'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XI

[trampledamage]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

I really think, purely to help the issue of equality you understand, but I really think McCoy needs to take his top off in the next movie.

I second the notion. And just to make sure we're on an even parlance, I suggest we get a look at his skivvies.

Good point. We wouldn't want anyone thinking we were just making a token gesture.

 

[trampledamage]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

Other than hand-stands, what would a mini-skirt stop you from doing?

(I'm not being snarky, I just thought about it - because I've never worn one - and while a long skirt would stop you doing quite a bit, a mini-skirt won't get in the way)

Anything that requires kicking (necessary for fighting), bending over (fighting or numerous other activities), or which requires one to function in a climate any colder than where I am now (Florida).

I can't see how a mini-skirt stops you from kicking or bending over. Granted I'm assuming uniform underpants to go with the skirt (which would mean they could do the hand-stand too now that I mention it). And since they're on a climate controlled space-ship, weather isn't a problem either.

Besides, if the males can look good in their tight fitting shirts and pants, so can the women.

Got no problem with this idea - tight shirts and pants for everyone. I was just questioning your opinion that wearing a mini-skirt would stop you from doing something.

 

[Crusher Disciple]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

^ I will engage in research and get back with you.

J.

What- you're going to wear one?

 

[seniorsleuth]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

Other than hand-stands, what would a mini-skirt stop you from doing?

(I'm not being snarky, I just thought about it - because I've never worn one - and while a long skirt would stop you doing quite a bit, a mini-skirt won't get in the way)

Anything that requires kicking (necessary for fighting), bending over (fighting or numerous other activities), or which requires one to function in a climate any colder than where I am now (Florida).

I can't see how a mini-skirt stops you from kicking or bending over. Granted I'm assuming uniform underpants to go with the skirt (which would mean they could do the hand-stand too now that I mention it). And since they're on a climate controlled space-ship, weather isn't a problem either.

Besides, if the males can look good in their tight fitting shirts and pants, so can the women.

Got no problem with this idea - tight shirts and pants for everyone. I was just questioning your opinion that wearing a mini-skirt would stop you from doing something.

I guess if they had no sense of modesty whatsoever, they could do all those things completely naked, too. The point is that women, no less then men, should be permitted to wear clothes in which they feel comfortable enough to be able to perform various activities at maximum efficiency, and the mini ain't it.

It also makes Trek seem like something campy, kitschy, and over the top, rather than something one can view as a serious representation of life in the future.

As for climate, it always bugged me that 9 times out of 10, the planets they visited in TOS seemed to be a perfect 75 degrees with no precipitation. Yeah, right. I'll be happy if both men and women in the new version's away teams have to alter their typical clothing to accommodate some (truly) alien environments.

 

[Hermiod]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

I guess if they had no sense of modesty whatsoever, they could do all those things completely naked, too. The point is that women, no less then men, should be permitted to wear clothes in which they feel comfortable enough to be able to perform various activities at maximum efficiency, and the mini ain't it.

Says you. You're breaking rule number one - Do Not Judge 23rd or 24th Century People By 20th or 21st Century Standards.

It also makes Trek seem like something campy, kitschy, and over the top, rather than something one can view as a serious representation of life in the future.

Why should that future be so conservative ? Nobody is willing to answer a simple question - why must Uhura cover herself up to be considered competent ?

Has no-one considered the possibility that 23rd century society is at a point where a woman like Uhura does not have to apologise for being attractive ?

As for climate, it always bugged me that 9 times out of 10, the planets they visited in TOS seemed to be a perfect 75 degrees with no precipitation. Yeah, right. I'll be happy if both men and women in the new version's away teams have to alter their typical clothing to accommodate some (truly) alien environments.

Star Trek had this thing called a budget. Problem was, it wasn't a very big budget. Thankfully, they spent their money on telling stories instead of rain machines.

 

[Amaris]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

^ I will engage in research and get back with you.

J.

What- you're going to wear one?

Why do you ask? You want pictures?


J.

 

[SGx]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

I think this article is really silly. Knee-length boots and mini skirts were, at the time, a sign of liberation for women. There's absolutely no reason for Abrams to change it. Overall, I though Uhura's character was a weak point for the film, but not because of any equality issue - she was just a little boring.

For me the best eye-candy was Spock. And the Orion girl.

 

[THE CHEBB]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

I am a man.
I liked seeing Bra & Panty Uhura.
I liked seeing bikini Orion Girl.

That's your problem right there. As a man you are no longer allowed to have a sex drive. Finding women attractive demeans them, didn't you know that ?

Indeed.

Women are not sexual objects. Their breasts are only for feeding infants. You don't want to go near their private parts; there be demons there that'll eat your bones. They never see men as sexual objects either. Certainly not someone to have sex with. Women don't have sex at all; they only copulate; it's never fun for them. Sex is only for dominating the women, therefore it should be banished. Totally. Unless the women want a child, then they'll put up with it, even though they don't like it.

You cannot look at a woman's face, cleavage, butt, legs or any other part of their body you find even remotely sexually attractive. It's best to look at their toes only when speaking to them, otherwise you're disrespecting them.

