Women and Gender Politics in Star Trek

[pepperlandgirl]

I love Star Trek. I remember watching on episodes on Saturday afternoons when there was nothing else on. One of the first movies I remember seeing--and requesting many many times--was Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. But it wasn't until a few years ago when I really got into the show. You see, I was watching Star Trek V: The Final Frontier with the RiffTrax with gigglesthebloody and she looked at me and said, "Jesus Christ, why is anybody a fan of Star Trek?" And then I realized that she was of a very tender age (17 or 18) and she had never been exposed to the greatness of the series. So, we started watching it together.

And because we share a brain, we both fell in love with the show and became instant, unapologetic, fangirls. Every episode was a new discovery of wonderful awesomeness. Every witty piece of dialogue, every smirk from Shatner, every roll of Bones' eyes, became something cherished. My point is that we watched Star Trek without any real expectations, but also from a completely 21st century perspective. On the one hand, this was a blessing. It's amazing to discover and experience something truly wonderful when you're old enough to appreciate it. On the other hand, it's a bit of a curse, as well. Because while there are some great things about the show, there are some truly cringe-worthy and awful moments as well. And no, I'm not talking about Plato's Stepchildren (but I am talking about Spock's Brain eventually).

For me, the worst moments are always, always, always a result of gender politics. The way women are treated on the show is even more startling to my sensibilities because the show can be so completely over the top when it preaches about ending racism and moving beyond that to a more egalitarian society. In Day of the Dove, they don't even try to be subtle about their preaching. And Balance of Terror really only holds together so well because there is the tension on the bridge over the fact that Vulcans and Romulans are clearly related. And it's not just issues of race. Obviously Star Trek covered a lot of ground in a pretty forward-thinking, even idealistic way. Yet, for all of that, they couldn't escape their own context. It was all well and good to preach about racial equality, but there were still apparently only two minorities on the entire ship. And though there was a woman on the bridge, ultimately, Star Trek has a very, very dim view of women that can be extremely difficult to ignore or reconcile with my overall love for the show.

I don't believe that Gene Roddenberry was necessarily the source of the misogynistic views (let's call it what it is). Or at least, not the only source. In The Cage, the first officer was played by Majel Barrett (Roddenberry). Not only was she hot, but she was also pretty damned awesome. Furthermore, all the women wore pants and acted like what I imagine people in an actual military act like. But then, apparently, Starfleet regressed about 200 years in about 2 decades. I'm guessing that when Roddenberry was told to make some changes, that was on the list (though I do not know for sure and hope that anybody more knowledgable than me will clarify). On the other hand, a woman as a first officer (wearing pants) might just be part of the strange dynamic that is prevalent throughout the show. Namely, that while the series will pay lipservice to female empowerment, ultimately, the writers/directors/producers could never, ever envision such a thing, and thus, could not write about it in a series that takes place two centuries into the future.

I don't want to be too hard on them for this. They are a product of their time. But that gets back to my basic problem of trying to deal with the fact that I love the show while I find certain elements (and episodes) amazingly distasteful and insulting. The worst, by far, is Space Seed.

I honestly do not know what to make of Space Seed. Clearly, Khan is a very bad guy and we are not supposed to find him sympathetic. I mean, when the first thing a character does is grab the throat of Dr. McCoy, you know that he's probably not a good guy. To that end, we're probably not supposed to find him at all attractive, reasonable, or sane. That's not a problem for me. And yet...and yet...Lt. Marla McGivers clearly thought there was something pretty special about him. Almost immediately, the dynamic between them became something very frightening and abusive. But the show never gives you any reason to think his actual actions are wrong. In order for the plot to work, Marla needs to fall in love with him, right? It's like the writers were trying to convey "This is how you woo a woman" not "This is how you manipulate and abuse a woman into being your servant." Furthermore, her devotion/love is never truly questioned. There's never a moment where it seems like maybe she could take a step back. To me, the tone throughout the episode is one of acceptance, ie, everybody "accepts" that this is how you should treat a woman, and this is how you keep a woman. Added to that creepiness is the fact that she is completely and utterly hollow. As a character, it's not even fair to call her two-dimensional. But then, what woman on Star Trek is three dimensional? I wish the answer to that was "Uhura," but she's not. Not really.

Spock's Brain is even worse. God, so much worse. First, characterizing the women of givers of "pleasure and pain." As though a woman only has those two functions. She's good to have around when you can fuck her, otherwise she's just a pain. Second, the men (and Scottie in particular) are absolutely, utterly confused by the fact that they have this advanced civilization, but not a man in sight! In fact, Scotty keeps asking who is responsible for it and where are the men. I guess in all their travels, they never came across a competant female engineer? Third, the plot demands that the characters be idiots, because of course, that is the motive to steal the best brain in Starfleet. So of course it's got to be a place full of the women-folk with nary a man in sight. Because if the had a man--a real man--they wouldn't need Spock's brain to keep order! Spock, who isn't just brilliant with a mind like a computer, but is also a true alpha male. Emotionally unavailable, supernaturally strong, uninterested in women (99% of the time), loyal to his captain, clever, musically gifted, quick on his feet Spock. In some ways, he's even more perfect than Kirk, and Kirk, of course, is Starfleet's golden boy. One woman or one thousand women--it doesn't matter. What each one needs in order to be functional and not retarded ("Brain and brain! What is brain?") is a good, strong alpha male to take care of her.

The more time I spend writing this, the more examples occur to me. Wolf in the Fold is all about how far men are driven by their (justifiable) hatred of women. After all, that's why they thought Scotty was capable of cold-blooded murder. And of course, perhaps most outrageous of all is The Enemy Within. Kirk is split into his agressive id and his cool, compassionate Super Ego. Id!Kirk sees Yeoman Rand and immediately has to have her. He attacks her, attempts to rape her, and in as she struggles to get away, she scratches his face. Clearly, the woman was terrified that her captain was attacking her. Later, the woman apologizes and stumbles all over herself to assure him that she would never, ever tell anybody what happened to her.

Um, what?

Either the Federation refuses to prosecute high-ranking officials who are accused of crimes like rape, or rather, more likely given her actual dialogue, she's a good woman who knows her place.

RAND: Then he kissed me and he said that we, that he was the Captain and he could order me. I didn't know what to do. When you mentioned the feelings we'd been hiding, and you started talking about us.
KIRK: Us?
RAND: Well, he is the captain. I couldn't just. You started hurting me. I had to fight you, and scratch your face.
KIRK: Yeoman, look at me. Look at me, look at my face. Are there any scratches?
RAND: I was sure I scratched you. I was frightened. Maybe
KIRK: Yeoman. I was in my room. It wasn't me.
RAND: Sir, Fisher saw you, too.
KIRK: Fisher saw?
RAND: If it hadn't been. I can understand. I don't want to get you into trouble. I wouldn't have even mentioned it!

