Great Links: Spock Advice For 60s Troubled Teen + Uhura v Slave Leia + Google Making Trek Real + more | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Great Links: Spock Advice For 60s Troubled Teen + Uhura v Slave Leia + Google Making Trek Real + more March 17, 2013

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Great Links , trackback

TrekMovie’s column looking at Star Trek in the zeitgeist has returned. This week’s Great Links has Leonard Nimoy offering Spock-ish advice to a "teenage outcast in 1968, Google inspired by Star Trek (again), The Big Bang Theory getting early Trek toys, Uhura taking on Slave Leia, Star Trek fighting for Best Sci-Fi TV show, and more. Check it all out below.  

 

1968 ‘Teenage Outcast’ Letter From Spock (Nimoy) goes viral

Last month our friends over at My Star Trek Scrapbook posted an article about Leonard Nimoy replying to a letter written to the teen magazine FAVE. Nimoy was responding to a letter written "To Mr. Spock" from a reader from a mixed race family who was struggling and thought that the half-human/half-Vulcan would be able to help. Nimoy’s letter to the troubled teen offered genuine advice like "Spock learned he could save himself from letting prejudice get him down. He could do this by really understanding himself and knowing his own value as a person. This It’s Get Better like letter from 1968 has gone viral, picked up by the Huffington Post, Buzzfeed and elsewhere. Visit
MyStarTrekScrapbook to read the full letter.


Leonard Nimoy offers Spockish advice to a "Teenage Outcast" in 1968

KREO Enterprise shows up on ‘Big Bang Theory’

Strangely Thursday’s episode of the CBS comedy The Big Bang Theory contained no references to Star Trek, which is unusual for the show. However, eagle-eyed John Tenuto spotted a Trek object on the show. Apparently Howard Wolowitz has some connections as he had a Hasbro KREO USS Enterprise toy in his closet – and that toy wont be released until May. You can watch the full "The Closet Reconfiguration" online at CBS.com.


Howard got early version of KREO Enterprise

Cosplay of the Week: Uhura v Slave Leia

This photo was offered without comment via Chickopolis Facebook page.


Star Trek and Star Wars together at last

Star Trek marching to best Sci-Fi TV show in io9 March Madness

io9 is holding a "March TV Madness" mega-poll with various brackets deciding the greatest sci-fi TV show. Star Trek, Star Trek: The Next Generation and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine are all included (even though they don’t allow spin-offs). All three shows easily beat their competitors in the first round.

They started with 30 shows so there are six more rounds to pick a winner with polls being held every few days in March. Visit io9 to keep up with the next round and vote for the Treks.


The Star Treks are marching towards dominance in race for Best Sci-Fi TV series

Quote of the Week: Google’s Vision Is To Make Star Trek real

Speaking at the by South By Southwest event this week, Google Senior VP Amit Singhal talked about the future of the company and its vision for search, saying (via Forbes):

Our vision of Google is things you need to know just come to you… Our dream is for search to become the Star Trek computer. That’s what we’re building today.

Singhal specifically pointed to Google Now which is designed to send users information before they even search for it (see video below via CNET).


Google Now – inspired by Star Trek

Craft of the Week: Star Trek Crew Cushions

The favorite bit of fan-made Star Trek fun this week comes from Barcelona artist Fabi Phil who sells these Worf, Picard and Data inspired pillow cushions (for just €47 for all 3). More info at Etsy.com. [UPDATE: They also offer a pair of TOS Kirk and Spock cushions for €30]


TNG crew cushions


TOS crew cushions

 

That’s it for this week’s Great Links. If you see something fun about Trek out there, send in a tip to tips@trekmovie.com.

 

Comments

1. WillH85 - March 17, 2013

Why is Picard pink?

2. Trekkermaster - March 17, 2013

First!

There are many things to be said about that Uhura vs Leia pic…

3. SirMartman - March 17, 2013

Battlestar Galactica needs to make the jump to the big screen,,

4. Cap'n Chris - March 17, 2013

The original posting of that picture on Facebook from ‘Ladies of Science Fiction and Fantasy’ on FaceBook came with the tagline

“Whoever loses, we win!” :)

5. Cap'n Chris - March 17, 2013

oops. Meant to put the link and put it in my name! Doh!

