I've continued to respond exactly the same number times you have. And I continue to say the scene needs no explanation in the first place.
It's not the number of times you've responded but how you respond, ignoring what one of the show's writer's said and even contradicting yourself at times. You said it could be completely random that it would be a group of all-women and that it shouldn't imply anything at all, yet you also said it could be evidence of ceremonies that are segregated by sex. I merely wanted to know if there was a reason. You went on a rant that it doesn't matter. You went on a rant that it doesn't matter. One of the writers of Picard, Michael Chabon said that Romulan society is matriarchal and Rhiansuu hint at that as well. Okay, that might be why they portrayed Oh's group as all women. To convey that idea without having to actually say it. An example of show, don't tell. Yet you still insisted that the scene couldn't possibly have any meaning, when it seems like there's evidence that it might.
But you keep going on and on that it doesn't matter, an same gendered group is totally coincidental, etc etc. If a writer is trying to convey a group being random, they'd probably have them be an uneven mix of male and female. If not, it might be for a particular reason related to the story, maybe it's an internal bias on the part of the writer, or maybe it's supposed to reflect society at the time (ex old movies showing US soldiers as being all-male VS. movies set in modern times showing US soldiers being made up of men and women soldiers).
I'm saying you're *wrong*, not that you're incorrectly labeling these things as negative. The pendulum has NOT swung all the way in the other direction.
From where it was in TNG? I'd say it's arguable. I don't recall "bad-ass" women being a focus in TNG. It was male-centric in that regard. We got plenty of typical alpha-male scenes with Riker unbelievably taking down a Klingon officer that's towering over him, Worf being the #1 bad-ass who takes takes out the evil Duras and avenges his mate after she was put in the 'fridge. He's also depicted as a stereotypical male, closed off from his emotions and stoic. Klingon warrior culture itself was heavily male-centric that evoked Japanese bushido. Women were shown early on being soldiers in that S2 Riker episode, but after that it seemed like it was a male-centric warrior culture. And I think Picard was portrayed as a reckless bad ass in his youth, and even got a John McClane episode. And Picard was the patriarchal figure to the entire crew, and who mostly lectured everyone else about the moral thing to do.
Now we have a show where we see a female-centric warrior sect that evokes Japanese bushido. The #1 bad-ass initially is Dahj/Soji who has all the great hand-to-hand combat scenes, and takes all the bad guys in superhero-like fashion. The second one is Elnor, who's a man but was raised by an all-female warrior sect, and who is sensitive and soft at times. And now Picard is now the one being lectured too and put in his place, mostly by women.
The criticism of Picard is nearly universal throughout the show, regardless of gender or other factors, and is therefore obviously not a sign of some political message about women speaking truth to power/Picard.
I never said it was a political message about women "speaking truth to power/Picard." That's you inserting your own assumptions into the conversation and assigning what you think is my intent.
The focus of this series is not exclusively or even primarily on women in traditional male roles or men in traditional female roles or characters designed to break traditional roles altogether.
I never said that was the focus of the series. You're creating strawman arguments.
The discussion was about who was criticizing Picard. Riker being friendlier doesn't magically erase the fact that he was still clearly criticizing Picard. It just makes him less willing to hurt Picard's feelings. And he also didn't actually object to anything Troi said other than her opening line 'You deserved it'', which he clearly objected to for its tone, not its accuracy. Both because if he did object to its accuracy we'd've heard more out of him than just 'Imzadi!' and also because what Troi said was really just a more specific and detailed version of what Riker himself said...
Riker criticized Picard first, not after.
That's interesting. So you're argument that Riker was lecturing Picard in the same way as Troi, but if it happened prior to Picard uncharacteristically giving shit to Soji about her fears, then apparently Riker's lecturing was ineffective whereas Troi's was successful, because after Troi told Picard off, his second round with trying to convince Soji went better.
And I rewatched that scene where Soji is telling Deanna that she can't be sure of anything, her voice is shaking, she's about to cry, and tells Deanna that she can't trust her and especially not Picard, and then Picard interrupts and is basically and insensitive asshole to her. Holy shit was that out of character for him, whether it be TNG Picard or PIC Picard.