And now it's been like 4 hours since I started this OP and I think I've forgotten the main point. I know there's nothing to be done about it now, 40 years after the fact. And even the liberal, hippy-dippy ST:TNG had a few awkward situations (Troi's bodysuit, I'm looking at you). But it is so pervasive throughout the series, and even plot points, that sometimes it makes me wonder if the awesome truly outweighs the bad.

[Laughing Lagomorph]

Are you talking about only the Original Series, or the entire franchise?

Because I agree watching it now the Original Series is clearly a product of the time it was created, the late 1960s. And the later series also have issues, I mean Voyager tried to break new ground by having a female captain and then put Jeri Ryan in that bodysuit.

I'm genuinely curious how the new movie continuity is going to do in this regard. I think they made a good start by giving Uhura a much more central role than she had in TOS, now I would like to see her DO stuff, maybe involving command situations, or at least more action than just opening a hailing frequency or watching the guys beat the crap out of each other.

(It's been a long time since I've seen it and I'm hardly going to defend what is widely regarded as one of the worst episodes in franchise history but I seem to remember the reason no one could believe the women in "Spock's Brain" built the society they lived in is that absent the influence of the Learning Helmet or whatever it was they clearly weren't smart enough to have done so. This wasn't because they were women per se but because of the way their society had evolved...the men on the surface of the planet clearly couldn't have done so either.)

[Guizmeaux]

But... Janeway?

Maybe she was the maternally-influenced captain of a ship somewhere out in East Jesus, but she had no problem making hard decisions (sometimes). I really liked her as a strong female character, and that's coming from a man who likes competent, capable women who don't simper at the sight of someone who can take responsibility from them.

Also B'Elanna Torres.

Or were you just talking about ST:TOS?

[What Exit?]

First, great op and you have the bulk of a front page article here that should bring in some traffic.

A few comments:
It was not the writers that could not foresee a future of equal rights. Many of the writers were top notch Sci Fi writers that could envision such a future. It was producers and networks guys especially that could or did not want to. They decided the audience at home would not accept such ideas.

As to Marla, my recollection is that while she was a weak 60s character, in 60s terms it made some sense. She was apparently supposed to really be a fan-girl of Khan or at least what Khan represented. She turned at his appearance and attention into a semi-brainless groupie.

Your summary, I get your point, but as far as the 60s go Star Trek was sadly ahead of the curve. Only Emma Peel of the Avengers and Agent 99 of Get Smart were more empowered on TV in the 60s than Uhura. Neither was female and black. Marlo Thomas as That Girl was still not up to Uhura's level of competence and responsibility. It was not until Mary Tyler Moore played Mary Richards that a truly independent woman appeared in series TV as a full time cast member or better yet in her case, the star.

BTW: I would welcome you incorporating any of this post as a counter-point to your article if you move this to the front page.

[pepperlandgirl]

Are you talking about only the Original Series, or the entire franchise?

Just TOS. I am really not familiar with the entire franchise. Guizmeaux, I've never seen Voyager. My ST knowledge basically covers TOS, the movies, and a bit of Next Gen. But I don't want to limit the discussion to TOS by any means!

Because I agree watching it now the Original Series is clearly a product of the time it was created, the late 1960s. And the later series also have issues, I mean Voyager tried to break new ground by having a female captain and then put Jeri Ryan in that bodysuit.

Exactly. There's like this weird tension (in TOS and TNG too) between wanting to break new ground and being utterly incapable of such a feat. I think What Exit?'s point about the writers wanting one thing and the network execs wanting another thing would go some way in explaining that tension. Of course, that reflects back something pretty horrible on society. "Well, we COULD make women completely equal and even leaders on the ship, but then nobody would watch."

I'm genuinely curious how the new movie continuity is going to do in this regard. I think they made a good start by giving Uhura a much more central role than she had in TOS, now I would like to see her DO stuff, maybe involving command situations, or at least more action than just opening a hailing frequency or watching the guys beat the crap out of each other.

I don't know if they'll use Uhura the way they should, but I am reasonably confident that we'll at least not get all the weird subtext about how women are good for A)screwing and B) cooking and C) answering the phone, because they are weak, and generally stupid.

(It's been a long time since I've seen it and I'm hardly going to defend what is widely regarded as one of the worst episodes in franchise history but I seem to remember the reason no one could believe the women in "Spock's Brain" built the society they lived in is that absent the influence of the Learning Helmet or whatever it was they clearly weren't smart enough to have done so. This wasn't because they were women per se but because of the way their society had evolved...the men on the surface of the planet clearly couldn't have done so either.)

Yes, they were confused about the situation because clearly the culture (and the ability to steal a brain!) seemed beyond them. But it seemed to me that Scotty (at least) was more troubled by the fact that they were a bunch of women with no obvious leader (the woman who identified herself as the leader was dismissed by them).

[dread pirate jimbo]

To WhatExit's point about the network's meddling, I have heard from a number of sources that one of the loudest criticisms from the test audience of the original pilot, "The Cage," was that it was not credible to have a female first officer. "What does that uppity woman think she's doing?!?" I believe the exact word used, in fact, was "uppity." Apparently, the most vociferous protests against Number One actually came from the women in the audience (but that might just be spin from the Powers That Be). So when they went back to the drawing board for the second pilot, they got rid of the female first officer and turned the female crew members into a) receptionists, b) nurses, or c) science specialists that Kirk could nail. Speaking as a boy who grew up in the 70s and 80s with the understanding that anyone could go ahead and do anything they wanted with their lives, regardless of gender, the whole notion that people in the 60s were not ready for a female authority figure still kinda blows my mind, as it seems to me fairly self evident that this was a stupid, stupid way of presenting the distant future. Suffice it to say, Uhura's presence on the bridge was nevertheless groundbreaking -- having a female on the bridge, in the chain of command, acting all competent and stuff, was a big deal for 1966, as was having a black person in the chain of command AND a Japanese person AND!! a pointy-eared space alien (apparently this was one of the other major problems the network voiced about the show; they had to lose the Satanic-looking guy. Roddenberry drew the line there and insisted that the Spock character remain, and, in fact, promoted him to first officer from science officer, in an effort to push the racial diversity envelope once the gender diversity door had been slammed shut on him). I suspect that all these up-front machinations coloured the entire approach the series writers took for the remainder of the show -- even the series finale, "Turnabout Intruder," featured a woman bent on revenge who specifically notes at one point that "your world of starship captains doesn't admit women," which is why she had to steal Kirk's body to become one. The series imposed a glass ceiling and mostly stuck to it (although they still managed to shoehorn "The Cage" back into the series, complete with the female first officer, with the two-part "The Menagerie," so it still wound up out there in the Trekkie consciousness).

