Picard...checking privilege?

[Tosk]

But not the women?

And now we're back to the point I was making in the first place.

 

[Makarov]

Too much pot going on in this thread

 

[Gov Kodos]

But not the women?

Janeway knew how to use one. Pity the show forgot about that after the first episode.

 

[fireproof78]

Janeway knew how to use one. Pity the show forgot about that after the first episode.

Eh, she beat up a Borg Drone with a Bat'leth pretty good in Unimatrix Zero.

 

[fireproof78]

And now we're back to the point I was making in the first place.

 

[Jayson1]

Eh, she beat up a Borg Drone with a Bat'leth pretty good in Unimatrix Zero.

Which is also unrealistic. All sword fighting especially in future settings is unrealistic unless your talking about people who are into it and train for it. I doubt people in the future would train to use such primitive weapons. It would mostly be high tech stuff like phasers,tech weapons and maybe knives for close combat situations but even then you can tell with TNG they use the less violent open palm technique in order to not create us much damage in fighting. Starfleet seems to value non-lethal strategies so teaching them with medieval weapons seems unlikely.

Jason

 

[Sci]

ITA the privilege portrayed in the Star Trek universe is not racial its speciest. The UFP and especially Starfleet is humancentric through and through.

That was the Klingon's assessment of the status quo in the late 23rd century anyway.....

It was Azetbur's assessment. And while her argument is reductive, it contains more than a hint of truth. Vulcan, Andor, and Tellar had all been powerful spacefaring worlds for centuries when United Earth came along -- how come the Federation is so Earth-centric? How come English is Federation Standard? How come Earth is the capital planet? How come we see crews that are majority-human?

The only two possibilities are either that we creatively reinterpret the canonical evidence to fit our pre-conceived ideas ("everyone in the Federation is equal") or we acknowledge the disparity between the ideal and the evidence and conclude that the Federation is not truly egalitarian.

If we follow this line of thinking it'll soon be the case that the Prime Directive is nothing but a mechanism of repression explicitly created by the elite classes to maintain power

I think sometimes it is. There's no reason to let an entire species go extinct unless you just don't want future competition. And Kirk's interpretation of the Prime Directive in "A Private Little War" was a thinly-veiled rationalization for using the conflict on Neural as a proxy war for the Federation's conflict with the Klingons.

Picard did everything he could reasonably do, and transported a hell of a lot of them already. The federation betrayed him and itself not the other way around. It doesnt make any sense to put everything on Picard to do more, more, more.

It is certainly true that the Federation betrayed them! But Picard also betrayed them, by abandoning them.

Picard could have -- and should have -- used all the resources at his disposal as a private citizen to continue mobilizing ships to participate in the Romulan evacuation. He should have continued to advocate for the people of Vashti in the Federation government. He should have founded a non-governmental organization to continue this work, and he should have recruited people to keep it up. AND, he should have made sure that Romulans and Vashti were in key leadership positions of that organization, so that it didn't fall into a paternalistic "Federation Savior" mode of thinking!

These are all things Jean-Luc should have done. Instead, he ran away to LaBerre and wallowed in self-pity for fifteen years.

The federation and romulans screw up the rescue and he gets blamed

No one is blaming Jean-Luc for the Federation's sins. But he chose the sin of omission, the sin of passivity once state action was rejected. He deserves to be called out for that. And he deserves to be called out for thinking he could just come back to Vashti and everyone would be happy to see him. There is a lot of sheer fucking hubris there.

I dont remember him soaking up admiration in the show or in the prequel novel either...

The flashback scenes where he literally shows up in a white suit and panama hat?

I didn't feel there was anything to that scene that said anything other than he was on the planet to visit some people he had become close to and was looking forward to seeing.

It literally had a crowd of people converging on him and him soaking it up.

How does he not? If Picard is gonna claim that the Federation as a society has a moral obligation to help the Romulans, surely that same obligation extends to him as an individual whether or not the government has agreed to it.

And what are the practical limits of that obligation? Is one expected to forgo their own welfare for such an ideal?

Good question! I don't know. But you know what I do know? Jean-Luc could have done a shit-ton more to save more Romulans than he did, without forgoing his own welfare. He had two years to do all kinds of work as a private citizen to rescue as many people as possible before the supernova, and he squandered it while condemning the Federation for not doing the same work he was refusing to do as a private citizen. That's some hypocrisy there. That's some hubris. And that's what he has to make amends for.

