• 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!

Original Crew = A Step Back?

1) Women tend not to be placed in front line positions.

2) Psychological and Physiological differences make there be more male competition for roles such as, captain, helmsman, science officer, security, navigation, weapons officer etc.

3) Long term commitments can conflict with a woman's maternal instincts.

4) Testosterone.

I think people call discrimination a the call of an often imaginary hat.

Well it's nice that we have folks here who still look at women at face value by putting them in positions due to how they compare to men and NOT at what women are capable of doing. Judge a book by it's cover is not the most appropriate method of drawing a conclusion, especially when it comes to Star Trek's optimistic approach of the future where viewpoints like this have no relevance in a judgement of character.

And I will have you know that there are over fifty women in the military who bear the rank of Admiral and General in the United States military.
A lesson many Brits learned this week. Susan Boyle is proof that one should NOT judge a book by its cover.
Our US military still has a long way to go before achieving equality, but we have come far since the days in which I served.
 
Well it's nice that we have folks here who still look at women at face value by putting them in positions due to how they compare to men and NOT at what women are capable of doing. Judge a book by it's cover is not the most appropriate method of drawing a conclusion, especially when it comes to Star Trek's optimistic approach of the future where viewpoints like this have no relevance in a judgement of character.

And I will have you know that there are over fifty women in the military who bear the rank of Admiral and General in the United States military.

What do you expect? This mentality is exactly what Abrams and his people are looking for in their new audience. Why else make the already sexist miniskirt uniform into something that showed even more skin while adding fuck-me boots? Why else emphasize the sex and focus on the cliche of Kirk getting his mack on and being "the man" with the ladies? This is the stereotype of big budget summer action movies, and that's exactly what this movie is. And it doesn't even matter to a disturbingly large number of people. Some of them may even agree, but are afraid to say so, because they're afraid any negativity will scare away potential "mainstream" audience members and the movie will fail.
 
Well, this has stepped in the wrong direction. I know you can't satisfy all the fans. I didn't bring this topic up to be pleased, I brought it up to express my opinion on the subject of this new movies gender roles. I'm not going to raise any mobs with pitch forks to boycott this movie just because I have an opinion I don't like about the new movie. Pleased or not, I am going to see this movie and I hope to enjoy it for what it is.
 
Heh, pitchforks. There needs to be a smiley based off of that. :evil:


There is.... :devil:


Well, this has stepped in the wrong direction. I know you can't satisfy all the fans. I didn't bring this topic up to be pleased, I brought it up to express my opinion on the subject of this new movies gender roles. I'm not going to raise any mobs with pitch forks to boycott this movie just because I have an opinion I don't like about the new movie. Pleased or not, I am going to see this movie and I hope to enjoy it for what it is.

I completely got, that you feel that the Gender thing is lacking here...

I just think that you're up on the soapbox, for a cause that was NEVER gonna be a major factor in this particular film.

Your looking for gender justification in a SUMMER ACTION-FEST, BLOCK-BUSTER MOVIE.



I kinda-sorta think that you'd be hard-pressed to find many examples of what you are seeking in that category.

(The ABYSS, is the only example I can think of off the top of my head and that was back in 1989, I think... wait... There's ALIENS (1986 ?), well that's two...)
 
Last edited:
What do you expect? This mentality is exactly what Abrams and his people are looking for in their new audience. Why else make the already sexist miniskirt uniform into something that showed even more skin while adding fuck-me boots? Why else emphasize the sex and focus on the cliche of Kirk getting his mack on and being "the man" with the ladies? This is the stereotype of big budget summer action movies, and that's exactly what this movie is. And it doesn't even matter to a disturbingly large number of people. Some of them may even agree, but are afraid to say so, because they're afraid any negativity will scare away potential "mainstream" audience members and the movie will fail.

I don't think so. What makes a movie a success or even good never always stems from your above description. Last summer's Action/Adventure movie "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" made 50 million dollars less than the comedy/drama "Sex and the City". I don't think Sex and the City earned more or got better reviews for being stereotypical.
 
to the OP: it might be because sci fi (especially Trek) is still largely followed by fans of the male gender. I know, not fair. I am female and I love Trek. but seriously, IRL? I've got NO women friends who're Trekkies. OTOH, I've got quite a few Trekkie buddies IRL who're male. this is probably the overriding reason you see women in lesser roles (in catsuits etc) in modern Trek.

btw, I totally empathize with your take on Number One. I am kinda disappointed they didn't use that character in this movie. offhand, I can think of several actresses who could have played her, including JJ's own Jennifer Garner.

oh well. I'm hoping Trek survives far into the future. if that happens, maybe some change in fan demographics will force some concurrent change in the franchise itself.
 
What do you expect? This mentality is exactly what Abrams and his people are looking for in their new audience. Why else make the already sexist miniskirt uniform into something that showed even more skin while adding fuck-me boots? Why else emphasize the sex and focus on the cliché of Kirk getting his mack on and being "the man" with the ladies? This is the stereotype of big budget summer action movies, and that's exactly what this movie is. And it doesn't even matter to a disturbingly large number of people. Some of them may even agree, but are afraid to say so, because they're afraid any negativity will scare away potential "mainstream" audience members and the movie will fail.

I don't think so. What makes a movie a success or even good never always stems from your above description. Last summer's Action/Adventure movie "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" made 50 million dollars less than the comedy/drama "Sex and the City". I don't think Sex and the City earned more or got better reviews for being stereotypical.


Sex and the City: The Movie, is not exactly what one would call a BIG ACTION, SUMMER BLOCK BUSTER.

It was a light entry in the early summer ENTIRELY GEARED TOWARD A FEMALE AUDIENCE.
(though having never seen the TV show, I did enjoy the movie)

And the studios (HBO/New Line Cinemas) were quite happily surprised at the final numbers.
 
Uhura has a big part as I understand it.

My fingers are crossed and hopeful. Even James Doohan said that if he was the captain, he would have given her more to do than just say "Hailing frequencies open". Plus, he'd limit Kirk to one lady every five years. :P
 
Sex and the City: The Movie, is not exactly what one would call a BIG ACTION, SUMMER BLOCK BUSTER.
But I didn't call it that. My point was to say that having a big action summer block buster won't always get you success or praise.

And while it wasn't released in the summer, Star Trek Nemesis was built to be a big action black buster that was aimed at getting a more mainstream audience into the theaters. That didn't work out too well.
 
No, I coming from both a military background and having worked in an office for a number of years, am used to women dressing and behaving professionally in the workplace. Did I mention most of of my superiors were women?
 
Just look at "The Cage". Gene Roddenberry wanted a very capable female crew member who actually had a position that was high in profile, but the studio didn't want that so what we got now was an operator named Uhura, a Yeoman who clings to the closest man in her proximity and is always victimized. And don't forget the obligatory nurse who the series actually abandoned by the time the movies came out.

I think it's also funny how every time there is an attempt to put a female in a bridge position that's not limited to just answering calls or taking your coats,
uh actually for the times they had woman in some interesting roles..
the proscecuting jag officer in kirk courtmartial was female.
there were other female bridge officers including some in command gold
during tos.

oh chapel later became a dr and was in charge of emergency medicine in voyage home.

yeah they could have done more but there were attempts.

actually i think there are supposed to be some higher ranking female officers in the movie..
we shall see.
 
No, I coming from both a military background and having worked in an office for a number of years, am used to women dressing and behaving professionally in the workplace. Did I mention most of of my superiors were women?
Ok, that's great, but I still don't see how miniskirts change that equation. Sorry, I promise I'm not being deliberately obtuse.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top