Star Trek and Singleness

[Six of Twelve]

One of the things about TOS that bugged me was that not only were all the main characters single, but they were all life-long singles who'd never been married, with the exception of McCoy, whom I seem to remember it being mentioned that he'd been previously married, but was now single again.

TNG did somewhat better with a widowed Crusher who had occasional brief relationships and an implied relationship with Picard, as well as an unresolved relationship with Riker/Troi, but neither couple resolved things until Nemesis. Mostly, Picard, Riker, and Troi spent a large portion of their lives as never-married singles, getting married relatively later in life. They did allow O'Brien to get married and become a father, but he was a relatively minor character on TNG. They allowed Worf to become a father through a type of marriage clone relationship, but I'm sure they'd not have done it with a human character,.

DS9 had the only Captain/commanding officer of all the shows who was not a never-married single (at least during the series' run) and had a child. They made him effectively single through being widowed, but he was an active father during the show's run and he got married again before the show ended, about to become a father again. Similarly, Dax as a Trill had been married several times before and then again to Worf, who finally marries for the first time, though they never showed any "Dax as stepmothers" scenes with Alexander. O'Brien's marriage from TNG is carried over, though Keiko is either away or "offstage" most of the time. Dukat's marriage, fatherhood and affairs are mentioned. Kira, Odo, Quark, Bashir, and Garak are the ubiquitous never-married singles.

With the exception of Tom and B'Elanna, Tuvok, and the minor character Samantha Wildman, the main Voyager characters are mostly never married singles again. One would think that by the end of those seven years, that mention would at least be made of more crewmembers who'd partnered up.

On Enterprise, save for the non-monogamous Denobulan doctor, we're back to a ship full of never married singles again, at least the main characters.

I can understand that in Enterprise and TOS why being single might be more common as they were not family ships and they didn't get to go home as often as in later shows, but it seems odd that never having been married, ever, would be almost the default, and why divorced and widowed people weren't more prevalent than the never-married.

I know the reason from the writers' point of view: more story possibilities if they're single, especially when the reset button can be hit over and over at the end of episodes. But, again, why are never-married singles more common than the previously married, especially for characters older than their 20s? After all, the same story possibilities exist for the previously-married as for the never-married. It's hard to imagine that so many people in the future would be the "married to their jobs" types.

 

[maneth]

I suspect that the main reason is that the writers don't want to write stories of married couples, and given the reception most episodes that feature Keiko heavily got, neither do the viewers want to watch a marriage soap day out and day in.

 

[cultcross]

I suspect that the main reason is that the writers don't want to write stories of married couples, and given the reception most episodes that feature Keiko heavily got, neither do the viewers want to watch a marriage soap day out and day in.

This - marrying your characters off or worse having them married to begin with means that instead of being able to write romance of the week plots, they have to write a married couple. Traditionally a lot less successful. Personally I'd love to see an up to date take on a married couple (maybe one where the woman doesn't make dinner and do seemingly all the childcare like Keiko) in the new show. Someone like Zoe and Wash.

 

[Six of Twelve]

You both missed my main point or perhaps you simply didn't read the entire post.

I never said that married or partnered people needed to be predominant, but rather, why did the majority of the singles need to have been of the never been married variety, rather than the previously married, but now single type.

I also noted why the writers would prefer to write about single characters in my original post in detail, yet that section was either ignored or left unread, as you pointed out to me what I'd already written in the original post, as if it wasn't even there .

 

[cultcross]

You both missed my main point or perhaps you simply didn't read the entire post.

I never said that married or partnered people needed to be predominant, but rather, why did the majority of the singles need to have been of the never been married variety, rather than the previously married, but now single type.

'Divorced' is a trope in TV/Movie land for a bitter and cynical character who is distrustful of romance and makes quips about their ex. McCoy, for example, in ST09. It isn't often used as mere backstory. I suspect partly that is a lingering artefact of the stigma attached to it.

 

[Paradise City]

Because you can afford to get married far older given that lifespans are much longer.

Being in Starfleet is very risky and we do see families getting ripped apart because an officer was killed. Life can often be very cheap particularly on starships that have to shoulder cutting edge exploration and defence duties. Most officers posted to ships probably postpone long term relationships until the time in their career when they are posted to a deskjob or leave Starfleet or at least in such senior positions where they are insulated from much of the danger. For example Captain Jellico had a young family.

 

[Kor]

It would be interesting to see how this compares with the demographics of real-life armies and navies, especially any differences between long-term deployments in the field vs. being stationed at a base.

Kor

 

[Greg Cox]

Funny thing: although the bit about McCoy's failed marriage was always intended to be part of the character's backstory, it never actually made it onto the screen until the 2009 movie. Indeed, the one time the original series tried to reference it in "The Way to Eden," the idea was nixed by the producer and/or studio.

(By contrast, let it be noted, Nurse Chapel was allowed to have a long-lost fiancee.)

And, decades later, Joss Whedon famously had to fight Fox to get a married couple included in the cast of FIREFLY.

 

[Six of Twelve]

'Divorced' is a trope in TV/Movie land for a bitter and cynical character who is distrustful of romance and makes quips about their ex. McCoy, for example, in ST09. It isn't often used as mere backstory. I suspect partly that is a lingering artefact of the stigma attached to it.

