shouts or (god forbid) gets angry, and when there's a fight, every woman in the world will stay out of it or leave the fighting to the big strong men who'll be there to protect her. It's completely unrealistic to portray a woman who's unlike that.

I like how you act like there is no middle ground.

I think you can achieve a happy medium between "ruthless, tough as nails, butch" and "delicate ladylike flower".

Something you seem to ignore that was already mentioned not a few posts up, Tasha yar is a good example of an in between. She was established as a tough and competent officer, who had the respect of her crew. Yet she wasn't unpleasant to the people around her, she wasn't on some kind of constant crusade to make up for the fact that she was traumatized. What's interesting, is that she actually WAS a victim of trauma as a young person, but for some reason she doesn't use that excuse to be an unpleasant bitch to everyone around her like Kira.

Yes, tasha yar was an underdevloped character, but that was the actress's fault, for leaving prematurely. that was a shame. Something you know she regrets now. At least we got to see her come back and further prove her heroism in yesterday's enterprise. Once again she is shown to be efficient, well respected, and heroic. All the while she falls into a loving relationship with a stranger, who she even outranks. so she is the more accomplished one in the relationship. I see nothing weak about her, and nothing bitchy either. Refreshing for television these days.

It's not even about being FEMININE or MANLY.

It's about not being a JERK to everyone all the time, ala kira and starbuck from early bsg and countless other cliche characters on overly melodramatic soap operas

 

[Mr_Homn]

some examples of PERSONAL not PROFESSIONAL conflict in TNG:

-Picard's dislike for Wesley in season 1

-Beverly's dislike for how Picard treats her son

-Beverly and Picard's obviously awkward and painful reunion.. considering picard was partly responsible for jack crusher's death. Wesley even recounts his pent up anger for picard in the bonding.

-Riker and Troi's relationship was really kind of strained in season 1 and 2. you can still tell that Troi felt hurt for a while by riker choosing to focus on command and leaving her

- Pulaski's disrespect for Data, flippant responses to picard. Picard's dislike for her way of doing things. I always got the sense that she left on bad terms with him. they barely mentioned her again and picard never seemed to warm up to her.

-Keiko and Obrien's marriage being called off in data's day

-in the episode Sarek, everyone in the crew was at eachothers throats. yes, sure, it was caused by outside influences, but still, many hurtful things were said, especially between geordi and wesley

-in Attached, picard and beverly have a very important event impact their relationship.. beverly finds out about picard's pent up feelings for her, and rejects his advances at the end. its kind of depressing because you know they are both unhappy alone.

-in the episode "The Loss", Troi gets very personal with Riker due to the loss of her powers. She is very angry and lets loose on many characters. There is definitely tension with riker

- "Second Chances" we revisit riker and troi's turbulent past, and they reveal much more of their hurt feelings and resentment for eachother. not exactly pleasant or happy stuff

- Picard chewing wesley out in first duty. questioning his morale fiber. Wesley lies to his friends.

-Worf's drama with his son... they argue a lot, in many episodes. it could be considered an arc if you watch the right order... when they first meet, kheylar dying... that was worf's WIFE. and now he is left with not only the emotional baggage, but his kid who she never told him about? now THAT'S Conflict. then on to to alexander and worfs trouble getting along, alexander's problems at school,, refusal to become a warrior, later to the point of alexander coming back from the future and trying to kill himself after he realizes his father was right, that he didn't fit in as a klingon, that he was unhappy

-Ensign Ro had a ton of conflict with Riker and Picard and just about everybody

-in the pegasus, picard yells at riker more than i had ever recalled. he questions his loyalty for the first time. those are powerful words coming from picard... considering their relationship

-worf and riker in Ethics. This was not a mission of any kind. Purely a personal matter, with worf begging riker to kill him. Very emotional, especially when alexander and troi think he has died.

-death of tasha yar ... i dont know if this is considered CONFLICT.. i guess not... but TNG killed off a main character in a random episode, and that was pretty jarring. if it isn't considered CONFLICT, i guess you could say it is a source of conflict as it causes the characters pain and the feelings of loss. especially data, who is obviously heavily impacted by the event, as it is touched on in other episodes.

these are only a few off the top of my head. I'm sure i could come up with more. I felt that most of this conflict felt natural and was welcome. it didn't feel forced. With the exception of Ro. She was boring. Sure there wasn't conflict in every episode, but i think that's a very good thing. When your characters are bickering and fighting in every episode, it's hard to respect them as professionals or even personality wise

the key here is subtlety

 

[DevilEyes]

So, to summarize... after 6 pages of your thread called "No conflict on TNG? Ha!", you're still not providing any examples of conflict on TNG, but trying to prove how awesome the lack of conflict is and how much shows that feature conflict suck?