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ladies-of-Science-Fiction-Fantasy/402069189889265

6. Anthony Pascale - March 17, 2013

actually the photo went ‘viral’ last week but was on Chicktopolis in December. Not sure where they got it, but it was well before Ladies of Scifi

7. r - March 18, 2013

WillH85 – as the Andorian on ENT lovingly called Captain Archer “Pink Skin,” clearly these pillows were designed by an Andorian ;)

8. Aurore - March 18, 2013

Nyota : Who came first?

Leia : …Well, last time we both…

Nyota : THAT is NOT what I meant !

Leia : …Oh…Honey…Star Trek came first…

Nyota : That’s right b*tch….

:)

9. Cygnus-X1 - March 18, 2013

It’s a touching write-in and response. Nimoy advises the girl to listen to her inner voice, to be true to it, and have the courage to be a lone-wolf and cast off the need to be popular and a member of the “wolf-pack” until people realize her true value.

And on the very next column (of the second page of the article) is an advertisement urging the reader to conform with group fashion trends, “be in” and buy a Monkees sweat shirt, thoughtlessly misprinted as “sweat shift.”

10. Cap'n Chris - March 18, 2013

Ah, cheers Anthony :) Wherever it came from, kudos to the creator. It’s great!

Those pillows are fantastic too.

11. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - March 18, 2013

@9. Cygnus-X1

…actually is it a sweat SHIFT… A shift is a type of dress, which this plainly is. It’s far too long to be a shirt.

I agree that the juxtaposition of the advertisement with the article is tacky.

12. DeBeckster - March 18, 2013

I wonder what became of the person who wrote that letter.

13. trekmaster78 - March 18, 2013

@#1
In ENT the Andorians called the humans “pinkie”

14. Gorn Captain - March 18, 2013

Is that a shadow, or is Uhura’s neutral zone showing? O_O

15. Khaaan, the weasel - March 18, 2013

Dat “Trek vs. Wars” photo… bunch of bollocks! Everyone knows that Uhura wore RED knickers!

16. P Technobabble - March 18, 2013

Ladies of Sci-fi…! When does that movie come out!!??

17. William - March 18, 2013

Did anyone else catch the $”47″ for all 3 pillows. I wonder if that amount was chosen on purpose.

18. CmdrR - March 18, 2013

14 – Nothing neutral about Nyota.

Crew we are crossing the zone, on my authority as captain of the Enterprise!

19. Toonloon - March 18, 2013

That pic of uhura and leia just became my new iPhone wallpaper.

20. crazydaystrom - March 18, 2013

Uhura and Leia. Hmm. I’ll have to think about that.

:-D

21. Driver - March 18, 2013

Uhura in mirror universe garb would have been sexier.

22. TOS 4 EVER - March 18, 2013

Anthony,

I have nothing but reverence and respect for you.

This site is consistently truly excellent and fascinating!

May I also add… so are the many, many very bright fans of Star Trek
who are compelled to visit every day or two.

(Much affection for those who strive to move beyond name calling, low shots or bigotry when difference of opinion of this beloved franchise and it’s characters runs high! ;-)

Thanks Sir!

TOS 4 EVER

Dear Mr. Roberto Orci,

Do Paramount Pictures, the very amazingly talented Mr. JJ Abrams and all of your awesome and open eared creative team know how important it is to Star Trek’s ongoing amazing legacy to ‘right the wrong’ and honor Captain James T. Kirk (Prime Universe) and the legendary actor to play him… Mr. William Shatner?

When I say ‘honor’ Captain James T. Kirk Prime… I think we the fans truly deserve to see this character alive, free of the death shown on Veridian III in ‘Star Trek: Generations’… acknowleging this canon… but bringing Mr. Shatner and Kirk back for a chance to ‘ride into the sunset’ after being crucial to help save the day, or the ship, the Federation, Starfleet, Mr. Nimoy as Spock Prime, Mr. Zach Quinto’s Spock, Mr. Pine as his younger, alternate self, all of the above… or the two Universes?

