Freethought & Rationalism Archive

WinAce · 03-13-2003, 09:54 AM

By yours truly

I know it's dumb, but I thought I'd post this again. It's a parody of those bizarre contradiction resolutions found on sites like CARM and Tektonics.

Silent Dave · 03-13-2003, 03:33 PM

An openness to and guidance from the Rodenberry spirit are absolutely essential for the proper understanding of Star Trek.

Dave

Verithrax · 03-13-2003, 05:22 PM

There are no holes in Star Trek.
No.
NO.
NO!
DAMMIT!

Titanpoint · 03-14-2003, 04:25 AM

Here's something I wrote on Star Trek: Voyager

Quote:

Star Trek: Voyager was a terrible series, wooden acting, repetitive scripts (how many times did time-travel appear as a plot device?), but most of all a slavish devotion to all things feminist and PC.
The gender roles were reversed. Males were shy, unsure and well connected with their feelings. The females were sharp, inventive and emotionally retarded.
No male ever came out well in the series. No female came out badly.

Whenever a man made a decision it came out badly. Whenever a female made a decision it turned out alright in the end.

Males of alien races were always evil, devious, corrupt or decadent. Females of alien races were misunderstood and almost always right.

The men on Voyager never grew up. They remained the "man-boys" of feminist imagination. They never thought of anything original. Only the females could do that.

As for "Seven of Nine" the most ridiculous and obvious piece of sexual eye-candy ever created in a TV series. "Seven" was created specifically to attract the pubescent teenage fantasies of the boys who were watching the series (as the comments above have shown). "Seven of Nine" was the unattainable prom date, the "anti-man" of feminist and lesbian fantasy.

In all, Star Trek: Voyager was humorless, repetitive tripe with worthless dialog, ludicrous plots, unbelievable characters and tedious character development. Star Trek: Voyager had almost no sexuality either. You would have thought that seven years isolated on the far side of the galaxy would have made people closer and sexual developments happen. But not here. This is the feminist Galaxy. Sexual attraction between male and female does not happen. Even far away men and women led separate lives of monk-like sexual repression as they lived their lives as part of a military hierarchy that Janeway once ludicrously referred to as a "family"

Roll on, Enterprise.

Let the phaser blasts fly....

Bookman · 03-14-2003, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Titanpoint
Star Trek: Voyager had almost no sexuality either. You would have thought that seven years isolated on the far side of the galaxy would have made people closer and sexual developments happen. But not here. This is the feminist Galaxy. Sexual attraction between male and female does not happen.

I didn't watch the show much but I remember some attempted sexual tension between Chakotay and the commander. And didn't Tom Paris knock up the half-Klingon engineer?

Any chance you developed this theory and then suffered from confirmation bias?

Bookman

Ensign Steve · 03-14-2003, 10:08 AM

ApologeTreks?

*ducks!*

Titanpoint · 03-14-2003, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bookman
I didn't watch the show much but I remember some attempted sexual tension between Chakotay and the commander. And didn't Tom Paris knock up the half-Klingon engineer?

Any chance you developed this theory and then suffered from confirmation bias?

Bookman

Actually no. You've actually mentioned pretty much all of it.

Tom Paris had one or two affairs with female aliens (and always managed to look a chump, surprise surprise) and Seven of Nine had a nice line in being sexually intimidating with the Chinese ensign and that's about it.

"attempted" is the operative word.

A funny thing happened on the way to the 24th Century: men lost their immense capacity for inventiveness, apposite humor, back chat and all-round creativity.

Voyager was an exercise in sexual role reversal.

Watch it again (just one episode) and you'll get to see how blatent it all is. If those male characters were really eunuchs, it would make more sense. Certainly amongst intelligent men, the idea of deferring to the deeply useless Janeway would have been anathema.

I've revisited this posting I originally made over a year ago and I've not really changed my mind about it.

Ensign Steve · 03-14-2003, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bookman
I didn't watch the show much but I remember some attempted sexual tension between Chakotay and the commander. And didn't Tom Paris knock up the half-Klingon engineer?

Any chance you developed this theory and then suffered from confirmation bias?

Bookman

If I can make a comment, Paris and the engineer were married before she got pregnant. There were allusions to the fact that they were sexually active prior to the wedding, but the "knock up" itself happened within the bounds of holy matrimony.

And the relationship between Chakotay and the commander was more along the lines of unrequited love, or even possibly a one-sided crush. Plenty of tension, but not very sexual.

Titanpoint · 03-14-2003, 12:16 PM

Chakotay was the worst case. Here was a character who was supposed to be a fearless rebel leader and yet he simpered and pouted around Janeway and was happy to be second in command.

Apparently Robert Beltran complained about how little action or development his character got. So they wrote about Chakotay even less.

Ensign Steve · 03-14-2003, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Titanpoint
Apparently Robert Beltran complained about how little action or development his character got. So they wrote about Chakotay even less.

Yeah, but he did finally capture the attention of the frigid Seven of Nine. A heroic feat in the eyes of Trek fans everywhere! Was it worth it after seven years of BS? You'd have to ask him.

03-13-2003, 09:54 AM	#1
WinAce Beloved Deceased Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Carrboro, NC Posts: 1,539	Are There Really any Contradictions in Star Trek? By yours truly I know it's dumb, but I thought I'd post this again. It's a parody of those bizarre contradiction resolutions found on sites like CARM and Tektonics.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-13-2003, 03:33 PM	#2
Silent Dave Banned Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Bloomington, MN Posts: 2,209	An openness to and guidance from the Rodenberry spirit are absolutely essential for the proper understanding of Star Trek. Dave

03-13-2003, 05:22 PM	#3
Verithrax Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Brazil Posts: 146	There are no holes in Star Trek. No. NO. NO! DAMMIT!

03-14-2003, 10:08 AM	#6
Ensign Steve Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Augusta, Georgia, United States Posts: 1,235	ApologeTreks? ducks!

03-14-2003, 12:16 PM	#9
Titanpoint Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Netherlands Posts: 130	Chakotay was the worst case. Here was a character who was supposed to be a fearless rebel leader and yet he simpered and pouted around Janeway and was happy to be second in command. Apparently Robert Beltran complained about how little action or development his character got. So they wrote about Chakotay even less.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.