I think you started the thread in the wrong subforum. Since it's obviously about attacking DS9, and has nothing to do with TNG, why don't you ask the mod to transfer it to the DS9 subforum? The name should also be changed to something like "DS9 sucks", "I hate DS9", etc.

I don't mind strong female characters, but you don't have to make them unrealistically butch.

Yeah, I mean we all know that every woman in the world is a delicate ladylike flower who never sweats, swears or shouts or (god forbid) gets angry, and when there's a fight, every woman in the world will stay out of it or leave the fighting to the big strong men who'll be there to protect her. It's completely unrealistic to portray a woman who's unlike that.

I like how you act like there is no middle ground. I also like how you cropped my quote and left out the the sentences which already address what you are saying now.

I think you can achieve a happy medium between "ruthless, tough as nails, butch" and "delicate ladylike flower".

Something you seem to ignore that was already mentioned not a few posts up, Tasha yar is a good example of an in between. She was established as a tough and competent officer, who had the respect of her crew. Yet she wasn't unpleasant to the people around her, she wasn't on some kind of constant crusade to make up for the fact that she was traumatized. What's interesting, is that she actually WAS a victim of trauma as a young person, but for some reason she doesn't use that excuse to be an unpleasant bitch to everyone around her like Kira...

There's absolutely no need to answer any of this, for the simple reason that it's already been answered several times already by several different people in this very same thread:

http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=3980018&postcount=8
http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=3990995&postcount=38
http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=3992345&postcount=41
http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=4077014&postcount=64
http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=4077175&postcount=65
http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=4081951&postcount=70
http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=4083107&postcount=71
http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=4083150&postcount=73
http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=4084418&postcount=74

 

[GalaxyX]

^^^ Who's ignoring who now?

 

[DevilEyes]

^ I have no idea what you're talking about, but anyway, since I didn't have time to comment the last time (plus, I thought my previous post was clear enough...)

I like how you act like there is no middle ground.

I think you can achieve a happy medium between "ruthless, tough as nails, butch" and "delicate ladylike flower".

I'm sorry, but why would female characters have to conform to your idea of the "happy medium"? Do you think that every female character has to be the same? It never occurred to you that other people might find characters who don't conform to your standards of "happy medium" a lot more interesting, and that it would be pretty dull and bland (not to mention unrealistic) if every female character had to fit into a certain mold?

And, in case I wasn't clear enough the last time, what does it mean, "unrealistically butch"? That doesn't make sense. There are women in real life who are as "butch" as Kira and those who are as "butch" as Starbuck, and there are women who are way more butch than either of them - including plenty of women who actually self-define as "butch". So how can any fictional female be "unrealistically butch"? In fact, portraying every female character as being similar and conforming to someone's ideal would be UNREALISTIC.

 

[flemm]

Honestly I just have to laugh when I hear Kira described as "unrealistically butch." First of all, there are lots of women in real life that are about 100 times more "butch." Secondly, Nana Visitor is exquisitely gorgeous and extremely feminine. I guess it's a tribute to how forceful her performance is that anyone can actually have the impression that she is "butch" at all, let alone unrealistically so. Certainly there is plenty of middle ground between "ruthless bitch" and "ladylike flower," however Major Kira is an example of a character who occupies that middle ground. In short, open your eyes, stop feeling threatened, rewatch some episodes and bask in the glory of one of the most beautiful women who has been involved with Trek, and who is playing one of Trek's most fully realized characters

As for conflict on TNG as opposed to DS9, I would agree that the conflict on TNG tends to be more about the job at hand, and less about interpersonal issues. Either approach can work fine. As I said in more detail a bit higher in the thread (I think), TNG's crew is built more around the heroic model where everybody basically gets along and the issues that arise have to do with exterior threats and challenges. DS9 is a bit more of a mix, where in addition to the heroic adventure there is a bit more conflict between the characters of a personal nature. Both approaches can be effective, and were effective in the case of these two shows.