I have heard a story told by Nichelle Nichols on several occasions that she was considering quitting the series after the first season and was specifically forbidden from doing so by none other thean Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. who explained to her that every week, her character presented a strong, talented black woman onscreen which served as an inspiration to countless others. In fact, after becoming a recruiter for NASA int eh late 70s, Nichelle was named NASA's Woman of the Year for increasing their female recruits by more than tenfold in less than six months -- Mae Jemison, the first African-American woman to travel to outer space, credits the character of Uhura for inspiring her to reach for that goal.

Twenty years later, we see a revised universe in TNG, DS9, and Voyager where women can be captains and, frankly, it is about time. In some cases, be it Troi or Seven Of Nine or T'Pol in Enterprise, the costumes remained tight and sexy, but again, I believe this was a conceit to the fanboys in the audience and not so much a specific plan by the writers or creative team to keep women in their place -- Voyager didn't really take off as a series until the forth year, when Seven showed up, perhaps not coincidentally.

So, yes, there are things about the way gender roles have been portrayed in the series that have been genuinely cringe-worthy, especially early on. But I would also say, within the general context of what they were trying to do, and in the era in which they were doing it, they tended to be way ahead of the curve. In that respect, I think the series may have done a world of good in advancing feminism, despite how dated it looks from our point of view 40 years after the fact.

[Zsofia]

It bugs me every time poor Yeoman Rand is on screen - what the hell is her job, exactly? To be another pair of legs? Because I like her, and they give her some pretty good parts sometimes, but what is she supposed to wake up in the morning and do? Get the coffee?

ETA - and while the women are pretty much always in cringe-worthy outfits in every Star Trek series, at least in TOS Kirk is clearly supposed to be a certain amount of eye-candy himself (and later I guess Chekov, but he never did it for me.)

[OtakuLoki]

I think that the points that Pepper raises are all valid. The excuse/explanation that many Star Trek scripts and even the show's bible were heavily edited by the network against Roddenberry's desires is true, but only shifts the blame a bit. I think that in the end it has to be accepted that for all that Star Trek was forward-looking, it remains a product of its times. Even the later iterations within the franchise.

Then there's the fact that Roddenberry's original description of Star Trek was that it would be Wagon Train to the Stars reveals that for all there were some very forward-looking elements in his idea, I think there were also many that were based on the American fascination with the frontier and frontier society. And if you're taking taking your model from that period of time, it's going to be easy for period attitudes to leak through - esp. when those period attitudes are not that far from those of the current day.

I think a lot of the shows that are viewed as rightly having been ground-breaking for their time will show similar flaws to modern eyes.

[gigglesthebloody]

I think the writers did try to make it look like the women were competent officers occasionally (I mean, they do take over stations like Sulu's and Chekov's and being a pilot and a navigator has to take some serious skill). But most of the time in away teams or things like that the women were used as weak incompetent characters that make things more difficult for Kirk or were there as love interests for Chekov, or Scotty, or McCoy. (this bit is part of a convo between Pepper and I. She says she plans on expanding on it more later on tonight.)

Also, Uhura did take the conn occasionally, but when she stands up her ass hangs out of her skirt sooooo, yeah.

God, that character in Shore Leave was the worst. The princess get up and the desire to be swept off of her feet by Don Juan? ffs.

[What Exit?]

It bugs me every time poor Yeoman Rand is on screen - what the hell is her job, exactly? To be another pair of legs? Because I like her, and they give her some pretty good parts sometimes, but what is she supposed to wake up in the morning and do? Get the coffee?

ETA - and while the women are pretty much always in cringe-worthy outfits in every Star Trek series, at least in TOS Kirk is clearly supposed to be a certain amount of eye-candy himself (and later I guess Chekov, but he never did it for me.)

Well in partial defense, a Yeoman is real rate in the Navy. It is what is referred to as pencil pusher. The are effectively secretarial in nature. Knowing Kirk he probably did pick a hot blond as his primary Yeoman. In the Navy of today it is a coed position but as late as 1990 it was still overwhelmingly a male rate and on warships all male.

There really is an entire rate devoted to paper work and paper chasing and getting the Captain and other officers to sign off on logs and reports and other boring minutia. They would bring coffee and even food to the Captain if needed.

[OtakuLoki]

Jim, but that contrasts, poorly, with Roddenberry's stated claim that there were no enlisted members of StarFleet - that everyone was an officer. Which gets us back to Yeoman Rand - who is either an officer in a complete dead-end position, or an enlisted member, in officially all officer corps StarFleet. Second-class citizen, in either case, and it sure looks like it's based on gender roles.

[Chimera]

Please don't make me go all Skald like by speaking about the Unspeakable Series (begins with a 'V') in positive tones.

Yes, TOS is incredibly sexist. No, the later series have not completely lost that bent, even with one failed attempt at a strong female Captain.

Unfortunately, I think that all too often, the need to show someone as "strong" means that they have to be shown as being an asshole. In female characters, that then falls back to a certain word used for unpleasant females. Hopefully they will someday learn how to write strong female characters who do not need to act like that in order to be perceived as strong.

[pepperlandgirl]

Well in partial defense, a Yeoman is real rate in the Navy. It is what is referred to as pencil pusher. The are effectively secretarial in nature. Knowing Kirk he probably did pick a hot blond as his primary Yeoman. In the Navy of today it is a coed position but as late as 1990 it was still overwhelmingly a male rate and on warships all male.

Kirk made it pretty clear in The Naked Time that she was assigned to him. Unfortunately, the only place I can find online with full transcripts aren't actually full transcripts. But he asks why they assigned a beautiful woman to him, and then goes on to say that Spock can notice her but he can't because he's the captain, etc.

Anyway, gigglesthebloody and I were talking about this issue and I think I finally articulated what I was attempting to. Generally, there are two types of disposable characters. The first is the "Ensign Ricky" type. He's the red shirt who dies in order to demonstrate that the mission is dangerous. It's unfortunate, and Kirk always appears devastated when they do die, but they're clearly part of security or engineering and signed up for a dangerous job but are probably just grunts. When you see a woman on the ship, she actually has a title outside of engineering and security. Which makes me feel like the implication is that, of course, women would never be engineers. But that's not actually what I'm getting at here.

