• 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!

Why do people dislike The Outcast?

Status
Not open for further replies.
But why should Soren be played by a man? She wasn't a hermaphrodite after all.
I don't remember. When Soren talks about human sexual organs did that mean she doesn't have those either.

Or did she ask because she's got them (and the others don't) and is horny/ curious how a species with gender uses them?
 
But why should Soren be played by a man?

Because it was the late 80s/early 90s and by then when was there ever a romantic kiss between two men? It drives home the point that in the future, Earth is not only practicing tolerance, but that humanity isn't limited by such social taboos anymore -- or perhaps even definitions as we know them. That's quite utopian. If Frakes' intention was to match the Kirk/Uhura multiracial kiss, the opportunity was missed by turning a same-sex romance into your usual heterosexual tale. If Uhura was replaced by Yeoman Rand, would the episode be remembered today?

Since Soren is played by a female, it blunts the episode's intended commentary, reducing all the gender politics back down to "Man Fights For Woman," which is something that was fairly common in Trek before and well-after this episode -- in other words, safe territory, and that contradicts the majority of the episode, which was intended to make the viewer squirm a little and question society.

(I also have to admit: if Soren was played by a male but the episode progressed as is, it would've been extremely great to see super-warrior Worf lending a hand to his good friend and fellow he-man Riker try to save Soren, also showing that Worf was more concerned about helping a friend than about sexuality)
 
I don't have an issue with the allegory...but the episode lacks a sense of urgency, and the relationship is not believable or interesting.

RAMA
 
People seem to be suggesting that in the future "utopia", we will all be bisexual in order to show how enlightened and we are. Riker was a ladies man and that was well established, to have him snogging a man would just go against his character. The writers could have got around this by introducing a "previously unseen head of department", or similar, and have him fall in love with one of the planets inhabitants.

One does not have to be bisexual in order to be enlightened and inclusive of all. And by "all" I mean heterosexual people too.
 
People seem to be suggesting that in the future "utopia", we will all be bisexual in order to show how enlightened and we are. Riker was a ladies man and that was well established, to have him snogging a man would just go against his character. The writers could have got around this by introducing a "previously unseen head of department", or similar, and have him fall in love with one of the planets inhabitants.

One does not have to be bisexual in order to be enlightened and inclusive of all. And by "all" I mean heterosexual people too.

This is a good point. Inclusive/enlightened does not mean you'll bonk anything. It just means you're accepting of those that will :techman:
 
I don't hate the episode. It just makes me feel really depressed when it ends, because it's sad and moving and a little Outer Limits style creepy. So I don't like watching it, but I don't hate the episode. I think it's actually a really good episode.
 
I don't hate the episode. It just makes me feel really depressed when it ends, because it's sad and moving and a little Outer Limits style creepy. So I don't like watching it, but I don't hate the episode. I think it's actually a really good episode.
It is really bad form to dig up a thread that is 5+ years old. If you want to talk about this episode, start a new thread. I'm closing this one.
 
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