Forgive me but that seems to be an overly simplistic way to look at the issues raised here...just like anytime something nuanced and complex is boiled down to a "you're either with us or against us" sort of choice.

I'm sorry, but some things really are simple.

Few people will forgo their own welfare to benefit a complete stranger

Yeah, but Jean-Luc thinks of himself as a hero, and that is exactly what a hero is supposed to do. And if you refuse to, you shouldn't show up at a refugee camp of the people you abruptly stopped doing jack-all to help and expect to be welcomed back with open arms.

- and in my opinion rightly so.

"Fuck you, I got mine" is no basis for a system of morality.

Starfleet is not meant to be sexist in TNG, the whole idea is absurd. He was following orders from female admirals all the time and there's female captains just as important as him.

And yet, women characters are constantly depicted in sexualized, objectified manners (Troi's costumes especially), and the two main female characters are depicted in traditionally female-gendered caregiver roles. Troi is often depicted as uncertain and questionably competent in command scenarios. Women characters like Troi and Luxana are depicted in ways that fulfill stereotypes of women (loving chocolate, being overbearing and controlling of children, being hedonistic). Ambitious or assertive women characters like Shelby or Nechayev are depicted in harsh, critical terms. Women characters like the title character of "The Perfect Mate" are literally depicted as beings that exist to fulfill men's desires, and it's depicted as a tragedy that Picard cannot possess her instead of it being a tragedy that she's not given agency over her own life. When Lal is created, she is told that she "must" assume a gender role, and then, after she assumes a female gender role and kisses Riker, Data asks Riker what his "intentions" are as though he has some sort of ownership of his daughter in a patriarchal society. When Leah Brahams sees that Geordi has cyberstalked her and created a holographic re-creation of her, she is depicted as being unreasonable and mean-spirited for reacting with anger to his creepy, possessive, boundary-crossing, and stalking behavior.

Sorry, but it's perfectly fair to complain that TNG is sexist even if the characters imagine in-universe that their society is egalitarian.

The problem with this sort of analysis is that it makes the assumption that these women were not behaving in accordance to their own volition and agency

They weren't, because they are not real people. They're fictional characters whose "decisions" were actually the choices of the men who wrote and produced the show.

Then aren't you essentially advocating that it doesn't really matter how they are portrayed because they are nothing but a male fantasy and therefore inconsequential?

It's a big leap to jump from "This depiction supports deeply oppressive cisheteropatrichal values" to "Depictions of oppressive cisheteropatriarchal values are inconsequential."

The values espoused by our works of popular fiction are very important, because they influence what kinds of ideas and values people in real life will tolerate. For example, the 1915 film The Birth of a Nation by D.W. Griffin not only reaffirmed to millions of white Americans that white supremacy was okay and black people were threats, but it directly led to the revival of the Ku Klux Klan.

That's an extreme example, but it establishes beyond a doubt that the values espoused by works of popular fiction have important real-world consequences. They are not inconsequential.

I am very tired of people who respond to metatextual analysis of a work of art as perpetuating stereotypes or marginalized depictions by responding that, in-universe, the characters wanted to do those things, as though those characters were real people with agency. You can't excuse a work of fiction for depicting characters in an objectionable way by pretending those characters were real people who made real choices.

The basic conceit when we watch these shows is that somehow they are being portrayed as "real people" - a core elelment of getting absorbed into a story.

Yes, we all understand how make-believe works. And Star Trek: The Next Generation is indeed a work of make-believe -- a work of make-believe that espouses certain values. Many of the values Star Trek: The Next Generation espouses as a work of make-believe are good, progressive values, such as the idea that we shouldn't let our prejudices about what life is "supposed" to look like blind us from acknowledging someone else's personhood (e.g., Data in "The Measure of a Man"). And some of the values Star Trek: The Next Generation espouses as a work of make-believe are in fact deeply toxic and oppressive, such as the idea that women exist to please men and it's a tragedy when they can't do so (e.g., Kamala in "The Perfect Mate").

I don't think there is any excuse to be made because I simply don't see what was so objectionable about the characters

Yes, it's very clear you aren't capable of recognizing toxic, oppressive stereotypes when you see them. (I hope for the sake of any women in your life that you don't actually buy into them.)

Why would anyone interpret having a profession in 'caregiving' as something to be ashamed of for example?

The point is not that caregiving is something to be ashamed of. The point is that it is oppressive for a work of art to consistently depict that as women's roles instead of depicting women in a variety of roles, because depicting that as women's most common role is an artistic decision that reinforces patriarchal gender roles.