When we meet a character like Dr. Noel in Dagger of the Mind, we are told she's a professional, an educated doctor, and the "best woman" for the job. Marla, for what it's worth, was also set up this way. She's participating in the mission because she's a historian and they're picking up some weird ship from the 20th century. But do we ever see these women acting in these roles? Are they competant? Are they useful? No. Because they're not there to be doctors or historian. Even Nurse Chappel is rarely there to be a nurse. No, they're there because something about the plot requires somebody to be dumb (Marla), weak (Marla), and to get under Kirk's skin and make him weak (Noel). That's it. That's all. Women aren't three dimensional characters--they don't even try or care. So the ultimate message becomes "Sure, a woman can serve a starship, but for the most part, she's only going to cause some sort of trouble...because that's just the way women are."

I'm not comfortable enough yet to say this is a firm rule, since I haven't seen every single episode recently. But I'm reasonably confident that there aren't any exceptions. I would say Edith Keeler is the closest thing to a woman who actually seems to be a fully realized character, and even though she's nothing more than a plot devise, it's clear that what would lead the Nazis to getting the bomb is a personal philosophy that Kirk himself believes in. That makes the tension interesting. It's not that some dumb broad would let Hitler take over the world. It's that the very philosophy of the Federation, the one that Kirk struggles to espouse, is problematic.

[Jeff]

My knowledge of TOS is fairly shallow, but what about when the female role is a non-human character. Did they ever use this sort of disconnect to create a more progressive or three-dimensional female character?

[pepperlandgirl]

My knowledge of TOS is fairly shallow, but what about when the female role is a non-human character. Did they ever use this sort of disconnect to create a more progressive or three-dimensional female character?

I don't think so. They were either evil (Cat's Paw and A Private Little War come to mind), they were pawns in a greater struggle between the men folk (The Gamer's Of Triskelion or What Little Girls Are Made Of), or fated to be one of Kirk's Great Doomed Loves (Too many to count, including The Paradise Syndrome and Wink of An Eye IIRC). But they were purely functions of the plot, behaving in ways because that's what the script said they should do, not because they have fully realized motivations. And of course, the Great Doomed Loves needed to be reflections of Kirk, somewhat, as well as perfect examples of womanhood, otherwise, how could he fall in love with them?

Friday's Child is actually an episode that drives me batshit. There was so much potential there that was completely wasted. Eleen actually could have been an interesting character. When we first meet her, she's appropriately demure, very pregnant, and young, beautiful wife of the chief (or whatever he's called). But after her husband dies, we see that she's not demure at all. She's actually pretty spirited. She hates the child she's carrying(!) because she hated her husband, but she was put in that situation because that was her culture. I mean, Jesus--what a chance to really explore the impossible position some women could find themselves in, right? Despite her justified anger at her husband and her culture's traditions, she's willing to go along with the laws of the land, which would include her death. There's some genuine room there to explore what it means to be caught between your own needs and the faith you were raised in, on top of the more personal struggle of being pregnant with a child you never wanted. And she's physically a very stong person--probably as strong as Kirk et al.

So....what happens? Do we get any of that? No, of course not. She's a trouble maker. She's an obstacle. She's the plot devise that adds a wrinkle to their escape. And how do they get her under control? When she finally lashes out because McCoy is touching her against her will, he slaps her back! Right across the face. Appropriately cowed, she allows McCoy to touch her. Then she latches on to him as her dominant alpha male, and gives birth to the child insisting that it's McCoy's--she doesn't have the child because she wants it, she keeps it because she's now identified it as McCoy's!

Now, I know that McCoy was just trying to help her have the child safely, and then Kirk and Spock were fighting to keep her from being killed. I'm not saying that they were acting in dishonorable ways at all. But regardless of their motives, we're left with a woman who literally has no choice in who she marries, a woman who has no choice in being pregnant, a woman who has no choice in living or dying, and ultimately, a woman who is only "managable" after she accepts her role as a submissive.

[featherlou]

Not to squelch any discussion here, but as a long-time science fiction reader, I treat Star Trek the same way I treat classic old science fiction books - I read them for the marvelous stories, and just try to ignore the rampant misogyny.

[Glazer]

The fact that TOS was considered ground breaking for its time. And that now we can see its underlying assumptions are highly misogynistic. Are very good indicators of just how far we have come as a society in just 40 short years. If we can continue to improve people's attitudes towards women and other races as we have in the last 40 tears, then there might be hope for us yet.

[dread pirate jimbo]

The fact that TOS was considered ground breaking for its time. And that now we can see its underlying assumptions are highly misogynistic. Are very good indicators of just how far we have come as a society in just 40 short years. If we can continue to improve people's attitudes towards women and other races as we have in the last 40 tears, then there might be hope for us yet.

I agree with this point.

Here are the top 20 shows from the 1967/68 season, according to tvparty.com:

1. Andy Griffith Show
2. The Lucy Show
3. Gomer Pyle, USMC
4. (tie) Gunsmoke
Family Affair
Bonanza
7. Red Skelton Show
8. Dean Martin Show
9. Jackie Gleason Show
10. NBC Saturday Night at the Movies
11. Bewitched
12. Beverly Hillbillies
13. Ed Sullivan
14. The Virginian
15. (Tie) Friday Night Movies
Green Acres
17. Lawrence Welk Show
18. Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour
19. Gentle Ben
20. Tuesday Night Movies

About the closest thing to a strong female character that I'm aware of in any of the series in that list would be Samantha on "Bewitched" and, when all is said and done, she's a housewife, not an empowered feminist prototype. Or Lucy Carmichael on "The Lucy Show" who is a mom AND a secretary! There simply weren't, to my knowledge, any roles for women on TV at that point that were anything more than housewives, secretaries, or maids. I certainly don't disagree with any of the points pepperlandgirl has made about the roles of women in Star Trek as little more than window dressing, damsels in distress, or playthings for Kirk, with little meat to any of the characters, but compared to the other female characters on TV at the time, the women found in Star Trek were intelligent, qualified, and capable.

A few years later in 1973, in an Animated Series episode of Star Trek called "The Lorelei Signal," Uhura winds up in command of the Enterprise, with Nurse Chapel acting as Chief Medical Officer, when all the male characters on the show disappear to a far-away planet or become incapacitated due to a siren-song device. Clearly, a few scant years later the writers were prepared to give the female characters more responsibility. One might even optimistically guess that at some point, had the original series continued on for another season or two, they would have found an excuse to stick Uhura in the center chair, but that's mostly just a WAG for me -- it just seems to me that at some point this is a plot device that would have made sense.