As Worf says at some point to Chief O'Brien on DS9 about the Enterprise's battles with the Borg: "I never doubted the outcome. We were like warriors from the ancient sagas." He's right: the dynamic on TNG is a lot like epic adventure. It's about going out and slaying the dragon, except the dragon is often an anamoly, or an alien, or some sort of moral quandry. DS9 intentionally set out to create characters with more flaws who didn't always get along. It's a different approach, one that is more in vogue these days, but not necessarily "better" in some kind of absolute sense.

 

[GalaxyX]

Honestly I just have to laugh when I hear Kira described as "unrealistically butch." First of all, there are lots of women in real life that are about 100 times more "butch." Secondly, Nana Visitor is exquisitely gorgeous and extremely feminine. I guess it's a tribute to how forceful her performance is that anyone can actually have the impression that she is "butch" at all, let alone unrealistically so. Certainly there is plenty of middle ground between "ruthless bitch" and "ladylike flower," however Major Kira is an example of a character who occupies that middle ground. In short, open your eyes, stop feeling threatened, rewatch some episodes and bask in the glory of one of the most beautiful women who has been involved with Trek, and who is playing one of Trek's most fully realized characters

As for conflict on TNG as opposed to DS9, I would agree that the conflict on TNG tends to be more about the job at hand, and less about interpersonal issues. Either approach can work fine. As I said in more detail a bit higher in the thread (I think), TNG's crew is built more around the heroic model where everybody basically gets along and the issues that arise have to do with exterior threats and challenges. DS9 is a bit more of a mix, where in addition to the heroic adventure there is a bit more conflict between the characters of a personal nature. Both approaches can be effective, and were effective in the case of these two shows.

As Worf says at some point to Chief O'Brien on DS9 about the Enterprise's battles with the Borg: "I never doubted the outcome. We were like warriors from the ancient sagas." He's right: the dynamic on TNG is a lot like epic adventure. It's about going out and slaying the dragon, except the dragon is often an anamoly, or an alien, or some sort of moral quandry. DS9 intentionally set out to create characters with more flaws who didn't always get along. It's a different approach, one that is more in vogue these days, but not necessarily "better" in some kind of absolute sense.

Well let me tackle the two main points you have mentioned in your post.

First of all. Sure, it's true that there's tons of "butch" women in real life. What I hate (and nuBSG is particularly a culprit for this one) is that "butch" women is a crutch used for ratings, because the writers can now claim that they are edgy and with the "in" crowd of storytelling. In nuBSG, why couldn't they have a "butch" character be someone else than Starbuck? But no! they wanted to go for the controversial angle, and it feels totally forced! DS9 I admit wasn't so bad, as Kira basically starts out like nuStarbuck, but eventually mellows out into a normal person. But you know what they say: "first impressions".

As for your second point. You are absolutely correct. TNG and DS9 handled their conflicts completely different. And some personal conflict is fine as long as it makes sense in the story? I think Tasha Yar and Kira were compared. Both had pretty traumatic childhoods, yet Tasha is able to put them aside and do her job right off the bat. Kira had to go thru 5 seasons before it started sinking in that "hey, not everyone is an asshole trying to trip me!"

I prefer the TNG approach because it feels more natural for what is essentially a working environment.

 

[Mr_Homn]

^ I have no idea what you're talking about, but anyway, since I didn't have time to comment the last time (plus, I thought my previous post was clear enough...)

I like how you act like there is no middle ground.

I think you can achieve a happy medium between "ruthless, tough as nails, butch" and "delicate ladylike flower".

I'm sorry, but why would female characters have to conform to your idea of the "happy medium"? Do you think that every female character has to be the same? It never occurred to you that other people might find characters who don't conform to your standards of "happy medium" a lot more interesting, and that it would be pretty dull and bland (not to mention unrealistic) if every female character had to fit into a certain mold?

And, in case I wasn't clear enough the last time, what does it mean, "unrealistically butch"? That doesn't make sense. There are women in real life who are as "butch" as Kira and those who are as "butch" as Starbuck, and there are women who are way more butch than either of them - including plenty of women who actually self-define as "butch". So how can any fictional female be "unrealistically butch"? In fact, portraying every female character as being similar and conforming to someone's ideal would be UNREALISTIC.

No, you're confused with what i am saying. Or just trying to put words in my mouth. I'm not asking my characters to all be the same. I'm just asking for the supposed PROTAGONISTS not act like pissed off teenagers. It's not asking much, really.

Especially since it's a tired cliche that caters to insecure women who think that being "Strong" means overcompensating to the point where nobody finds them pleasant to even be around.

Ultimately, those of us who actually respect strong women find it frankly insulting.