What I notice is this undercurrent of bias where any woman who does in fact willingly hold traditional roles and so forth simply must be characterized as either self-deluded at best or at worst under in thrall of some abusive male. Isn't making those assumptions the exercise of a sort of intellectual privilege?

Ah, yes, another variation on, "Let's claim that pointing out oppression is what is oppressive!" It's right up there with, "No, you're the racist for saying that white people have unearned advantages."

To be clear: I have made no claims whatsoever about real people or their real choices. I have made claims about the real-world consequences of the messages propagated by works of fiction.

Sarcasm? Really?

Yes. You should try engaging with the arguments made by that sarcasm instead of being upset by it.

As for Shelby and Necheyev I think it's all a matter of perspective...I mean personally I've encountered plenty of 'Assertive Ambitious' people in my life, both men and women, and most of them all seemed to be somewhere on the asshole spectrum regardless of their sex or gender....

Missing. The. Point.

Clever punctuation doesn't really do much to support an argument.

You were absolutely not addressing the point being made. The issue is not, "Are ambitious people pleasant?" The issue is, "Always depicting ambitious women as unpleasant is sexist because it is an artistic choice that supports the idea that women should have less power than men."

I would say the point is that those characters were written by men within a social and historical context. In some cases they were written as aliens to service a particular story. You find their characterization as objectionable for your own reasons

My own reasons being, "Men and women are equal and these depictions oppose equality."

and I do not find them objectionable for my own reasons.

Do you think men and women are equal?

Also, Data aspires to be human, and has been created male, so he would tend towards a traditionalist, patriarchal, attitude to his child.

Wow. Wow wow wow. There are a lot of ideas about what it means to be human, what it means to be a man, what it means to be a father, and what it means to be a father to a daughter. Why would Data aspiring to be a human lead to him adopting the patriarchal values of one particular human sub-culture?

I would expect in a 24th century semi military organisation to teach all senior staff hand to hand combat training, whether you call it Kirk fu or something else, they should be as competent as Marvel's Black Widow.

We're getting off-topic here, but I would humbly suggest that that is probably a waste of time in reality, that Black Widow's levels of martial arts proficiency and lethality are in fact wish-fulfillment fantasies, and that weapons training is probably more useful for anyone who isn't part of a dedicated special operations team.

Thankfully DISC corrected that helpless female who cannot fight nonsense

One of the best things about DIS.

 

[fireproof78]

No one is blaming Jean-Luc for the Federation's sins. But he chose the sin of omission, the sin of passivity once state action was rejected. He deserves to be called out for that. And he deserves to be called out for thinking he could just come back to Vashti and everyone would be happy to see him. There is a lot of sheer fucking hubris there.

This cannot be overstated.

 

[Jayson1]

Exactly what resources does Picard have when he is isn't in Starfleet to mount some kind of personal rescue. One of the issues of being in a society without money is you got nothing to pay people with in terms of mounting any kind of individual rescue operation. Plus even if you did, do you think Starfleet would sit back and allow civilians to get involved in a political matter of that kind of scale. Picard's makeshift fleet would be intercepted by Starfleet vessels and be told to turn back or be arrested.

Jason

 

[fireproof78]

Exactly what resources does Picard have when he is isn't in Starfleet to mount some kind of personal rescue. One of the issues of being in a society without money is you got nothing to pay people with in terms of mounting any kind of individual rescue operation. Plus even if you did, do you think Starfleet would sit back and allow civilians to get involved in a political matter of that kind of scale. Picard's makeshift fleet would be intercepted by Starfleet vessels and be told to turn back or be arrested.

Jason

Well, as people like to note, Picard has lots of connections due to his various missions. So, why not appeal to the Klingons, call in a favor with the Vulcans or help Spock?

No, I don't think he could martial near the resources of Starfleet, but there is a huge gulf between doing nothing and doing everything.

 

[Sci]

Exactly what resources does Picard have when he is isn't in Starfleet to mount some kind of personal rescue.

To start with, Jean-Luc is famous. He's the face of Starfleet! He saved Earth from Shinzon in 2379, he exposed the forced relocation of the Ba'ku in 2375, he saved the entire Federation from the Borg in 2373. He's so famous that when the Mars Attack happened, the Federation News Network was carrying his personal reaction to it. He's huge.