The bottom line for me is that Star Trek was as or more progressive than anything on TV at the time. Through the lens of our 40+ years of hindsight, the show has some very icky elements to it, but I think one must constantly assess those elements based on the era in which they were presented and not based on what we believe to be true in the 21st Century.

[pepperlandgirl]

I watched Star Trek: The Motion Picture for the first time last night, and was rather pleased to see that Chapel became a doctor, and that Rand was no longer a Yeoman. I think that, coupled with information dread pirate jimbo added, does point to what I initially suspected--there was a problem there but it wasn't necessarily with Gene Roddenberry.

I think my next massive ST essay will be about how ST:V really isn't that bad.

[What Exit?]

I think my next massive ST essay will be about how ST:V really isn't that bad.

This will be a tough sell.

[pepperlandgirl]

I think my next massive ST essay will be about how ST:V really isn't that bad.

This will be a tough sell.

Yes, it will be. But I think I'm up to the challenge.

[What Exit?]

I think my next massive ST essay will be about how ST:V really isn't that bad.

This will be a tough sell.

Yes, it will be. But I think I'm up to the challenge.

I'll have to watch it again. It was not as bad as the last two Next Gen movies. Those I would not watch again.

[OneCentStamp]

I think my next massive ST essay will be about how ST:V really isn't that bad.

This will be a tough sell.

Yes, it will be. But I think I'm up to the challenge.

It's a multi-layered challenge: step one will simply be getting Trekkies to admit it even exists. :smile:

[dread pirate jimbo]

I watched Star Trek: The Motion Picture for the first time last night, and was rather pleased to see that Chapel became a doctor, and that Rand was no longer a Yeoman. I think that, coupled with information dread pirate jimbo added, does point to what I initially suspected--there was a problem there but it wasn't necessarily with Gene Roddenberry.

I think my next massive ST essay will be about how ST:V really isn't that bad.

I liked Voyager and I don't care who knows it.

[Laughing Lagomorph]

I think my next massive ST essay will be about how ST:V really isn't that bad.

I'll have to watch it again. It was not as bad as the last two Next Gen movies. Those I would not watch again.

I agree, but talk about a low hurdle.

I don't get the Voyager hate either. It wasn't the best but it had its moments.

[What Exit?]

[quote=Laughing Lagomorph]

I think my next massive ST essay will be about how ST:V really isn't that bad.

I'll have to watch it again. It was not as bad as the last two Next Gen movies. Those I would not watch again.

I agree, but talk about a low hurdle.

I don't get the Voyager hate either. It wasn't the best but it had its moments.[/quote:29ymstcx]
He was joking though on not admitting to Star Trek V: The Final Frontier and pretending that ST: V = Voyager instead.

Voyager was not a very good series, but it had its moments. I for one disliked Next Gen as much or more.

[Exy]

Exactly. There's like this weird tension (in TOS and TNG too) between wanting to break new ground and being utterly incapable of such a feat. I think What Exit?'s point about the writers wanting one thing and the network execs wanting another thing would go some way in explaining that tension. Of course, that reflects back something pretty horrible on society. "Well, we COULD make women completely equal and even leaders on the ship, but then nobody would watch."

Yeah. In terms of the makeup of the cast, TNG is not really any better than TOS. Most of the overtly sexist things you mention wouldn't have happened on TNG, but there still weren't any skirts in upper command positions. In fact, the two major female characters were both health care workers, a field traditionally open to women. TNG probably annoys me more in this respect, because at least Kirk's galaxy was honest in its sexism, whereas Picard's just ignored the issue. Given how much more sanctimonious and preachy TNG was, it's pretty pathetic how much less gutsy it was than TOS.

It's also telling that, while TOS addressed the major American social issue of its era, the civil rights struggle, TNG totally avoided the gay rights movement. There was one episode where sexual norms are sort of vaguely addressed, when Riker falls in love with this character from an androgynous species (a character played, of course, by a female actor) -- what a cowardly way to treat the social issue of the time. Presumably, Federation citizens of Picard's era are free to be gay in exactly the same circumstance that women can become starship captains: off-camera.

[dread pirate jimbo]

Exactly. There's like this weird tension (in TOS and TNG too) between wanting to break new ground and being utterly incapable of such a feat. I think What Exit?'s point about the writers wanting one thing and the network execs wanting another thing would go some way in explaining that tension. Of course, that reflects back something pretty horrible on society. "Well, we COULD make women completely equal and even leaders on the ship, but then nobody would watch."

Yeah. In terms of the makeup of the cast, TNG is not really any better than TOS. Most of the overtly sexist things you mention wouldn't have happened on TNG, but there still weren't any skirts in upper command positions. In fact, the two major female characters were both health care workers, a field traditionally open to women. TNG probably annoys me more in this respect, because at least Kirk's galaxy was honest in its sexism, whereas Picard's just ignored the issue. Given how much more sanctimonious and preachy TNG was, it's pretty pathetic how much less gutsy it was than TOS.

It's also telling that, while TOS addressed the major American social issue of its era, the civil rights struggle, TNG totally avoided the gay rights movement. There was one episode where sexual norms are sort of vaguely addressed, when Riker falls in love with this character from an androgynous species (a character played, of course, by a female actor) -- what a cowardly way to treat the social issue of the time. Presumably, Federation citizens of Picard's era are free to be gay in exactly the same circumstance that women can become starship captains: off-camera.

In defense of TNG, we did see the first ever on-screen female captain in, IIRC, a second season episode. Granted, I believe we only see her for one scene, and that only for a little semi-confusing explication, but there it is. The only other good thing I can say about TNG is that they eventually wrote Wesley Crusher out of the series -- I fucking hated that little shit.





The movie franchise inexplicably skipped over number five and went straight on from IV to VI. THERE WAS NO STAR TREK: V!!!! Anyone who says otherwise is a big, fat liar whose pants are on fire. A LIAR!!!!!!!!

[Orual]

The movie franchise inexplicably skipped over number five and went straight on from IV to VI. THERE WAS NO STAR TREK: V!!!! Anyone who says otherwise is a big, fat liar whose pants are on fire. A LIAR!!!!!!!!

Speaking of sexism, wasn't that the movie where Uhura had to distract some guards by doing some kind of horrific old-lady fan dance?

No amount on angry faces can undo that horror.

[pepperlandgirl]

the makeup of the cast, TNG is not really any better than TOS. Most of the overtly sexist things you mention wouldn't have happened on TNG, but there still weren't any skirts in upper command positions. In fact, the two major female characters were both health care workers, a field traditionally open to women. TNG probably annoys me more in this respect, because at least Kirk's galaxy was honest in its sexism, whereas Picard's just ignored the issue. Given how much more sanctimonious and preachy TNG was, it's pretty pathetic how much less gutsy it was than TOS.

