Ster Trak

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Wow. Who would have thought that long form fiction would change over 25+ years?
Clearly writing to the sensibilities of a different audience in a different era is happening.

Shut the fuck up!

No Lucy you got some splainin to do.

[TGLS]

youtu.be/zBeY46HDj6A

[King Green]

Why the hell not, a parody is only good if the shows flaws refuse to confront themselves.

Still wish I saved that video of a Twi"lik cosplayer reasonably ranting of VOY and early TAS arrogance on culture studies.

Triple King F*ck the Youtube devs!

[Durandal_1707]

You know, everyone remembers Bones saying "Dammit Jim" a lot, in the original series, but he never actually did. He only ever said "Blast it." The only time TOS ever did anything even resembling a swear was "Let's get the hell out of here" in City, and that was meant to be an extreme circumstance.

Cut to TNG where they're saying "damn" and "my God" "what the hell" on a regular basis.

Clearly society is going down the tubes.

[Link8909]

You know, everyone remembers Bones saying "Dammit Jim" a lot, in the original series, but he never actually did. He only ever said "Blast it." The only time TOS ever did anything even resembling a swear was "Let's get the hell out of here" in City, and that was meant to be an extreme circumstance.

Cut to TNG where they're saying "damn" and "my God" "what the hell" on a regular basis.

Clearly society is going down the tubes.

Also Captain Kirk's "Klingon bastards."

In-fact, Ryan's Edits who makes Star Trek INtakes put together a video of all the swears from The Original Series, The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, and Voyager, and swearing in the future is more likely than one thinks.


youtu.be/8ErazOHgjhQ

He also put together a video that asks the hard hitting question of the whole franchise.


youtu.be/elxpt1X3pcM

[clearspira]

Wow. Who would have thought that long form fiction would change over 25+ years?
Clearly writing to the sensibilities of a different audience in a different era is happening.

Indeed, by this videos logic, Captain Pike in season two of Star Trek Discovery should have been talking about how uncomfortable he is with women on the Bridge as that's what he said in "The Cage", or that Captains like Janeway, Garrett, and Georgiou shouldn't exist because women aren't allowed to be starship captains, as stated in "Turnabout Intruder".

Cannon seems to only matter when it's convenient to win an argument, because if you actually apply this mindset to all of the franchise rather than the parts one dislikes, you end up hating everything, for example, by this logic The Wrath of Khan is bad because Khan couldn't have known who Chekov was because he wasn't in "Space seed", and that Kirk never talked about Carol and David Marcus before The Wrath of Khan even though Marcus was Kirk's son and you would think that would have been brought up before.

And I know this seems like an obvious statement, but it's one that people tend to forget: people change, sensibilities change, that's apart of growing up, and expecting any series or film to write a fictional work with outdated sensibilities isn't good, one of the criticisms of season one of The Next Generation was that it was written like The Original Series, which lead to the big oof episodes like "Code of Honor", or the Enterprise episode "Stigma" that took on the Aids crisis with the mindset of the 80's with disastrous results.

Also the logic of the video doesn't add up, so a series is bad because fictional real people from 2399 aren't talking like fictional fake people from a 1930's holo-novel?

It helps that the "no female captains" line was uttered by an insane woman who has so much internalized misogynism that many fans think she may have been a closet transperson. Note how Kirk never actually affirms her claims.

I also think that Kirk really had no reason to mention Carol and David on screen to us the viewer before TWOK. Spock and McCoy didn't actually seem all that surprised to me.

[Link8909]

It helps that the "no female captains" line was uttered by an insane woman who has so much internalized misogynism that many fans think she may have been a closet transperson. Note how Kirk never actually affirms her claims.

I also think that Kirk really had no reason to mention Carol and David on screen to us the viewer before TWOK. Spock and McCoy didn't actually seem all that surprised to me.