That means, he has political and social capital. One of the most basic things he could do is, arrange a press conference or exclusive interview -- go on the Federation News Service or whatever, denounce the decision to abandon the Romulans, and call on the owners of private ships throughout the Federation to join in a new rescue armada.

One of the issues of being in a society without money is you got nothing to pay people with in terms of mounting any kind of individual rescue operation.

The canon has always been contradictory on this, but PIC makes it pretty clear that Jean-Luc is paying Rios for use of La Sirena. And we know from DS9's "Dr. Bashir, I Presume?" and "Little Green Men" that there's an industry of ships that provide interstellar transportation to paying customers. So clearly there is capital out there to compensate shipowners. Assuming, of course, that those ship owners even want to be compensated.

Plus even if you did, do you think Starfleet would sit back and allow civilians to get involved in a political matter of that kind of scale. Picard's makeshift fleet would be intercepted by Starfleet vessels and be told to turn back or be arrested.

Why? Free societies aren't supposed to prevent that sort of thing, and there's no indication from PIC that the Federation's decision to abandon the rescue effort was accompanied by a ban on private travel to Romulan space if the Romulans were to grant access.

And even if that were the case -- that's not an argument not to do it. Civil disobedience is a thing.

 

[Jayson1]

I'm not so sure the Klingons would want to help Romulans. Heck they were probably cheering things on. Worf is also likely back in Starfleet so he doesn't even have Gowron around anymore who he has worked with in the past. Plus the same issue of him being a civilian come up. Those connections were created while he was a Starfleet officer. Without the uniform any dealings with other governments would be tricky because if they help Picard then that means they might be betraying a alley or business partner in the Federation.

Jason

 

[fireproof78]

That still doesn't mean he gives up. As Sci noted, civil disobedience is a thing (and something Picard is willing to do-Insurrection), and he has social capital as a diplomat and famed Starfleet officer.

Picard doesn't have Gowron but he has Worf who has Martok. Picard was the Arbiter of Succession which would have pull with the Klingons for status alone.

Again, do something with this ability that you have. Going home is not the answer.

 

[Sci]

I'm not so sure the Klingons would want to help Romulans.

Good point -- it might be very controversial in the Empire! But there again, there would almost certainly be Klingons out there who recognize that Romulans fought with honor against the Dominion. And there would almost certainly be Klingons who may hate the Romulans but still think doing nothing is passive genocide and a violation of Kahless's teachings.

Worf is also likely back in Starfleet so he doesn't even have Gowron around anymore who he has worked with in the past.

Ah, but Chancellor Martok is the head of Worf's House. That gives Worf influence with the Klingon government (even if Gowron is no longer around to owe Jean-Luc favors). And I have trouble imagining Worf not resigning in protest of the abandonment of the Romulans.

Plus the same issue of him being a civilian come up. Those connections were created while he was a Starfleet officer. Without the uniform any dealings with other governments would be tricky because if they help Picard then that means they might be betraying a alley or business partner in the Federation.

Might be! But that's not a reason for Jean-Luc not to try.

Again, do something with this ability that you have. Going home is not the answer.

Exactly. Nobody would blame Jean-Luc if he tried and failed. They blame him for not even trying.

 

[Jayson1]

To start with, Jean-Luc is famous. He's the face of Starfleet! He saved Earth from Shinzon in 2379, he exposed the forced relocation of the Ba'ku in 2375, he saved the entire Federation from the Borg in 2373. He's so famous that when the Mars Attack happened, the Federation News Network was carrying his personal reaction to it. He's huge.

That means, he has political and social capital. One of the most basic things he could do is, arrange a press conference or exclusive interview -- go on the Federation News Service or whatever, denounce the decision to abandon the Romulans, and call on the owners of private ships throughout the Federation to join in a new rescue armada.



The canon has always been contradictory on this, but PIC makes it pretty clear that Jean-Luc is paying Rios for use of La Sirena. And we know from DS9's "Dr. Bashir, I Presume?" and "Little Green Men" that there's an industry of ships that provide interstellar transportation to paying customers. So clearly there is capital out there to compensate shipowners. Assuming, of course, that those ship owners even want to be compensated.



Why? Free societies aren't supposed to prevent that sort of thing, and there's no indication from PIC that the Federation's decision to abandon the rescue effort was accompanied by a ban on private travel to Romulan space if the Romulans were to grant access.

And even if that were the case -- that's not an argument not to do it. Civil disobedience is a thing.