You're right about this. And Troi was absolutely worthless in her chosen profession. We never see her counseling anybody, and Spock (who was only lightly telepathic) had better success at sensing anger/frustration/pain/etc than the actual empath. They did have a woman as a head of security, so that was good--until she died. I don't remember why she left, but they could have replaced her with another woman. But I would need to watch more episodes of TNG to really get a good idea of how the gender politics work in that universe.

It's also telling that, while TOS addressed the major American social issue of its era, the civil rights struggle, TNG totally avoided the gay rights movement. There was one episode where sexual norms are sort of vaguely addressed, when Riker falls in love with this character from an androgynous species (a character played, of course, by a female actor) -- what a cowardly way to treat the social issue of the time. Presumably, Federation citizens of Picard's era are free to be gay in exactly the same circumstance that women can become starship captains: off-camera.

I keep hearing rumors that Roddenberry intended to introduce a gay character "eventually." I don't know if that was going to be in TNG or elsewhere, but I agree that it was cowardly to just pretend the issue didn't exist. In fact, the only time I've seen Roddenberry discuss homosexuals was in relation to Kirk and Spock (of course). In Shatner's biography, there's the following exchange.

Interviewer: "There's a great deal of writing in the Star Trek movement which compares the relationship between Alexander and Hephaistion to the relationship between Kirk and Spock - focusing on the closeness of the friendship, the feeling that they would die for one another..."

Gene Roddenberry: "Yes, there's certainly some of that - certainly with love overtones. Deep love. The only difference being, the Greek ideal... we never suggested in the series... physical love between the two. But we certainly had the feeling that the affection was sufficient for that, if that were the particular style of the 23rd century."

I honestly don't know what he was trying to say with that. That in his view, homosexuality has been wiped out by the 23rd century? Or was it just a way to say that all the slashers were really on to something? Or perhaps I just really like that quote and wanted to introduce it into the conversation? At any rate, I agree. While Star Trek (in general) should be lauded for what it attempted to do (and in some cases, what it successfully accomplished) there's still so much it could have and should have explored.

And my "Star Trek V is not so bad" essay is going to blow everybody's mind.

[Exy]

They did have a woman as a head of security, so that was good--until she died. I don't remember why she left, but they could have replaced her with another woman. But I would need to watch more episodes of TNG to really get a good idea of how the gender politics work in that universe.

Oh, shit, they did. I get the impression that chief of security would be a position in line for captainship, meaning that, after Picard, Riker, the (male-appearing) robot, and Geordi, finally you get to a woman. Until they killed her off. (Dr. Crusher would be on that list too, but I'm not sure where.)

[pepperlandgirl]

If TNG works like TOS, then Dr. Crusher could have technically relieved Picard of duty at any time due to mental/medical incompetance. McCoy threatened Kirk with that a few times (and Spock with it once), though Kirk only called his bluff once.

[dread pirate jimbo]

They did have a woman as a head of security, so that was good--until she died. I don't remember why she left, but they could have replaced her with another woman. But I would need to watch more episodes of TNG to really get a good idea of how the gender politics work in that universe.

Memory Alpha suggests that Denise Crosby complained that her character wasn't getting enough to do, so they wrote her out of the series. Getting offed in that horrid episode with the evil black oil slick was, IMO, one of the stupidest, silliest deaths in the history of fiction. "Skin of Evil"?!? Are you fucking kidding? Even the episode title was stupid and silly. But that's TNG season 1 for you! Of course, clearing Yar out of the way meant that they could stick the Kingon in his proper place, as full-time security chief where he could beat up or shoot everything he encountered while constantly repeating "I respectfully submit that our only option is to fight!"

Incidentally, the chain of command in TOS, as I understand it, is captain, first officer, helm, navigator, engineer, science, communications, and then who ever has the highest rank from what's left over. In TNG I believe the security chief would fit in between the engineer and the science officer. WhatExit? might have a better understanding of naval chain of command, however, which is what the show was more-or-less trying to follow. So the doc does fit into that hierarchy eventually (Dr. Crusher was given the command on, I think, two episodes and was shown to be a captain of her own ship in the final TNG episode; there's an interesting Star Trek novel called "Doctor's Orders" where Kirk puts McCoy in command of the Enterprise before beaming down to some adventure or other) and, of course, the doc always has the power to find any crew member medically unfit for duty, including the captain.

[Exy]

If TNG works like TOS, then Dr. Crusher could have technically relieved Picard of duty at any time due to mental/medical incompetance. McCoy threatened Kirk with that a few times (and Spock with it once), though Kirk only called his bluff once.

I know that came up on TNG as well, but then command would have just fallen to the next one in the chain, which would typically have been Riker. A lot more officers would have to have died/been relieved to put her in the chair. They did establish in one episode that she occasionally took shifts as captain, something I guess all the senior officers were entitled to do, although I assume had something big come up Picard would have been woken up to handle it. (Fortunately, nothing happens at night in Picard's galaxy. Also, notice how all the ships are always the same way up . . . )

[pepperlandgirl]

They did have a woman as a head of security, so that was good--until she died. I don't remember why she left, but they could have replaced her with another woman. But I would need to watch more episodes of TNG to really get a good idea of how the gender politics work in that universe.

Memory Alpha suggests that Denise Crosby complained that her character wasn't getting enough to do, so they wrote her out of the series. Getting offed in that horrid episode with the evil black oil slick was, IMO, one of the stupidest, silliest deaths in the history of fiction. "Skin of Evil"?!? Are you fucking kidding? Even the episode title was stupid and silly. But that's TNG season 1 for you! Of course, clearing Yar out of the way meant that they could stick the Kingon in his proper place, as full-time security chief where he could beat up or shoot everything he encountered while constantly repeating "I respectfully submit that our only option is to fight!"

So they wrote off the only woman on the bridge because the actress wanted to actually have something to do and it was easier to kill her than to give the only woman on the bridge something to do? That might be even more problematic than Kirk's tendency to go through women like Kleenex.

Incidentally, the chain of command in TOS, as I understand it, is captain, first officer, helm, navigator, engineer, science, communications, and then who ever has the highest rank from what's left over. In TNG I believe the security chief would fit in between the engineer and the science officer.

I know that Uhura was given the conn on at least one occasion. I guess Spock, Sulu, Chekov, and Scotty were all otherwise engaged.