 

[Mr_Homn]

As for your second point. You are absolutely correct. TNG and DS9 handled their conflicts completely different. And some personal conflict is fine as long as it makes sense in the story? I think Tasha Yar and Kira were compared. Both had pretty traumatic childhoods, yet Tasha is able to put them aside and do her job right off the bat. Kira had to go thru 5 seasons before it started sinking in that "hey, not everyone is an asshole trying to trip me!"

Its like your reading my mind and typing what you see!

What you are saying is exactly how I feel.

I prefer the TNG approach because it feels more natural for what is essentially a working environment.

To add to this... it also makes the character seem more real to me. It makes it feel like less of a contained TV show.

Like, the character has a life before this show, these emotions aren't NEW to her. It's been long enough to where they should know how to handle themselves. (OR else they wouldn't BE in their professional positions)

I mean, Tasha had a life before the enterprise D, and obviously she was traumatized early on. But it's been a long time since then. She's had time to get over it. It would be unrealistic for her to be unstable and also in the professional position she is in. It just wouldn't happen. Too much competition. So obviously, she has put her trauma behind her, before the series takes place , and now she is emotionally stable and professional. This way, the character seems to take on a life bigger than just these 7 years (or unfortunately in tashas case, 1 year) that you as the viewer witness.

With Kira it's like... Ok, this character had a traumatic background, that's clear. But it's like she hasn't learned anything between the time she was abused and the time the series starts. Where's the growth since then? You'd think the show started the second she just got released from the cardassian camps. But it didn't. There was time in between. And apparently Kira did not experience any growth whatsoever in that time. Which reminds us that she is not real, but simply a character on a tv show. It reminds us that as long as we are not watching, nothing important will happen to these characters.

Kira- "My character has a history of being abused, but even though that was a while back, I haven't learned how to deal with those feelings because the TV show hasnt started yet!"

compared to tasha

"My character was abused, but that was a long time ago, and I wasnt born yesterday, Im an adult and i am strong enough to move on"

imo, Kira is the weak one. she's the one who lets her past govern her everyday actions. she has no free will. Like i said, it's insulting that they would try to pass her off as a "Strong" character. Get over your personal problems, do your job right, act like an adult and maybe I'll consider you strong.

It's just a total lack of subtlety in storytelling.

 

[DevilEyes]

^ I have no idea what you're talking about, but anyway, since I didn't have time to comment the last time (plus, I thought my previous post was clear enough...)

I like how you act like there is no middle ground.

I think you can achieve a happy medium between "ruthless, tough as nails, butch" and "delicate ladylike flower".

I'm sorry, but why would female characters have to conform to your idea of the "happy medium"? Do you think that every female character has to be the same? It never occurred to you that other people might find characters who don't conform to your standards of "happy medium" a lot more interesting, and that it would be pretty dull and bland (not to mention unrealistic) if every female character had to fit into a certain mold?

And, in case I wasn't clear enough the last time, what does it mean, "unrealistically butch"? That doesn't make sense. There are women in real life who are as "butch" as Kira and those who are as "butch" as Starbuck, and there are women who are way more butch than either of them - including plenty of women who actually self-define as "butch". So how can any fictional female be "unrealistically butch"? In fact, portraying every female character as being similar and conforming to someone's ideal would be UNREALISTIC.

No, you're confused with what i am saying. Or just trying to put words in my mouth. I'm not asking my characters to all be the same. I'm just asking for the supposed PROTAGONISTS not act like pissed off teenagers. It's not asking much, really.

Especially since it's a tired cliche that caters to insecure women who think that being "Strong" means overcompensating to the point where nobody finds them pleasant to even be around.

Ultimately, those of us who actually respect strong women find it frankly insulting.

I mean, Tasha had a life before the enterprise D, and obviously she was traumatized early on. But it's been a long time since then. She's had time to get over it.
(...)

With Kira it's like... Ok, this character had a traumatic background, that's clear. But it's like she hasn't learned anything between the time she was abused and the time the series starts. Where's the growth since then? You'd think the show started the second she just got released from the cardassian camps. But it didn't. There was time in between.

You can't even get the facts right. How did you watch the show? Glimpsed a few scenes in an episode or two while you were talking to your friends or doing something else?