Would the creative staff entertain the idea of making Captain James T. Kirk Prime (Mr. William Shatner) as real, current, alive, and relevant as Mr. Leonard Nimoy’s phenomenal Spock Prime? Side by side… one last time?

I cannot speak for all fans… but I myself will be hurting if this has not been addressed in ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’. What about a teaser dropped at the end?

“There are always possibilites, Spock said.”

Thank you for all your talents, efforts, and for listening and valuing what us, the fans… are thinking and feeling!

Yours Most Sincerely,

Mark

(TOS 4 EVER)

To Mr. William Shatner: “The fate of Two Universes… Two Parallel Realities hang in the balance. The only man who can save both would first have to ‘cheat death’… with some help from his closest, most logical friend.”

23. JohnD - March 18, 2013

“trangely Thursday’s episode of the CBS comedy The Big Bang Theory contained on references to Star Trek, which is unusual for the show.”

what are you talking about??

24. KG - March 18, 2013

#1 If I remember the winning entry from “Captain Picard Day”, isn’t Picard supposed to be orange?

25. Fabiana - March 18, 2013

Hi, my name is Fabiana from Morondanga, first of all I thank the publication of our cushions. I would tell WillH85, we use the color pink in all cushions where the character has white skin, it seems funny, as in the case of Spock and Kirk.
Soon we will have the cushion of Uhura, and we will have the trio along with Spock and Kirk.
Again, thank you very much for posting our creations.
regards

Fabi and Phil

26. Phil - March 18, 2013

@22. No. A thousand times, no.

27. Nony - March 18, 2013

If you’re going to be re-posting pictures like that Uhura and Leia one because they’re ‘great’ (as opposed to probably the exact opposite of what Nichelle Nichols would have wanted for Uhura back in the ’60s), I expect to also see gay cosplay and/or the male Star Trek cast members’ next shirtless/underwear/homoerotic photoshoots here as well. Keep that in mind.

28. Phil - March 18, 2013

The Uhura vs. Leia thing looks like it was found on some high quality adult entertainment site somewhere….

29. dscott - March 18, 2013

I assume the remark about Star Trek references in TBBT is meant to be facetious?

30. Red Dead Ryan - March 18, 2013

The Uhura/Leia photo was uncalled for, and I agree with Nony that there is a level of sexism being displayed not just by those who took the photo, but by the person who posted it on this site. It was clearly poornographic in nature, and wasn’t needed here.

That io9 poll is clearly messed up. They include the spin-offs, but they don’t allow spin-offs? WTF??

31. Spike - March 18, 2013

@22 Yes. A thousand times, yes.

32. BiggestTOSfanever - March 18, 2013

Here is an unrelated but funny Star Trek youtube video I happened across:
“High School Never Ends”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sV_oPBNF_jk

33. sean - March 18, 2013

#22

I’m sure you are a very nice person, but you’ve really got to let that go. The ship has sailed.

34. Red Dead Ryan - March 18, 2013

#22.

Hate to tell you this, but Shatner isn’t coming back.

35. Spockchick - March 18, 2013

@17. William

We’ll have to wait ’till next year to see if they go up to $48 :-)

36. Paul Sibbald - March 18, 2013

@22

Here you go, Kirk survives Veridian 3.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2M47diM41nA

:)

37. THX-1138 - March 18, 2013

In the spirit of balance I would like you, Anthony Pascale, to know that I fully endorse pictures such as the Uhura/Leia pic above being posted to this site. I am not offended in the least by a bit of “Uhura Neutral Zone” in the photo. And if it makes a difference to anyone I say go right ahead and post Spock/Han Solo pics. It’s a great big world. Sex is part of it.

38. Dee - lvs moon surface - March 18, 2013

Uhura vs Slave Leia ??? serious???… Gosh… but think I’m in bad mood today!