I'll give TOS a pass for that, considering the times in which it was written, but for TNG onward, it's rather eye-rolling that the currently single are mostly of the "marital blank slate" types of never having been married, rather than the more likely previously been married, be it divorce or widowhood. Surely, modern writers can avoid the bitter divorced trope, especially for those who weren't recently divorced.

 

[cultcross]

Why is it more likely they'd be previously married? If we're going by modern US societal percentages, 60% of crew in their 30s and 40s should be married (currently) and about 20% of the 25 year olds.
Marriage has declined in the recent past, too - those figures were 80 and 65% in 1960. So it's entirely possible marriage is much rarer by Treks era.

Source: fivethirtyeight

 

[sbk1234]

I imagine that for dramatic reasons, a married character implies a more "complete, happy" character, rather than one who is still "searching for completeness." This would make a more interesting character with more directions to grow and change.
Not that most of these were ever main characters or even actually seen, but lots of married people have been mentioned or seen in the background. I suppose TPTB felt this served the notion that marriage still exists and is a normal part of people's lives. Even the ideal goal for many.

One other aspect from a show making POV, the producers may have also felt that audiences would rather be able to fantasize about being with this character or that, rather than knowing that this fictional character is "already taken." Silly, I know, but that's how many people think.

 

[Six of Twelve]

It also makes me wonder if it's simply a matter of more independent, loner types, the ones more likely to have never been married past the age of 35, as being most attracted to spacefaring occupations in the first place, and that such occupations just skew more to long term singledom than those who spent a majority of their lives on planets and whether the demographics for planet dwellers differ significantly from those in spacefaring occupations.

 

[Kor]

One other aspect from a show making POV, the producers may have also felt that audiences would rather be able to fantasize about being with this character or that, rather than knowing that this fictional character is "already taken." Silly, I know, but that's how many people think.

Yes, I think that's a real factor. For example, there was a time when it was important for pop music stars to have an image of being single and "available."

Kor

 

[Greg Cox]

Yes, I think that's a real factor. For example, there was a time when it was important for pop music stars to have an image of being single and "available."

Yep, to the extent that pop stars were pressured to hide any secret marriages or serious relationships.

 

[Ghel]

As an "in universe" reason, I'd argue that Starfleet seems to employ those that are essentially married to the job. Based upon TNG, Starfleet academy is essentially a highly elite and highly competitive college setting. If everyone (or at least most) who enter Starfleet Academy essentially do so in their upper teens or lower twenties, work for about four years and are immediately assigned to starships, there probably isn't much time for marriage or divorce. Any relationship almost immediately becomes a long-distance one. Perhaps those inclined to marry are more likely to be offered or accept ground based or space station based assignments, like the poor Section 31 guy in Into Darkness.

 

[cultcross]

Perhaps those inclined to marry are more likely to be offered or accept ground based or space station based assignments, like the poor Section 31 guy in Into Darkness.

That's a particularly good point - most of the series we've watched have been set on dangerous ships exploring new worlds and fighting dangerous alien enemies. They've not been great places to settle down with the wife, husband, or 4 additional genders, and raise spawn. What would your spouse even do if they weren't also Starfleet? Even on the ED with its families - those kids must have grown up with some interesting psych problems, all the shit that ship went through. But a station or a planet base, that I could see being more conducive to family life.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

The bachelor/ette default is exemplary of a larger problem: characters generally have problems with their family members because of their career in Starfleet. Spocks is in conflict with his father for not going to the Vulcan Science Academy; Picard in conflict with his father and brother for not making wine; Riker was in conflict with his father because they both had mommy issues; Yar was in conflict with her sister because she wouldn't join the gang; Worf was in conflict with his brother for not committing to the Klingon way; ... . A career in Starfleet is constantly being presented as a choice in opposition to long-term personal relationships outside of Starfleet. A marriage would be another problematic relationship, but one that would need to be explored on a more regular basis.

 

[Xotika]

Why is it more likely they'd be previously married? If we're going by modern US societal percentages, 60% of crew in their 30s and 40s should be married (currently) and about 20% of the 25 year olds.
Marriage has declined in the recent past, too - those figures were 80 and 65% in 1960. So it's entirely possible marriage is much rarer by Treks era.

Also marriage age is going higher and higher up. In 19th century you were generally supposed to be married around 20. Now in a lot of countries 30 as the age of first marriage is considered the norm, people concentrate on education/building a career first and then start the family. Probably 3 centuries from now people will have relatively longer lifespans and much improved medical science, so marrying and having first child in your 40th or even later may be commonplace then.

As an "in universe" reason, I'd argue that Starfleet seems to employ those that are essentially married to the job.

Also great point.

 

[JesterFace]

Maybe marriage is not such a big deal in the future... nor as sought after as it is today.

 

[Six of Twelve]

Maybe marriage is not such a big deal in the future... nor as sought after as it is today.

It is possible that marriage will be entirely privatized by then and no longer a legal status as it is today. But I do imagine people will still continue to want some form of long term relationships, in whatever forms they might take.