"Stigma": A Harbinger of the Death of Trek

the problem is that is what you believe as far as what the
episode wasnt about.
even yourself shawn admitted that the publicity surrounding the episode talked about aid awareness.
frankly it was made under a directive by viacom itself
story here .


and it can be questioned whether aids still does carry some type of stigma considering how the aids epidemic in africa has been treated and i dont want to start a debate on gays but considering the polls on gay marriage ect i dont see how it can be said a vast majority of the population is accepting of homosexuality.

 

That, and hordes of the Vulcans in ENT tend to be snobbish bastards

 

we have seen snobbish bastard vulcans before enterprise.

 

Tuvok comes to mind. Not to mention what's his name from DS9 that tried to show Sisko up at baseball. That guy made Soval seem positively fluffy by comparison.

 

^
Captain Solok was the one from "Take Me Out To The Holosuite." DS9's Vulcans included manipulative Maquis, psychopathic killers and plenty of just plain jerks.

Tuvok, by contrast, was probably the last likeable Vulcan - the only one of any prominence, anyway. Tim Russ really gave a lot of gravitas and dignitas to the role, despite basically being shafted to window dressing for most of VOY's run, which was a shame.

 

Maybe it was just how he treated Neelix then, but I always took him for snobby.

 

Eh, you can't blame a guy - even a green-blooded Vulcan - for finding Neelix irritating, can you?

(hopes nobody asks if that is the case then why the hell I have a Talaxian avatar...)

I think Tuvok could be pretty sympathetic - "Gravity" comes to mind as having the character deal with the same themes of sexual repression that characterised the excellent TOS episode, "This Side of Paradise."

For obvious reasons, this was a poignant aspect of the Vulcan psyche that Blalock's T'Pol, even at her best, never got.

 

If you say so. I'll have to disagree with you there.

 

You're missing the point here. If JB had started the post by saying, "I disagree. I think that the episode was about AIDS awareness and here's why, and here's why it's still important..." I would have no problem with that but at this point in the discussion, we weren't discussing the merits of AIDS awreness, we were discussing the merits of the actual subject of the episode which was discrimination against people with a disease because the primary way of contracting the disease is behavior that society finds objectional/abherrant.

Whether or not this episode was hyped as an AIDS awareness episode is irrelavent, because that's that's not what it was about. His comments were based on premise that it was indeed an AIDS awareness episode and that we were wrong for thinking that AIDS awareness wasn't important. No. What was said was that the discrimination issue (which, again, was what this ep. was about) was 20 years too late and wasn't topical at all and that this was an indication of how outdated Trek was. As I said, commenting on what he thought we had said without actually reading the post.

Wow,talk about a hit and run, posting, eh? What exactly do you mean by this? Do you have any idea of the global effort that has been undertaken by governemtal and Non-Profit organiations around the world to educate the people of Africa (south of the Sahara) about the dangers of HIV/AIDS and all of the efforts that have been done as far as distribution of condoms is concerned? The AIDS problem in Africa is a problem of their own making, not anyone else's. The men refuse to use condoms and they refuse to remain monogamous. The reason why is simple: they don't have cable! Maybe that's too simple so I'll explain.

What you find in countries with incredibly high birth rates and high infant mortality rates and short life expetancy is universal: poverty. When you're completely impoverished, all you have for entertainment is sex. The reason why these people are compltetly impoverished is because they live in countries that have ass-backward corrupt governments that don't give two shits about the people. And I'm not just pulling this out of my hat either. I learned about this in both my Environmental Science and a Poli Sci course. So, in the end, who's fault is the AIDS epidemic in Africa, really?

Wow! 2 hit and runs in the same sentence. No offense, but you're way off base here. I'm very accepting of homosexuality but I am not in favor of gay marriage (I'm in favor of Civil Unions, though) and you'll find that pretty much across the board with those who are against gay marriage. There is only a slight minority of people who are against gay marriage because of their own personal bigotry. I'm not going to get into the reasons why even people who are accepting of homosexuals have a problem with gay marriage because this is not the forum for that discussion but I will say that my positon changed after A.) I was married and B.) After I became more educated on the issue myself.

-Shawn

 

That's the irony--A Trek series (that is part of a franchise that once addressed the issues of the day on a regular basis) is mandated to do an episode about a social issue.*

*Credit to Sam Cogley's review of this episode for pointing that out first.

One can look at this episode as either being an allegory to AIDs or the discrimination of having a disease with a stigma. Either way you slice it, it's such a non-issue as of 2003 when this first aired. It's like the idiot plot that DeadPoet mentioned a while ago, not unlike the sequel to "The Princess Diaries" where everything got wrapped up by the main character making a speech about Shit We Already Knew(TM). Not a bad episode (Particularly not for that season), but the story didn't need telling.

In the writer's defense, they didn't take to easy way out of doing this with a throw-away Vulcan/Andorian/(insert alien culture character), so they could forget about it. Not that it would have made much difference for all the effects T'Pol showed from then on out, but it was there.