Indeed, Star Trek isn't a reality show where we have cameras on them 24/7, we only see what's in the episodes, so the relationship between Captain Kirk and Carol Marcus happened off screen, and it would have been unnatural dialog if Kirk just randomly brought it up in episodes that had nothing to do with them.

And it's very true with the "no female captains" line, Star Trek has always tried to be a progressive series from its inception, and while it has its rough moments like Captain Pike's "not used to women on the Bridge" line and plenty of other moments throughout the series, it's very much apart of the times and for the most part Star Trek was shown a positive representation of women in the forces, so with that and the context of Lester being insane, it stands to reason she's talking nonsense and that there are female Captains.

But that wasn't the point I was making, my point was that it's easy to apply the same level of criticism that removes the context behind a scene in a film or series that's beloved to "deconstruct" it, as one can to any new addition to the franchise that one personally dislikes, and that if you do you windup hating everything, so it ends up being selective criticism.

[tyrteg]

Yeah. This is why I don't bother coming to these forums anymore. People can have the truth shoved right in their faces and they'll deny reality. It's giving me an insight of what Trump supporters or Flat-earthers thought processes must be like to be confronted face to face with hard evidence - straight from the episodes themselves - with no alterations or commentary - just the episodes of the show and just go "Lalala this is not saying what you think it's saying. You're wrong! And dumb!"

So yeah sure. We're dumb for thinking that crassness and substance abuse have no place in Roddenberry's future. That the writers should actually watch a few episodes of Trek before they start calling "Disruptors" "guns" and start talking about pulling the trigger or trying to reintroduce poverty in 24th Century just so Picard could be shamed for having his family's vineyard...
In the end it's been said on this forum over and over and it changes nothing and convinces nobody. The same names will prop up again and again to mob anyone who dares disagree until they give up arguing and just leave. Rinse and repeat. And that's why I'm glad to be out of here...

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Yeah. This is why I don't bother coming to these forums anymore. People can have the truth shoved right in their faces and they'll deny reality. It's giving me an insight of what Trump supporters or Flat-earthers thought processes must be like to be confronted face to face with hard evidence - straight from the episodes themselves - with no alterations or commentary - just the episodes of the show and just go "Lalala this is not saying what you think it's saying. You're wrong! And dumb!"

So yeah sure. We're dumb for thinking that crassness and substance abuse have no place in Roddenberry's future. That the writers should actually watch a few episodes of Trek before they start calling "Disruptors" "guns" and start talking about pulling the trigger or trying to reintroduce poverty in 24th Century just so Picard could be shamed for having his family's vineyard...
In the end it's been said on this forum over and over and it changes nothing and convinces nobody. The same names will prop up again and again to mob anyone who dares disagree until they give up arguing and just leave. Rinse and repeat. And that's why I'm glad to be out of here...

I can't believe you got to this realization in only 37 posts.

[Rocketboy1313]

Yeah. This is why I don't bother coming to these forums anymore. People can have the truth shoved right in their faces and they'll deny reality. It's giving me an insight of what Trump supporters or Flat-earthers thought processes must be like to be confronted face to face with hard evidence - straight from the episodes themselves - with no alterations or commentary - just the episodes of the show and just go "Lalala this is not saying what you think it's saying. You're wrong! And dumb!"

So yeah sure. We're dumb for thinking that crassness and substance abuse have no place in Roddenberry's future. That the writers should actually watch a few episodes of Trek before they start calling "Disruptors" "guns" and start talking about pulling the trigger or trying to reintroduce poverty in 24th Century just so Picard could be shamed for having his family's vineyard...
In the end it's been said on this forum over and over and it changes nothing and convinces nobody. The same names will prop up again and again to mob anyone who dares disagree until they give up arguing and just leave. Rinse and repeat. And that's why I'm glad to be out of here...

Gene is dead.
Has been for a while.
New writers with a new audience get to tell new stories.
I don't know what to tell you.
It is not the same show.

Do you still want Superman unable to fly and fighting unnamed mad scientists and wife beaters?
Do you want Daredevil in Red and Yellow?