An attractive woman can never be intelligent or successful. The less attractive they are, the more intelligent they must be. You must only love them for their inner personality, not their looks, or you disrespect their intelligence. They only love men for their inner personality too.

Miniskirts should be banished. As should all skirt, tanktops, dresses, high heels, panties and good looking underwear. All clothing should be functional only. Clothing is not supposed to make one attractive; it's only supposed to protect against bad weather. Men shouldn't clothe attractive either.

A woman does not shave her legs to be more attractive; they shave them because they collect the hairs and make little hairsculptures out of them. Actually, women who shave their legs aren't real women at all. Real women leave all their hair as is, even when it's long enough to braid. Men shouldn't either; they should be hairy and strong, for their only function in life is to catch food.

Women are the source behind all technological evolution; everything points to the fact that technology doesn't exist to make our life better. Technology exists only for the sole purpose of one day being able to grow children out of test tubes within a day. When that day has come, every woman should kill their man. When that's done, they should kill all other men as well. Then there will be no more wars, no more disagreements and humanity will finally be enlightened.

You see, women have a plan.

I frakkin' knew it!

 

[seniorsleuth]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

I guess if they had no sense of modesty whatsoever, they could do all those things completely naked, too. The point is that women, no less then men, should be permitted to wear clothes in which they feel comfortable enough to be able to perform various activities at maximum efficiency, and the mini ain't it.

Says you. You're breaking rule number one - Do Not Judge 23rd or 24th Century People By 20th or 21st Century Standards.

It also makes Trek seem like something campy, kitschy, and over the top, rather than something one can view as a serious representation of life in the future.

Why should that future be so conservative ? Nobody is willing to answer a simple question - why must Uhura cover herself up to be considered competent ?

Has no-one considered the possibility that 23rd century society is at a point where a woman like Uhura does not have to apologise for being attractive ?

As for climate, it always bugged me that 9 times out of 10, the planets they visited in TOS seemed to be a perfect 75 degrees with no precipitation. Yeah, right. I'll be happy if both men and women in the new version's away teams have to alter their typical clothing to accommodate some (truly) alien environments.

Star Trek had this thing called a budget. Problem was, it wasn't a very big budget. Thankfully, they spent their money on telling stories instead of rain machines.

I think putting women in revealing clothing but not the men IS conservative. It's saying that women must flaunt their attractiveness but men need not do so, something that's as old and conservative as the hills. It suggests that the only measure of attractiveness in a woman is physical, while that's not the case for men. That's inequality, not progress. I guess I just happen to hope that in a century or two we will get beyond that.

So, I guess you think that the fact that the males are wearing pants means that they are ashamed of being attractive? Poor boys.

Just close your eyes and imagine the Trek males walking around in short shorts while the women are fully covered and tell me it wouldn't bother you because, after all, one shouldn't assume that men in the 23rd century would be like they are today.

 

[Crusher Disciple]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

Why do you ask? You want pictures?

J.

They always come in handy....down the line.

 

[Jeri]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

In birds, if there is a difference of display, the male usually has brighter plumage; it's been that way for millions of years. It's not unreasonable to expect human display patterns will remain the same for a few hundred. I don't think it's a matter of politics.

 

[seniorsleuth]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

In birds, if there is a difference of display, the male usually has brighter plumage; it's been that way for millions of years. It's not unreasonable to expect human display patterns will remain the same for a few hundred. I don't think it's a matter of politics.

You are correct, but choosing to depict this in a film released in 2009 or 2010 and gauging the expected reaction of different groups in the audience and choosing to cater to the tastes of one group or another is political.

 

[Jeri]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

In birds, if there is a difference of display, the male usually has brighter plumage; it's been that way for millions of years. It's not unreasonable to expect human display patterns will remain the same for a few hundred. I don't think it's a matter of politics.

You are correct, but choosing to depict this in a film released in 2009 or 2010 and gauging the expected reaction of different groups in the audience and choosing to cater to the tastes of one group or another is political.

What?

 

[superstring01]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

I have to comment on this.

Let me be frank: I'm not PC. I hate political correctness. I'm a gay man and I intentionally keep company with people who aren't afraid to say whatever's on their mind, including the occasional gay joke. So, when feminists bitch about Uhura not being able to fight, I want to laugh. Women are physically less capable than men, and every time I saw human females fight in Star Trek and--say--hold their own against Klingons and whatnot, I want to laugh. It isn't that I don't want to see women in Star Trek, or that I don't know that a woman can fire a phaser pistol as well as a man, it's just that wome have 30% less muscle mass than men.

Moving right a long...

At any rate, even I, with my less than PC POV's can see the sexism (or at the very least, blatant disregard for strong female characters) seeping through in this Star Trek movie. Abrams made a point of touting Trek's egalitarianism, and even went so far as to (alegedly) consult his wife on how to develop a strong female character. But in this movie, we saw only one female character, and she was fifty-percent piece-of-ass. It's not that Uhura wasn't strong, it's just that she and her roll were so disposable. Moreover, we see no other female characters that are memorable, beyond that green strange that Kirk is tapping at the beginning of the movie.

