• 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!

So what are you reading now? (Part 3)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I also finished the first Voyager Homecoming book, which I thought was enjoyable, but I have a *huge* problem with one facet of it: the child abuse. a) it's not fun escapism, it's the vile crap that goes on all in real life. It may be suited to miserable stuff like BSG, but never Star Trek.

Oh yeah, it's not like Star Trek has ever dealt with unpleasant stuff like war and racism and oppression... ;)

b) I suppose such things might happen in the Trek universe, among the Orion slavers and so forth, but on Earth?

That attitude is exactly why it could happen. People on Earth are so used to thinking they live in paradise that it doesn't occur to them to look for the warning signs of something like child abuse. True, it would be extremely rare, but that means that in those exceptional cases where it did occur, it might well be easier to get away with because nobody would be watching for it.


c) "Dad" was a Starfleet officer. What about all the psychological testing Starfleet officers go though? What about telepaths? You think someone like Troi wouldn't pick up on the mental images of this guy beating his wife and raping his stepdaughter? This is so wrong on so many levels.

Yes, there's psychological testing, but where in the world did you get the idea that Starfleet recruits are required to submit to telepathic probing? If you think child abuse is incompatible with ST's utopian Earth, how could you possibly think that the same idyllic society would allow anything so Orwellian as the routine use of telepathic thought police to violate people's mental privacy? Talk about multileveled wrongness. That doesn't happen, because people in the Federation have rights.

Starfleet has tests, of course, but no test is infallible. Starfleet is also a large bureaucracy, and in every bureaucracy there are people who slip through the cracks.
 
^ ITA with all of Christopher's points.

b) I suppose such things might happen in the Trek universe, among the Orion slavers and so forth, but on Earth?
That attitude is exactly why it could happen. People on Earth are so used to thinking they live in paradise that it doesn't occur to them to look for the warning signs of something like child abuse. True, it would be extremely rare, but that means that in those exceptional cases where it did occur, it might well be easier to get away with because nobody would be watching for it.
People often seem to forget that, in real life, child abuse happens in all sorts of environments, and is committed by people of all sorts of social and economic backgrounds. Many abusers seem like normal, upstanding citizens, successful in their jobs, good neighbors, and, to those who don't know what's really going on, good family men. (* disclaimer: No, I am not suggesting that it's only men who commit abuse.)

Child abuse is not necessarily a result of things like poverty, big economic discrepancies, or war - all those things that have been apparently eliminated in the Federation - so why would Federation society be any different from the 21st Earth societies in that respect? The reasons it happens would not be eliminated (although less substance abuse might help). And, as Christopher pointed out, you can't expect the state to telepathically screen every member of the society in order to discover whether they have any criminal tendencies - that would make it a totalitarian society. The differences that a more progressive society with a better education on these matters makes is that other family members, friends, teachers, social services etc. would hopefully be more likely to believe the children when they say that they have been abused, quicker to notice that something is going on if the child is not able to confide in anyone, and better at coping with the consequences on the child. But the psychological reasons why abuse happens, as well as why many abused children find it hard to reveal what is happening to them, would still exist, because the basic human nature would not be very different than it is now.
 
I wasn't talking about telepathic probes, just the sort of surface thoughts that Troi would pick up from a character on the show.

I would like to think that in the future, people are educated properly so that they would realize the horrific damage acts like child abuse, rape, violence etc do to the victims. The same applies to stuff like racism, sexism, all the way down to petty theft. How else do these things not happen in the future (or at least, happen very, very infrequently)? It's got to be a result of a superior educational system. I would think the schools took better care of their students, so that when one is noticably troubled more is done then a few parental meetings and empty promises.
If stuff like that is still permitted, exactly what makes the "better future" of Trek any different from today?
 
I wasn't talking about telepathic probes, just the sort of surface thoughts that Troi would pick up from a character on the show.

If the perpetrators and victims of child abuse weren't good at hiding it, at burying the signs beneath the surface, then it wouldn't be such a pervasive problem in real life.


I would like to think that in the future, people are educated properly so that they would realize the horrific damage acts like child abuse, rape, violence etc do to the victims.

Of course they would know that -- in principle. My point is that if they very rarely encounter it -- and particularly if they're so confident in the utopian perfection of their society that they don't expect it -- then they wouldn't necessarily notice the signs that there was a problem. Our society is very vigilant to the signs of abuse because we encounter it so often. But in a society where it had become exceedingly rare, people would certainly be aware it was a bad thing in theory, but might not have the experience to recognize its symptoms when they saw it. Particularly with the kind of medical technology they have in the 24th century, which could instantly heal any bruises or cuts so that the victims wouldn't show any physical evidence of being abused. The only evidence would be behavioral, and as I said, abusers and their victims are good at hiding it. Really, the only way anyone would likely find out is if the victim found the courage to tell people. And if their teachers, counselors, whatever assumed that "our society is enlightened and abuse is a thing of the past," then it might not occur to them to ask the right questions. That's the downside of a utopia. Get overconfident in your perfection and you lower your guard to the things that can corrupt and undermine it.


If stuff like that is still permitted, exactly what makes the "better future" of Trek any different from today?

The fact that it's so much more rare. Even in the most idyllic possible society, it's unlikely that 100 percent of such things could be eradicated. It would be prevented or caught most of the time, but no system is absolutely perfect, so there would be rare exceptions to the rule.
 
"Dad" was a Starfleet officer. What about all the psychological testing Starfleet officers go though? What about telepaths? You think someone like Troi wouldn't pick up on the mental images of this guy beating his wife and raping his stepdaughter? This is so wrong on so many levels.

the Psi Corps are in a different series...
 