I know that came up on TNG as well, but then command would have just fallen to the next one in the chain, which would typically have been Riker. A lot more officers would have to have died/been relieved to put her in the chair. They did establish in one episode that she occasionally took shifts as captain, something I guess all the senior officers were entitled to do, although I assume had something big come up Picard would have been woken up to handle it. (Fortunately, nothing happens at night in Picard's galaxy. Also, notice how all the ships are always the same way up . . . )

Didn't Troi go through the process of becoming a commander or a senior officer?

[dread pirate jimbo]

So they wrote off the only woman on the bridge because the actress wanted to actually have something to do and it was easier to kill her than to give the only woman on the bridge something to do? That might be even more problematic than Kirk's tendency to go through women like Kleenex.

Yes, that's correct.

I know that Uhura was given the conn on at least one occasion. I guess Spock, Sulu, Chekov, and Scotty were all otherwise engaged.

I seem to vaguely recall Uhura getting out of the center chair to make way for the captain in one episode, but I don't quite recall the circumstances. Suffice to say, again you are correct, unless the Commanding Officer placed her in charge, which is the CO's prerogative at any time, for any reason, even if that assignment falls outside of the typical chain of command (eg. Capt. Pike is well within his rights to place Kirk in the first officer's role while he flies over to Nero's ship in the latest movie, even though Kirk is a suspended cadet with no business being on the bridge, much less in a command position).

Didn't Troi go through the process of becoming a commander or a senior officer?

In later seasons of TNG, both Troi and Crusher began more formal senior officer training, which took Troi out of the tight-fitting consellor dresses and into the tight-fitting uniform jumpsuits and led to the episode or two I mentioned earlier where Crusher was left in command of the ship. I suspect both Troi's and Crusher's characters moved in that direction in an effort to address some of the gender iniquities of the series, but I can neither confirm nor deny that. So, a third time, yes you are correct.

[featherlou]

Yes, Troi did - she wanted to become an officer of the line, I believe how it was termed (aka not completely useless). She kept getting stuck on having to make a command decision to send some crew to their death, I believe it was.

[featherlou]

Dupe.

[OneCentStamp]

The movie franchise inexplicably skipped over number five and went straight on from IV to VI. THERE WAS NO STAR TREK: V!!!! Anyone who says otherwise is a big, fat liar whose pants are on fire. A LIAR!!!!!!!!

If anyone would like next week's lottery numbers, PM me. :wink:

[What Exit?]

Incidentally, the chain of command in TOS, as I understand it, is captain, first officer, helm, navigator, engineer, science, communications, and then who ever has the highest rank from what's left over. In TNG I believe the security chief would fit in between the engineer and the science officer. What Exit? might have a better understanding of naval chain of command, however, which is what the show was more-or-less trying to follow. So the doc does fit into that hierarchy eventually (Dr. Crusher was given the command on, I think, two episodes and was shown to be a captain of her own ship in the final TNG episode; there's an interesting Star Trek novel called "Doctor's Orders" where Kirk puts McCoy in command of the Enterprise before beaming down to some adventure or other) and, of course, the doc always has the power to find any crew member medically unfit for duty, including the captain.

It varies a bit, but the Chief Medical Officer would not command in most Navies until after the last Bridge Ensign was gone. Part of the reason is Doctor have the responsibility to relieve a Commander from Command and that they generally have no training to command. I cannot remember the chain on my ship anymore. It was CO, XO and then the ranking Bridge officer. After that I am quite fuzzy.

[OtakuLoki]

[quote=What Exit?]

Incidentally, the chain of command in TOS, as I understand it, is captain, first officer, helm, navigator, engineer, science, communications, and then who ever has the highest rank from what's left over. In TNG I believe the security chief would fit in between the engineer and the science officer. What Exit? might have a better understanding of naval chain of command, however, which is what the show was more-or-less trying to follow. So the doc does fit into that hierarchy eventually (Dr. Crusher was given the command on, I think, two episodes and was shown to be a captain of her own ship in the final TNG episode; there's an interesting Star Trek novel called "Doctor's Orders" where Kirk puts McCoy in command of the Enterprise before beaming down to some adventure or other) and, of course, the doc always has the power to find any crew member medically unfit for duty, including the captain.

It varies a bit, but the Chief Medical Officer would not command in most Navies until after the last Bridge Ensign was gone. Part of the reason is Doctor have the responsibility to relieve a Commander from Command and that they generally have no training to command. I cannot remember the chain on my ship anymore. It was CO, XO and then the ranking Bridge officer. After that I am quite fuzzy.[/quote:2fqn1dgq]


In the USN there are several kinds of officers. First is the so-called Line officers. These are the officers who are in line for command positions. In general that includes the Combat Systems officers, the Deck officers, and the Engineering officers. In general other officer tracks are restricted line, and not eligible for command. This includes 99% of Medical officers, Chaplains, and many 'Mustang' or former enlisted officers. Things are further confused when you consider that some officers in the normally Line areas may be what's known as LDOs, or Limited Duty Officers*. Then there are Warrant Officers, who don't have commissions but have authority similar to a commissioned officer's, while not being in the line of command. The chain of command for my ship had been, in case of casualty: CO, XO, Combat Systems Officer***, CHENG, and then I think the Deck Division officer. Command duty, which is not command of the ship, actually, would go from OOD to EOOW, to DCO, depending what stations were best able to continue to command the ship, and who was senior in that station. Everything below the XO, however, could be adjusted based upon seniority in rank, though, generally, the Deck Officer is the most senior LT aboard.

I was on a cruiser. We never had to deal with a flight group. AIUI on a carrier, the chain of command is a bit ambiguous, since the air group and the maintenance personnel are not assigned to the carrier, and the authority of the command of the ship and the command of the air group are both ad hoc, and neither commander can directly discipline the other's personnel. (Though if the CO and the CAG are having pissing matches about who's supposed to be dressing down various personnel, I imagine that will mean the end of both's careers.)

As for having the doctor relieving someone as unfit for command: I get the impression that some posters believe that the doctor would then move into that position. That's not what would happen - the next person in the chain would take over. And given the line/restricted line dichotomy I mentioned, it's possible that the doctor could end up handing command over to the newest ensign, but still be unable to take command in his or her own right.

Now, one of the things that really annoyed me about TNG, and even TOS, was that they kept talking about people being "Acting Captain." Which is asinine. Captain is not a position that rotates at the drop of a hat. What you will have are people who are either the CDO, Command Duty Officer, or the OOD, Officer of the Deck**. In both cases, depending on the ship's status, the CDO and OOD have the authority as the Captain's representative to handle any time-sensitive matters, or any routine matters, that would come up on their watch.

And don't get me started about the whole "Temporary Ensign" nonsense. What the hell was wrong with "midshipman?"