39. Mark Lynch - March 18, 2013

I do like the Uhura/Leia photograph. Excuse me, I think I need to be alone for a while…

40. Phil - March 18, 2013

I want to hear no complaining when the Kirk/Skywalker photo shows up…

41. Phil - March 18, 2013

All’s fair, I suppose…

http://th09.deviantart.net/fs71/200H/i/2012/134/d/0/spock_model_by_g_skywalker-d4ztjrt.jpg

42. Trekkiegal63 - March 18, 2013

*sigh* Glad I wasn’t in my office when I checked this site for updates today. And that I brought my tablet with me for lunch. That picture of Uhura and Leia is not something I’d like anyone to see me viewing were they to come into my office to ask me a question.

Way too tired to go into the inappropriateness of it (had a wretched night’s sleep last night), so I’ll just say I second what Nony and Red Dead Ryan said.

The Nimoy article, however, was wonderful and the pillows adorable. If I knew it wouldn’t cause my husband to roll his eyes over my distinct taste in decor, I’d inquire about the possibilities of a Kirk, Spock and McCoy version. What? They’d go well with our blue sofa. ;)

43. dswynne - March 18, 2013

@42: I don’t think anyone would implicate you for doing anything other than viewing a picture of Sci-Fi most iconic female characters, as a fan, of course…

44. Joe Dirt - March 18, 2013

Daaang… there ain’t nutin’ wrong with that picture. Heck I sent over the company wire to all my frieunds. It’s more awesome than my metorite was, well before I found out it was a from ball of poo.

45. Keachick - March 18, 2013

Oh dear…There is nothing wrong with posting that photograph of Uhura and Leia. The TOS character Uhura was always wearing that attire – it was Starfleet regulation uniform for women then. Princess Leia was often wearing that attire we see in the photo as well. The two women met up, got into an altercation over whatever and Uhura got the better of her. The fact that some people may find the photo a bit sexy – so what? Hell, in the early 1900s women could not even show an ankle lest someone complain about her lewd behaviour and a man get “over-excited”.

I am really sick of this nonsense.

Interesting photo of a young William Shatner or was it? It was definitely his face, but I would not be so sure about the rest of the picture. A lot of photoshopping is done with actors’ faces being put on (naked) male model bodies of a similar height and body shape to the actual actors’ physique.

Yep, Picard, Kirk… are “pink skins”, hence the pillow colour for Picard. Love the cushions!

46. BiggestTOSfanever - March 18, 2013

@42
The Kirk and Spock pillows are there, but no McCoy:

http://www.etsy.com/listing/110099258/star-trek-cinema-kawaii-pillow-2-pillow?ref=correlated_featured

47. Hat Rick - March 18, 2013

So when are we going to see the Star Trek / NuBSG crossover?

The two series are related through Ronald D. Moore (zero degrees of separation). By rights, they need to be in the same universe at least once.

48. Trekkiegal63 - March 18, 2013

#46. BiggestTOSfanever:

Thanks! So cute… tempted to buy these, yes I am.

#45 Keachick:

While I agree that the women in TOS wore suggestive costumes in the form of really short dresses, they also wore some sort of hot pants, shorts or underwear beneath them. Just saying.

49. Dennis Bailey - March 18, 2013

The prudes are out in force today, I see.

50. NCC-73515 - March 18, 2013

“In the third of four installments, Captain Kirk and crew face an all-new adversary that threatens the future of the entire Federation.”
Cumberbatch revealed, finally? :D
http://www.startrek.com/article/countdown-to-darkness-3-out-wendesday-from-idw

51. Phil - March 18, 2013

Orci has Sackhoff’ed Harry Mudd. Atta boy….

52. Phil - March 18, 2013

@45. For whatever reason, you seem inclined to the point of obsession to ignore context and appropiateness of materials. To point a few things out…
1. In suggesting this is nothing more then clothing ignores sexism. Would you dress a guy in similar clothes to perform their everyday tasks? Probably not.
2. In Leia’s case, this was not everyday attire for her – she was a prisioner, and the tiny bikini was for the pleasure of her captor, and an attempt to use the state of undress to exert control.
3. The double standard. What do you suppose the reaction would be if this was Kirk and Spock, both in a state of undress, with Kirk chained?