Besides, some of the most heinous crimes in history were committed by people who were considered extremely intelligent and they knew what they were doing. Education and awareness has no basis on whether an individual will become a criminal or not.

Experience, parental guidance, and economic environment creates criminal.
 
Although I can accept that such things may occasionally slip though the cracks in the happy future, I can't see the Homecoming's child abuse going unnoticed. First, Brenna didn't learn to 'fit in' and pretend normalcy until >15. She's described as being withdrawn in school, and if the other kids can tell she's fucked up and don't want anything to do with her, there's no way teachers would let it pass. It would become obvious after a few of the parent/teacher meetings that went on that nothing was changing, and Brenna was still not right. What would a happy-Trek future school do? Send a councellor, most likely. Do more then useless governments do today - they'd keep at it until they got to the bottom of the situation.
Second, as I said earlier, "Dad" was a Starfleet officer, and we know they go though extremely rigerous psychological screenings. Their wants, needs, ambitions and so forth are examined in detail, and I don't think they'd take whatever Mr. Officer tells their counsellor as gospel.
 
Okay, but Dad Starfleet Officer was not the only bad apple. We have a lot of bad Admirals like Leyton and Dougherty. Or how about Capt Ransom and his crew or what about Capt Tracey of the Exeter, or how Admiral Cartwright and his bunch. So having a Starfleet officer who does something bad is not a new thing.
 
^Right. KingDaniel, what you're describing is the way the system's supposed to work, the way it probably does work in most cases. But you're saying that there should be such a thing as a 100% success rate, and that's just not the way reality works. Systems break down. Standards are enforced unevenly. Mistakes get made and can be compounded by other mistakes. It may be a one-in-a-million occurrence, but you can't say it's completely impossible.
 
Yeah, but all the examples you give are of fairly generic, impersonal evils or misguided idiots.
Systematic abuse and rape over the course of a lifetime is a much more personal evil, and one I'm not sure any of the Starfleeters you mentioned would be capable of.
 
I finished David Mack's The Calling last Friday. I greatly enjoyed and hope it becomes a series. My only problem was that it was too short, so if there's going to be anymore books to carry on the story I hope they have a higher word count.

I'm now reading David Mack's expanded The Sorrows of Empire. I was a little worried that reading it so soon after the original would seem a bit repetitive, but so far it's not. I'm about half-way through and it seems like most of the material so far is all new.
 
Okay, but Dad Starfleet Officer was not the only bad apple. We have a lot of bad Admirals like Leyton and Dougherty. Or how about Capt Ransom and his crew or what about Capt Tracey of the Exeter, or how Admiral Cartwright and his bunch. So having a Starfleet officer who does something bad is not a new thing.

Let's not forget Lon Suder from VOYAGER.

Besides, it's important to remember that the Federation is NOT a perfect utopia. It's better than today, there's been definite social progress, it's a positive vision of the future.

But since when did that mean that the people are all perfect? There's still going to be good guys and bad guys and murderers and rapists. Hell, they still have lawyers and trials and a criminal justice system. (Janice Lester wasn't exactly a model of mental health either.)

Just because society in general is more enlightened, and nobody is being discriminated against or dying of starvation anymore, doesn't mean human nature has changed. As Kirk used to argue all the time, the human race was evolving beyond its barbaric past, but it still had a long way to go.

(He says, rehearsing for his "The Dark Side of STAR TREK" panel next weekend.)
 
Okay, but Dad Starfleet Officer was not the only bad apple. We have a lot of bad Admirals like Leyton and Dougherty. Or how about Capt Ransom and his crew or what about Capt Tracey of the Exeter, or how Admiral Cartwright and his bunch. So having a Starfleet officer who does something bad is not a new thing.

Let's not forget Lon Suder from VOYAGER.

Suder doesn't count, since he was a Maquis. He never went to Starfleet Academy. Although since he was Betazoid, I guess one could say he's proof that Federation society in general isn't completely devoid of bad eggs.
 
I am just finishing up Jeffery Deaver's "Roadside Crosses", and have purchased 2 new books, James Patterson's "Fang", and Star Trek: Seven Deadly Sins.

I think I'll be reading "Seven Deadly Sins" next.
 
I recently finished The Invincible (Niezwyciężony) by Stanisław Lem. A gripping, intriguing story. I'm not quite sure what to think of the open end of the book. A follow-up would have been interesting. One thing I found odd is the writing style of the book - quite distanced and sometimes even stilted. I wonder whether that's due to the translation (I read it in German since I can't even say hello in Polish) or whether it's present in the original version as well. It certainly gives the story an eerier touch.

A friend of mine lent me the first two Percy Jackson books and I've already started with the first one. So far, it's much better than I had thought it would be.
 
I recently got back to the TOS books. Months ago, I was able to find star trek TOS books #1-97, along with a bunch of the standalone hardcovers, all for around 100 bucks. I read through the first 7, then took a break. Now I'm back at them.
I'm currently on book #9, "Triangle" the second book written by Sondra Marshak and Myrna Culbreath. Unlike their last book "The Prometheus Design", which I didn't care for at all, I'm actually enjoying this one. Still, not all that crazy for this writing team.
 
Captain's Glory. I'll miss the Shatnerverse when it's over.

Homecoming book 2. Seems to have run out of steam a bit.

I just got hold of a stack of Dumarest Saga books (wallet-crushing 15p each). Does anyone know if they're any good?
 
Ok, just finished Resistance and am now reading Before Dishonor. Wish I had read them before I read the Destiny saga, but still, nice to be getting the backstory I missed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top