What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Careful, my feisty young Padawan.
Accepting it, sure, but it's still confusing.
There are unisex names, but most are gendered. A woman named "Michel" would seem like a grammatical mistake to most French speakers. And of course, this applies in many languages.
Sure names can be gendered (see "A Boy Name Sue" ballad as part of that) but, to quote my favorite video game, "If that's your name, that's your name." But, Michael didn't bother me since I had studied the Bible and there's a female Michal in one of the Old Testament stories.
Citation?
My first name is unisex. Never bothered me, never even really gave it much thought.
"Ridiculously" over the top? This is Star Trek. A franchise where a woman and her companion from the Andromeda Galaxy once put on the illusions of being a Halloween castle and black cat just to learn more about humans. A giant black cat that hunted Kirk, Spock and McCoy and threatened them.
You can call things in DSC bad creative choices or stupid or both but "ridiculously over the top"? This is Trek. That would apply to a lot of what we've seen in the franchise since 1964.
And where human woman and men make babies with aliens and where Earth becomes the head honcho in charge of a vast galactic organisation, because humans are oh so special
that may be why we don't see many Andorians in those movies. it's so hot, they're au naturale
I would think that they would want to get warm, they are so cold, they are blue.
You're reading into what's not there. Giving women men's names is something I'm told Bryan Fuller does. It's his thing.
Gosh, are people triggered every time they see the credits for The Waltons or ER - both of which featured female actresses named Michael?
As for being "ridiculously over the top", you must really have struggled with DS9 - a show which has an ending centred around a captain whose conception was orchestrated by god-like aliens to battle demons who can be summoned by chants from a book (a book, incidentally, which has the power to blind someone or to change their appearance).
Yeah, that "trigger" argument...
Everything but the "Monster Maroons" is glorified pajamas. Right up to DS9 when Starfleet gets some style back. The grays are my second favorite uniform.
Discovery doesn't compare with DS9. It isn't supposed to.
And the boxes were ticked so well I didn't even notice.
And the boxes were ticked so well I didn't even notice.
Well, then I wouldn't worry about others who might have an issue with it.
I agree.
And I totally agree that DS9 is more of an ensemble show, which I prefer.
However, the quality of the show has nothing to do with it being "less pc" than current Trek. How exactly do you measure that, anyway? I certainly don't think the quality would have suffered, had they, for example, had a more even number of female vs male characters (both regulars and recurring) or less white characters or whatever the "pc" thing is for you.
As for Burnham always being center, alwas being the best one to fix thngs, talk to people etc. pp (yes, moreso than I just expect because, you know, protagonist) - that is imho because the creators don't trust themselves (their writing etc.)/ their own hero. Which is also why so many characters tell us that she's awesome, instead of trusting the audience to know that from what we see. (I also think that the character they want Michael to be didn't really gel with the premise of her not being The Captain. Which should be fixed next season, even though I probably won't watch.)
How exactly is that a pc thing? Would it be better storytelling if Burnham was a white male, or worse of she was gay? (I'm just assuming that gender, race etc. are what you mean by 'pc', if not, I apologize. For all I know, it's the fact that Book has a cat.) Could we theorize that they have this creative weakness exactly because they feel they have to, for their first female black hero, to spell it out how awesome she is? Possible. I'd need more data than one show. And the issue would still be inadequate writing, not "political correctness", per se.
Last edited:
If p.c = the white (mainly American/British) male is no longer the centre of the universe in storytelling, then explain on another thread why this is oh so bad.
You have likely headed the nail. It's a writer flaw called Telling not Showing, with a side of Mary Sue. Result, the character and the story suffer.
If Burnham is a great Captain it should never be said, only demonstrated from her actions, period. We will be shown how great a Captain she is.
I don't know if she is a great captain.
I do think she is a very flawed protagonist who needs reassurance from people owning to her past trauma. I don't think that has anything to due with race or gender but character background.
I do think she is a very flawed protagonist who needs reassurance from people owning to her past trauma. I don't think that has anything to due with race or gender but character background.
Similar threads
- Locked
