Women Warriors? NEVER!!!

[Nerys Ghemor]

What does sex drive have to do with erections?

You learn something new every day...

What I think Timo might be getting at is that for us guys it's not always entirely voluntary either way, sometimes things don't work when everything else wants to and sometimes they do work when you don't want them to.

Having an erection does not necessarily mean that a man is sexually excited.

A common misconception is that it is impossible to rape a man since an erection supposedly implies consent, simply not realising that men don't have an internal "Up/Down" switch.

Very, VERY true. Even arousal is involuntary and does not indicate that the mind wants what the body does.

And if I'm correct, even fear can cause an erection.

 

[Marie1]

Jem'Hadar women.
We bring the whoopin'
You bring the a$$...



Now continue with your serious discussion, if you wish...

 

[Rush Limborg]

My $0.02:

While there are, granted, precious few honest-to-goodness "Woman Warriors" in Trek, seriously--I think it would be offensive to imply that, somehow, if a show doesn't show a lot the girls beat the crap outta bad guys, somehow there's something wrong with that girl's confidence, or that she's weak.

There are other kinds of strength, folks. There are different ways of showing strength than going all-out agressive. And I think Star Trek illustrates this quite nicely.

Take Ezri Dax. Though we do see her in battle, still, I hardly think it's sexist to show in the same ep that she's unable to knock down a Jem'Hadar. To the contrary, she's a very strong girl--just in other ways.

Case in point, take "Strange Bedfellows", when she faces Weyoun 7, showing no fear, saying in a dry, contemptuous tone, "If you want to end the war, why don't you convince the Founders to surrender?"

Now...would you all have preferred it if, instead of having Worf snap Weyoun's neck for the sexist remark about Ezri's feeling for Bashir, Ezri would have beaten him up--as, I think, Jadzia might have?

I know I wouldn't have liked it--because, as far as I'm concerned (and I'm no girl, but still...), to show all positive, role-model female characters as steryotypical "tomboys" is an old, overused plot device that basically could well result in some women being ashamed of their lack of, for lack of a better term, masculinity.

Is this why so many people seem to enjoy dissing Ezri--because her strengths lie in areas other than beating guys up?



And that's the memo.

 

[DevilEyes]

You learn something new every day...

What I think Timo might be getting at is that for us guys it's not always entirely voluntary either way, sometimes things don't work when everything else wants to and sometimes they do work when you don't want them to.

Having an erection does not necessarily mean that a man is sexually excited.

A common misconception is that it is impossible to rape a man since an erection supposedly implies consent, simply not realising that men don't have an internal "Up/Down" switch.

Very, VERY true. Even arousal is involuntary and does not indicate that the mind wants what the body does.

And if I'm correct, even fear can cause an erection.

But the mind and the body cannot be completely separated. Having a body that your mind can't completely control would be a weakness for a warrior race like the Jem 'Hadar. And as much as one can control the body through the force of mind, the body can also affect the mind and create certain problems, desires and interests. Having a physical capacity for experiencing a sex drive is likely to have profound psychological effects. Why would you want to engineer perfect warriors with such a potentially serious weakness that would interfere with their single-mindedness?

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

With the Jem'Hadar, that makes sense. I was speaking of human men.

 

[Marie1]

Yeah, Jem'Hadar have freakish control over their minds- they need it for shrouding, which is why they can't do battle and shroud at the same time- as they need to empty their minds to focus on maintaining the shroud...

As long as they have White, I'd imagine the Jem'Hadar don't have as many involuntary responses as we do...
And humans have a hard time with that, we can't always control what the responses of our bodies will be, which I think is in part why the victims of rape sometimes feel guilt.

 

[Timo]

I think this little line of speculation is getting overtly complicated. The original idea was perfectly simple: raping is a good way to terrorize people, so the Jem'Hadar might be equipped with the necessary tools. They are a terrorizing force at least as much as they are a fighting force, after all - their main purpose is to keep Dominion subjects from rebelling, and they do that through fear. If they did that solely through killing, the Dominion would soon run out of subjects!

It would make no sense, then, to make these "necessary tools" dependent on something as fickle as a sex drive. The Founders would simply install an appropriate muscle that is completely under conscious control, not the silly blood bladder thing that hangs between the legs of most terrestrial males (and presumably most Star Trek humanoid males, too).

I mean, the Founders could equip their warriors with military-standard, stainless steel strap-ons, too - just like they equip them with fearsome-looking knives and bayonets since the Jem'Hadar bodies don't naturally feature tusks or fangs. But strap-ons would probably be a matter of ridicule, whereas biological-looking raping tools would create the desired frightening associations with "naturally occurring" rape.

The concept of the Jem'Hadar as tools of fear rather than destruction is quite inherent in the Jem'Hadar bodies already, even if the writers didn't completely understand this when they created the warrior species. The Jem'Hadar are capable of invisibility - except when in combat. They always become visible when they need to do combat. That's perfect for terror troops, because it's impossible to be certain that a Jem'Hadar is not standing behind your shoulder right now, listening carefully to your words of dissent or treason. But it's more or less useless for a field army. So, bioengineering of this sort would be perfectly matched by bioengineering of certain other fear-inducing sorts...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[captcalhoun]

there's better ways to terrorise people than raping women (or men)

 

[Timo]

Perhaps, and I wasn't intent on turning this into a hobbyhorse or anything - it was just a line of speculation, sparkled by the question "if there aren't Jem'Hadar women, are there any Jem'Hadar men?".

But why should the Founders neglect to introduce yet another good way to terrorize, when it costs them very little?

Timo Saloniemi