Fact 1: Kira was not in Cardassian camps. Kira was in the resistance, fighting, killing, blowing people up since she was 12 years old.
Fact 2: the Occupation of Bajor ended in 2369; the first episode of DS9 happens in... 2369. So, how much time do you think has passed since the end of the Occupation and the start of the show? Weeks? Months? Yeah, right, the occupation was long time ago. And it's really realistic to expect a person who's lived under a brutal occupation all her life and been a terrorist since her childhood to become a sweet, well-adjusted lady you would like to have around - in a few weeks, couple of months...

I mean, Tasha had a life before the enterprise D, and obviously she was traumatized early on. But it's been a long time since then. She's had time to get over it.

So, you're now doing my work for me and providing more arguments why your criticism of Kira doesn't make sense?

You know what I really like? Viewers who don't act like pissed off teenagers who can only tolerate fictional characters who fit their idea of who they'd like to date or hang out with, viewers who are actually mature enough to see the context of the story and understand that realism means showing people with a background of trauma and violence actually acting like people who have been traumatized, rather than be written to try to fit some fan's idea of an ideal girlfriend. Is that too much to ask for?

Tasha - "My character is supposed to be a tough woman with a traumatic history, but you'll hardly know if I didn't mention it. I'm not going to act like I've ever been traumatized, and I'm going to be a character without depth, flaws, or any any strong attitudes or views of my own, because this way I'll be more appealing to our target audience, young males, and will better fulfill their fantasy of a hot tomboy! My 'strength' will be shown in just beating up bad guys, which nobody would notice at all if I was a male character, but since I'm female, that will be enough to make me a 'strong woman' even though I have hardly any personality."

Ultimately, those of us who actually respect strong women (and strong men; and strong people; and strong characters in fiction) find it frankly insulting.

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

I may be exaggerating a little with Kira, but other than a bunch of talking exposition, I never understood her constant anger. A character needs to have some vulnerability to be liked. She didn't have any. She was just Terminator Bajoran programmed to get in Cardassians' faces (and anyone else she deemed not worthy, which was pretty much everyone at the station)

Sisko, well, in the very first episode we're treated to good exposition of the trauma he went thru with the Borg, but that was no excuse for the extreme act of insubordination to Captain Picard (to which Picard cowers away to like a hurt puppy) and even AFTER when Sisko realizes he was in the wrong, no apology, no explanation, just a handshake, like that's supposed to put his unwarranted attitude under the Bridge. If I were Picard I would have written his ass up and put it on his record.

Kira had no vulnerability? What? She was an extremely complex character. Sure, she puts up a tough, angry facade as a defense mechanism, but there are so many more facets to her personality.

As for Picard and Sisko, I would think that Picard would have at that point still been struggling with his guilt over what he'd been forced to do by the Borg. I can't really see him responding to Sisko angrily in a situation like that. Frankly it's a little unrealistic that Picard would be able to keep his command after what happened to him. They didn't know what kind of long-term effects his assimilation would have. He might have flipped out in a crisis situation or something, had some kind of borg flashback.

 

[GalaxyX]

Fact 3: Man, the level that people will go to defend melodrama is absolutely insane. It staggers the mind.

 

[Mr_Homn]

Fact 3: Man, the level that people will go to defend melodrama is absolutely insane. It staggers the mind.

I know, some people need to get a grip.

It's like they are personally offended because we don't buy into LAME character CLICHES.

 

[DevilEyes]

Fact 3: Man, the level that people will go to defend melodrama is absolutely insane. It staggers the mind.

I know, some people need to get a grip.

Yeah. I mean, there are people who will actually open threads on the TNG forum only to thrash DS9, and people who'll write long rants about how much they hate DS9 characters and wouldn't want to date them.

It's like they are personally offended because we don't buy into LAME character CLICHES.

So, you don't like Tasha anymore?

 

[GalaxyX]

It's like they are personally offended because we don't buy into LAME character CLICHES.

So, you don't like Tasha anymore?[/QUOTE]

Lack of character development does not equal LAME character development. Tasha's character never got a chance to develop into anything. So you a being totally unfair as is every Niner, and dy doing so, proving the whole point of this thread.

 

[DevilEyes]

Lack of character development does not equal LAME character development. Tasha's character never got a chance to develop into anything. So you a being totally unfair as is every Niner, and dy doing so, proving the whole point of this thread.

Which was...?

 

[GalaxyX]

Lack of character development does not equal LAME character development. Tasha's character never got a chance to develop into anything. So you a being totally unfair as is every Niner, and dy doing so, proving the whole point of this thread.

Which was...?

That the Niners unfairly attack TNG of not having any conflict, simply because people aren't stabbing each other or fucking each other every 5 minutes.