* This is usually the way an enlisted member will get commissioned. Other enlisted will turn down commissions and take the warrant officer route.

** I'm simplifying things here grossly, a more complete explanation could be available, but I don't think it's really germane.

*** IIRC, and I may not, Radio was part of the Combat Systems department. So that's where communications officers would be.

[pepperlandgirl]

As for having the doctor relieving someone as unfit for command: I get the impression that some posters believe that the doctor would then move into that position. That's not what would happen - the next person in the chain would take over. And given the line/restricted line dichotomy I mentioned, it's possible that the doctor could end up handing command over to the newest ensign, but still be unable to take command in his or her own right.

This was my misunderstanding, and honestly, I have no idea why I had such a misunderstanding. Of course, McCoy wouldn't take over command himself. I guess it was a temporary brain fart.

[OneCentStamp]

This was my misunderstanding, and honestly, I have no idea why I had such a misunderstanding. Of course, McCoy wouldn't take over command himself. I guess it was a temporary brain fart.

Damn it pepperlandgirl, he's a doctor, not a captain.

[dread pirate jimbo]

Just watched an interesting episode from mid-way through season one: "Court Martial"

In it, Kirk is court martialled for the death of one of his senior officers. The JAG assigned to prosecute Kirk is a former girlfriend of Kirk's, Lt. Areel Shaw, who goes on to run a very effective prosecution which appears to have successfully drummed Kirk out of the service before Spock starts playing chess with the Enterprise's computer and solves the whole conundrum. Meanwhile, the officer running Starbase 11 is Commodore Stone, a former starship captain and an African American (most likely the first time in TV history that any African American was shown as being in charge of anything, but I can't say for sure). When Stone convenes his court martial board, he appoints three other officers to work with him, including a Starfleet rep and two ship's captains. One of those captains, Captain Chandra, is very clearly of East Indian descent.

Now, this is not an episode about race or prejudice or anything of that sort. The fact that it includes a very racially diverse cast, with persons of colour in positions of high authority, is never explicitly stated -- it's just how things are. Likewise, positioning a highly competent female officer in the prosecution's position is never pointed to or addressed as any kind of big deal, beyond the history that she shares with Kirk -- she's simply the qualified expert placed in that role and she does a fine job in that role. Kudos to the series, IMO, for all of that -- it portrays a future where people of any race, creed or denomination can ascend to high ranking positions and where anyone, regardless of gender, can take on a role of great responsibility.

Two other notes: One of the witnesses called by Shaw is the Enterprise's personnel officer -- we don't get a name, but the officer is a female (an Asian female, in fact), so here we have yet another woman (of colour) in the episode filling a department head role. Also, at the end of the episode, when the Enterprise is powering back up and the navigator's chair is vacant, Lt. Uhura jumps in to handle the controls -- she is more than just the receptionist and can actually help fly the ship in a pinch! Again, credit to the script writers for mixing in these little tidbits without spending a bunch of time drawing attention to them -- this is just how things go in the 23rd century.

[pepperlandgirl]

jimbo, I agree that is a strong episode in terms of the cast, and the female attorney. However, not every woman on the show needed to have a past or current attraction to Kirk. I need to re-watch the episode--and I probably will tonight--but I recall a few things that genuinely annoyed me about her characterization and the way they handled her (making her all gaga-eyed over Kirk doesn't help. Of course, then I remind myself that she is a mere mortal, but the writers had control of her backstory!). That is what's so frustrating to me. Every time I want to give them props, it's like they purposely insert something in the script to hold me back.

[dread pirate jimbo]

There are certainly a couple elements to Shaw's portrayal and treatment that are... sketchy. The series makes it clear that every female in the universe, regardless of species, wants to sleep with Kirk, so I'm willing to forgive the past relationship with Kirk and the smooch on the bridge at the end of the episode. Plus, it adds a little texture to her job as JAG to bury this guy for whom she obviously feels a great deal of affection (of course, in real life I'm guessing the past relationship would cause her participation to be deemed a conflict of interest and she wouldn't be permitted to serve as prosecution, but that's a whole other discussion). On the other hand, there is a moment during Spock's testimony, while Shaw is asking Spock questions about the likelihood that Kirk made a mistake where Spock abruptly cuts her off in her line of questioning and addresses the board directly, basically dismissing her. I found that to be pretty uncool. On the other hand, she wears the longest service dress of any female in Starfleet -- it appears to be almost mid-thigh length!

Anyway, have a review of that episode and let me know what you think. I feel that it is much more of a hit than a miss as a piece of progressive writing and that the women in this episode are much more than window dressing or a plot device.

[featherlou]

That actually was a very interesting episode; they obviously went out of their way to address some gender and race inequality issues of the time, and yet there were moments when the accepted prejudices of the time shine through (like Jimbo said, when Spock disregards the girl lawyer is a great example). Still, full marks for what they did accomplish, rather than what they missed.

[pepperlandgirl]

Yesterday I watched not one but two episodes where the treatment of women didn't make me entirely stabby. Now, they weren't perfect--like with Court Martial, there were issues. But in The Alternative Factor, Lt. Masters is a capable, intelligent (African American) person. I could have been paying closer attention to the episode, but I don't recall her putting the ship in peril, destroying Kirk's heart, or just being worthless in general. And in A Taste of Armegeddon, Spock is helped by Lt (?) Tamula, who did a good job of assisting him.

[Skald the Rhymer]

There are certainly a couple elements to Shaw's portrayal and treatment that are... sketchy. The series makes it clear that every female in the universe, regardless of species, wants to sleep with Kirk

T'Pau. T'Pring. Amanda. All the women in the Cloudminders. What's-her-name who betrayed the ship to Khan, then reversed herself. The crazy Orison chick played by Batgirl. The woman from the McCoy-is-terminally-ill episode who fell in love with the Doctor. Either of the women with whom Scotty fell in love. Christine Chapel. Uhura.

[dread pirate jimbo]

[quote=Skald the Rhymer]

There are certainly a couple elements to Shaw's portrayal and treatment that are... sketchy. The series makes it clear that every female in the universe, regardless of species, wants to sleep with Kirk

T'Pau. T'Pring. Amanda. All the women in the Cloudminders. What's-her-name who betrayed the ship to Khan, then reversed herself. The crazy Orison chick played by Batgirl. The woman from the McCoy-is-terminally-ill episode who fell in love with the Doctor. Either of the women with whom Scotty fell in love. Christine Chapel. Uhura.[/quote:3qm98u5b]
Exactly! All of those women would have happily bedded Kirk without hesitation. I mean, did you see the way T'Pau was checking him out after he got his shirt torn open?