Maybe but your still hoping people will go against the government which can easily be seen as treason. Your also not just leading a march down some street but your putting civilians at risk by taking them into Romulan space and if they get killed then that is also something you have to consider as well.

Jason

 

[fireproof78]

The needs of the many outweighs the need of the few, or the one. At least, according to Star Trek.

Again, I would have preferred Picard at least supporting Spock!

 

[Sci]

Something else to think about -- how many worlds out there are looking at the Federation now, wondering if the UFP will let them go 'asplodey if they get a planetary disaster? How many worlds that might have aligned with the Federation are now thinking they should align with another power, or unite amongst themselves? How many potential rivals to the Federation might be willing to lend ships to a rescue armada under Jean-Luc's leadership out of both "humanitarian" (we need a better word for this concept in the multi-species world of ST) concerns and out of a desire to get a P.R. coup against the UFP?

If, say, the Cardassian Union, Tholian Assembly, Tzenkethi Coalition, and Breen Confederacy decide to send a rescue armada to evacuate Romulus under Jean-Luc's command? That would definitely help those states' interests. They'd have a major incentive to help him.

Maybe but your still hoping people will go against the government which can easily be seen as treason.

From a legal perspective? Pure nonsense. In real life today, people mobilize humanitarian assistance to nations like Iran all the time; it's not illegal, because it doesn't involve assisting the regime to wage war.

From a P.R. perspective? Maybe! The FNN interviewer in "Remembrance" certainly reflected that kind of bigotry. But again, so what? That's not a reason not to try.

Your also not just leading a march down some street but your putting civilians at risk by taking them into Romulan space and if they get killed then that is also something you have to consider as well.

This is true! And this is sometimes that would almost certainly bother Jean-Luc. But he still should do it.

To make a comparison: The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. knew that every time he went into a segregated city to confront the police with nonviolence, that that carried a risk that some of his supporters would be killed. His entire strategy, you must remember, was to use non-violent confrontation to provoke Jim Crow police forces into abusing him and his followers in the presence of a news media, whose reporting would then shock white Americans who would otherwise turn a blind eye to the whole thing into realizing that they couldn't stomach the violence and oppression when they actually saw it. He was a leader who marched people into dangerous situations and people did get killed.

It was still the right thing to do.

 

[Jayson1]

I've kind of wondered if Picard was thinking Starfleet would come to him at some point and ask for help. People would be upset by the news and be won over by his resignation. If people felt Picard was forced out for taking a moral stand then they might get upset at the Federation and demand he be brought back and listened to. At some point that didn't happen. Time moved on and the rescue effort didn't happen at which point Picard went into bitter mode at his failure and self isolated for many years.

Jason

 

[fireproof78]

I've kind of wondered if Picard was thinking Starfleet would come to him at some point and ask for help. People would be upset by the news and be won over by his resignation. If people felt Picard was forced out for taking a moral stand then they might get upset at the Federation and demand he be brought back and listened to. At some point that didn't happen. Time moved on and the rescue effort didn't happen at which point Picard went into bitter mode at his failure and self isolated for many years.

Jason

Now, here is my thing. I completely understand that Picard would feel that way. I have no issue with how the show presented in the show. But, Picard is not right. He ignored the Romulans and hoped others would do it. Now, I am a huge champion of individual choices but there is an impact to others-consequences. And Picard certainly can be held responsible for inaction.

 

[valkyrie013]

And thats why I don't like the way they portrayed JL in the series as Oh.. I didn't get my way, let me hole up in my vineyard for 15 years and do NOTHING.. JL in Tng wouldnt do that, He would do what Sci and others have stated that he didn't do, and having sheer F' hubris 15 years latter. He would have pushed starfleet, then the federation, than federaion news, federation opinion polls, etc. He wouldn't have given up on the romulan people in evacuation nor the people of Vashti..
The rest is.. well its a written show.. writers take liberties to tell stories..
As for a Human Centric federation? Well according to Enterprise, we were the driving force in forming the federation from speices that didn't really like each other when we first met them.. And, There has to be Some/A planet that is the center for the Federation? why not us??
As for Human ships.. well.. We see 1 ship out of over 7000? there are probably loads of multi species crews, even ships with just vulcans, just andorian, just Telerites.. etc. because we all have different tollerances to heat/cold etc. and while may able to serve on a human ship, they wouldn't be comfortable. But as a nother, the other speices just might not be motivated to join starfleet.. not like there's a draft? where humans are all Ra Ra Sign me up! its a volunteer service.