Well, since I'm a black man, I am comfortable with African-American or black.
That's nice, but I hope you realize that not all African-Americans feel as you do. Avery Brooks, for example, says he is "brown" not black. In my community in the deep south, African Americans prefer to be called African Americans, not black.
Obviously.
Like Europeans and Euro-Americans, black people are not monolithic.
And even if Uhura is African, or Jamaican...she still is considered a 'black' woman. She is representing me. So, basically, my call there.
I'm glad you think so, I really am. But not all Africans feel the same. There are a lot of Nigerians, Kenyans and Ugandans in this community who are employed at a local, historical, "black" college who will object the being called "African American" or "black." Uhura's presence on the Enterprise was truly ground-breaking. Not only was she an African character, she was a woman, which was equally ground-breaking, especially for science fiction.
As aforementioned, 'black' people are not monolithic. Of course, there are going to be different views on that.
The Ligonians happen to have dark skin, and they resemble, as you put it, "black people." But what has that to do with TOS?
Because it's still part of Trek franchise, and gives nuance to our discussion about what I am to cover.
I wouldn't say that's true at all for TOS. Sulu is a regularly appearing character. He appears to be an Asian male. Are you saying he's not? And what Asian females in TOS (Tamura, for one) are paired with "white men"?
Sulu is one of two main Asian males. Have things changed in terms of Asian male representation, given of what history has shown of Asians in general?
Again, 'race' is viewed primarily in 'black' and 'white'...Asians, Hispanics, and Native Americans are pushed to the side.
Blacks are more scrutinized than others (i.e. that interracial kiss); whereas, some racism, or racist images, does occur against people of color, like Asians, it is brushed away or rationalized.
Today, Asian women are still shown to be primarily for the white male(in regards to Trek, we see this in the Trek novels); and there is a lack of Asian men.
Yet you claim you're going to do this using TOS as its basis? I think that's not even close to being applicable to a realistic, objective study. Perhaps if you were looking at Bonanza and comparing it to Modern Westerns, you could draw some conclusions, but certainly not with TOS.
Huh?
No, it's not. Societies are constantly changing, and you've yet to show any concrete examples from TOS that are going to be a fair comparison to Modern society.
Huh?
So this is what you're agenda is? You're going to say that in the 1960's it was more acceptable for Asians and "whites" to kiss than African-Americans and "whites"? Yeah, it was. So? It was 45 years ago; times have changed. If Star Trek had been filmed 15 years earlier, there wouldn't have been any women officers, any non-"whites" or non-Europeans in the cast! But Star Trek for its time was quite progressive. If your intent is to prove otherwise, you've a long way to go.
Newsflash: It's still happening today. Just look into the production notes for the Will Smith movie 'Hitch.'
No problem with a white man kissing up on an Asian woman, but Smith was pushed to have a 'safe' choice: A Latina, since it was assumed audiences wouldn't come if it was he was with a white woman (might be offensive) or a black woman (it might be seen as a 'black' film).
Also, it wasn't just whites and Asians (or to be specific: white men and Asian women), but blacks couldn't have relationships shown onscreen even amongst themselves.
My 'agenda' (as you put it) is to show that Trek (which encompasses not only TOS, but movies, television sequels, and novel tie-ins) is not as progressive as it thinks, particularly in regards to Asian-Americans.
You mentioned Yeoman Tamura. Sure, for her bit part, it may have been something
at the time...however, looking at the Asian-American movement in the 1960s, the idea of the 'model minority' stereotype...Asian-American relations with African-Americans....etc...
Have things changed for better or worse since TOS for Asian-Americans (and, for African-Americans)?
The subject of this forum is TOS. You keep bringing up other shows to prove your point. For example:
I don't even consider ENTERPRISE to BE Star Trek, so don't presume that I'll defend it or any other incarnation of Trek. You asserted that the original series was not progressive. I am waiting for you to prove otherwise.
I already discussed this.
If you're going to say Trek fans are bigots, that's your right, of course. But that's got nothing to do with whether or not the original series was progressive. It was by far one of the most progressive shows on TV in its time. I, SPY and JULIA being two more. Even MEDICAL CENTER, if you want to carry it forward a bit.
Well, 'Trek fans' are a diverse group, albeit majority Caucasian. Obviously, with me posting here...I am a 'Trek fan.'
So, this particular comment doesn't make sense.
But it just seems to me that you have some sort of agenda here, and there's nothing worse than a researcher who has already got a biased opinion and is setting out to prove his or her point by fitting data to your purpose. TOS was progressive for its time.
And I don't think you can prove otherwise.
This is a repeat of something you've already said; and, again, I've already addressed what aspects I am looking at in my research.
Anyway, I hope there's no bad blood pumping through veins over that.
With all that I have going on right now, dude, I actually didn't even recall our discussion/debate until your brought it up...
Since it is 'black' history month, you find many who will use the terms 'African-American'...and 'black' (maybe 'brown' or even 'chocolate')...interchangeably.
Joel_Kirk is well within his rights to bring in references to other Trek
I beg to differ. He's saying the original series wasn't "progressive" but uses modern trek series and Enterprise to substantiate his point. That would be akin to saying that the 1960's Batman was too dark and too intense while using the Modern Batman movies to substantiate the point.
Well, Batman and Star Trek are two different things; and last I checked, Batman wasn't portrayed by a black man or Asian man in the 1960s.
Moreover, let's not put words that weren't previously posted.
I said the 'Star Trek franchise' wasn't as progressive as it thinks it is; and, believe it or not...as aforementioned, TOS is not the 'Star Trek franchise.'
That's all I was really trying to say in that thread - that 'black' was a better term to default to than African American or other rather vague terminologies. I regret that thread was closed - nobody was being hostile - it seemed to be shut down completely on the basis of being a 'sensitive topic', though I don't think it was one; it, like this one, was a discussion of utility, functionality, and precision of definitions. Anyway, I hope there's no bad blood pumping through veins over that.