Where's T'Pol or T'Pau? Where are the female ranks of Captains and Admirals. Surlely, if women have achieved SOME sort of parity with men, then we'd see and hear a bit more of them... or have men and women finally achieved detente and women are just keepin silent and being supportive of their men? Looks like it.

~String

 

[seniorsleuth]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

I have to comment on this.

Let me be frank: I'm not PC. I hate political correctness. I'm a gay man and I intentionally keep company with people who aren't afraid to say whatever's on their mind, including the occasional gay joke. So, when feminists bitch about Uhura not being able to fight, I want to laugh. Women are physically less capable than men, and every time I saw human females fight in Star Trek and--say--hold their own against Klingons and whatnot, I want to laugh. It isn't that I don't want to see women in Star Trek, or that I don't know that a woman can fire a phaser pistol as well as a man, it's just that wome have 30% less muscle mass than men.

Moving right a long...

At any rate, even I, with my less than PC POV's can see the sexism (or at the very least, blatant disregard for strong female characters) seeping through in this Star Trek movie. Abrams made a point of touting Trek's egalitarianism, and even went so far as to (alegedly) consult his wife on how to develop a strong female character. But in this movie, we saw only one female character, and she was fifty-percent piece-of-ass. It's not that Uhura wasn't strong, it's just that she and her roll were so disposable. Moreover, we see no other female characters that are memorable, beyond that green strange that Kirk is tapping at the beginning of the movie.

Where's T'Pol or T'Pau? Where are the female ranks of Captains and Admirals. Surlely, if women have achieved SOME sort of parity with men, then we'd see and hear a bit more of them... or have men and women finally achieved detente and women are just keepin silent and being supportive of their men? Looks like it.

~String

I agree that the movie was devoted to introducing the main characters and the secondary female characters were either absent or expeditiously eliminated (Amanda). But, it's a movie not the whole first season of a TV series. I hope and fully expect another important female character to be introduced in the next film. It can either be a revamped character from TOS, or a completely new one. With the altered timeline, the sky's the limit.

 

[AlanC9]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

You are correct, but choosing to depict this in a film released in 2009 or 2010 and gauging the expected reaction of different groups in the audience and choosing to cater to the tastes of one group or another is political.

What?

Simple. Folks like seniorsleuth have reactions that aren't relevant to the ST universe when they see women in miniskirts in that universe, because they're products of this century. Other folks have different reactions for the same reason. Abrams & company decided to titillate the latter and ignore the former.

 

[seniorsleuth]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

You are correct, but choosing to depict this in a film released in 2009 or 2010 and gauging the expected reaction of different groups in the audience and choosing to cater to the tastes of one group or another is political.

What?

Simple. Folks like seniorsleuth have reactions that aren't relevant to the ST universe when they see women in miniskirts in that universe, because they're products of this century. Other folks have different reactions for the same reason. Abrams & company decided to titillate the latter and ignore the former.

Uh, no. It means that the filmmakers made a determination based on values that exist in this century that expressing life and culture in the 23rd century by having the women in short skirts but not the men was okay, but having them both exposed, or having the men exposed but not the women, would not go over well with a 21st century audience.

That was a political determination made by the filmmakers from a male, 21st century perspective, which is still gender discriminatory. And, unless you can honestly say that as straight man you wouldn't have minded if the men were in short shorts and the women clothed, you have not disproven my point.

 

[Cakes488]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

What?

Simple. Folks like seniorsleuth have reactions that aren't relevant to the ST universe when they see women in miniskirts in that universe, because they're products of this century. Other folks have different reactions for the same reason. Abrams & company decided to titillate the latter and ignore the former.

Uh, no. It means that the filmmakers made a determination based on values that exist in this century that expressing life and culture in the 23rd century by having the women in short skirts but not the men was okay, but having them both exposed, or having the men exposed but not the women, would not go over well with a 21st century audience.

That was a political determination made by the filmmakers from a male, 21st century perspective, which is still gender discriminatory. And, unless you can honestly say that as straight man you wouldn't have minded if the men were in short shorts and the women clothed, you have not disproven my point.

RIGHT ON...!

I'm no prude over here...I'm just tired of the INEQUALITY that goes on....women are naked and men are not....anyone who denies that fact is either not watching tv/movies on this planet or is dillusional.

Uhura stipped -- great! But it would of been better had she been more involved with them actually solving the problem -- they want to give her a bigger role...well that's great and I'm all for it...but then it mostly turned out (MOSTLY) to be this romantic angle with Spock or sexual tension w/ Kirk....or fighting "over her" in a bar...ugh.

I guess this is how you have to write sripts and what you have to do to cater to the masses.

 

[Jeri]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

Kirk had nothing but his underwear on in the scene where Uhura was in her underwear.

It was not political in any way.

 

[Hermiod]

Re: 'Sigh'...A feminist review of Star Trek XII

I'm no prude over here...I'm just tired of the INEQUALITY that goes on....women are naked and men are not....anyone who denies that fact is either not watching tv/movies on this planet or is dillusional.

Not been watching the CW lately have you ?