Amen to that. Out of all the Voyager episode I have saved to DVD (Eight in all) about five or six of them are Tuvok-centric...not so much because of good writing (As episodes such as "Unity" and "Resurrection" are ones I hope I never have to sit through again, Tim Russ fan or not), but because of good acting.

With all respect, what other reason *would* someone be against gay marriage except for bigotry? I'm not asking so I can bitch you out later for it (as this isn't the place to do it), I'm just...curious. It's not like us breeders haven't fucked up the idea of marriage with people divorcing over issues liek money or because the sex is no longer good (and no one's put much effort into fixing what easily surmountable issues).

 

CaptainHawk1, you and I have discussed this via PM specifically so that this thread would not be derailed. I'll write here what I wrote you: yes, the episode was about discrimination. Because the most immediate parallel that will come to people's mind is AIDS, it's little wonder that people see the message as being one about AIDS and awareness.

Every fiber of my anthropologist's heart wants to respond to your post about poverty in Africa (let's just say it doesn't exactly boil down as simply as implied), but that's pretty far from where we started here. It's a theory that would do wonderfully in TNZ, however (and I'm being serious).

 

Yes, I admit that I oversimplified the poverty issue and its history and root causes are much more complex than I mentioned, but the immediate issues that they face are exactly as I stated them. However, you are correct that this thread is not the place for this discussion.

Moving along.

-Shawn

 

This is a nice quote.

I liked Stigma, and I think there were some things wrong with Enterprise, but Stigma wasn't one of them. As others have mentioned HIV/AIDS is still an issue (even in the Western world), as well as intollerance.

More over like good Trek, it showed people caring about each other and putting themselves on the line for a friend. (That also will never be old and tired.)

Lastly, it shows some continuity between episodes (something Enterprise didn't always pull off well, especially in season 4).

 

As I haven't really dealt with this issue in the thread (though others have at length), I have no problem with "Stigma's" message, unlike the qualms I have concerning "Dear Doctor." Obvious, maybe, but great literature and even pretty good TV episodes have been made around morals even more patently obvious.

But a good message does not a good episode make, and the writing and acting is simply far too sloppy for my tastes.

 

There's also that whole preaching to the choir thing.

 

^
Bingo. The majority of trek fans, I assume, are open-minded and non judgmental. Given the nature of show, it's pretty hard *not* to be, so to me, TPTB miught as well done an episode on the sun rising each day, it's pretty much the same message.

 

Since even the worst of Trek was 1,000 better than the average "sitcom", I'll still enjoy the episodes, if not for the primary message, then at least for the underlying stories. Okay, so the Stigma theme of AIDS was a bit heavy handed. But it was interesting, and more than that, I liked how the Vulcan doctor spoke out on her behalf at the risk of his own reputation. And the whole subplot of Phlox's wife chasing after Trip (and then finding out that Phlox was actually thinking the whole idea was very cool) was precious. It really made me smirk. Plus there were several other little moral dilemmas/messages showing up, particularly concerning the issue of doctor/patient confidentiality and whether or not he was supposed to respect this where his captain was concerned.

 

I didn't find the twist about Phlox approving of his wife going after Trip surprising in the least; actually, the main surprise was that it is a surprise to the characters and apparently meant as one to the audience.

He's polygynous. His wives are polyandrous. Having Trip enter the pool of his mutual polygamous web wouldn't disturb him in the least.

Aside from that, most of the gags were pretty cheesy and low-brow. I'll admit there's a germ of a good plot in here - Phlox encouraging Trip to go with his wife but Trip refusing out of his old-fashioned human decency and monogamous views - but it was handled pretty badly.

 

anna you have read tnz, all trek fans are open minded??

as for the two messages.
for the trip one i think it was more that in the end trip didnt exactly disaprove. i mean he is still friends with phlox and still respects himself.
it was more that their life style wasnt for him.
and i think that in the end phlox and his wife saw this and respected the choice .

and nah i wasnt suprised that phlox was this way.
though in dear doctor there is some stuff about denobulan mating season where it sounds like some form of conflict might take place so matter denobulan males are only possesive at certain times.



and i still believe to a degree there is still a stigma about aids that below have bought this on themselves when the truth is often far more complicated.

 

I think there is still a stigma about AIDS, albeit that has changed over the years. Now the thing that's kind of a stigma in our society is being ignorant about AIDS. In that light, it's interesting that the Vulcan unwillingness to talk about the issue of T'Pol's mental health and melding in general is central to this episode. The problem for me was put best by DeafPoet:

So true!

In the 80s and 90s I remember there being all kinds of "message" shows about how to overcome the stigma of AIDS. At this point we know what Trek's message on this is going to be, right? As others have mentioned it's preaching to the choir at this point. And if we look at the discrimination side of the episode, I think TNG did this better in an episode I didn't even like, The Outcast. I'm all for the message, but I would have liked it to have been told more interestingly!