It could very well be that all the photographer thought he was doing was giving character embodiment to the Trek vs. Wars debate. The problem is, it’s been sexualized in this pose, and objectified the characters. In a environment where there is supposed to be equality this strips away that attribute, suggesting the women are performing for the pleasure of others. And for younger females who are trying to find themselves in a world where objectifying themselves as a means of advancement still seems to be the norm, this really sends the wrong message.

53. Trekkiegal63 - March 18, 2013

#51 Phil:

Brilliantly stated!

54. Red Dead Ryan - March 18, 2013

#51.

Agreed! The pose by Uhura above Leia is downright sexual. The black underwear is clearly meant to represent her private parts.

It’s not the costumes that are bothersome (apart from the underwear), its the poornographic poses.

Had the picture been one of Uhura standing up straight, shooting Leia in the back with a phaser, that would have gotten the point across a lot better.

55. Red Dead Ryan - March 18, 2013

I don’t mind women showing a little bit of skin in sci-fi, but I don’t need to see them reduced to poorn caricatures.

And I certainly don’t need poorn in my Star Trek!

Keep the two seperate, please!

56. Khaaan, the weasel - March 18, 2013

@8: And for that you’ll get my best Takei-style “OOOH MYYY!”

57. JohnD - March 18, 2013

@22. Dude that was painful. These people write movies for money, that’s only going to get you so far. I can tell you for sure what won’t make these people stop with the terrible writing and cheap plots and that is talking about them like they walk on water.

58. The Original Spock's Brain - March 18, 2013

@ 52, 53, 54

In many TOS episodes you can see the women officers’ underwear, except it was the color as their uniforms.

59. The Original Spock's Brain - March 18, 2013

*same color*

60. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - March 18, 2013

@58. The Original Spock’s Brain

Yes, and it seemed perfectly natural to me as a kid in those days. We also wore knickers of the same colour (and material, I think) as that of our sports tunics at school – and for the reason – the knickers were unavoidably going to be seen from time to time.

61. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - March 18, 2013

That should read
- and for the same reason –

I hate it when I carefully read my posts before pressing the button, only to have a mistake jump out at me as soon as I’ve actually posted it!

62. Sophia - March 18, 2013

Inspiring Nimoy article and a great Shatner/Nichols KISS!

63. Phil - March 18, 2013

@58. Well, what you saw was a liner sewn into the bottom of the female uniform. The uniforms seem to be single piece outfits, so hitting the head had to be an adventure – not very practical. Regardless even though most of us are fans of TOS, if you look at the show with a critical eye, it was horribly sexist. It was a product of the era – okay for women to serve, but as a support function to men.

64. Sophia - March 18, 2013

@63 Yes but I think it was fixed w/the 1979 movie onwards! Oh I am so glad there are differences between us you men and us women which are wonderful and we may all celebrate that! k? :)

A 22 year old female fan of TOS!

65. THX-1138 - March 18, 2013

Clearly we all have different moral lines. I would suggest, after having been active on this site for most of it’s existence and seeing that Anthony will post just exactly what he pleases, that protestations against some suggestive content will fall on deaf ears. In other words, you may grouse but I doubt it will get you anywhere.

Like I said, I have zero problem with pictures of scantily clad women in highly suggestive positions. And if Anthony feels like posting similar pics of male Trek or Wars characters I have zero problem with that either. You see, if I don’t want to look I will just move along.

And Harrison is a Tholian.

66. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - March 18, 2013

@65. THX-1138

I find your last statement incendiary! In fact, accoding to Memory Apha, Tholian biology required high temperatures around 480 Kelvin (207 °C, 404 °F). So, not quite hot enough to ignite paper. If Harrison is a Tholian, his shapeshifting abilities would have to rival that of the Suliban. We’ll all know in May :-)

67. Phil - March 19, 2013

@65. Oh, AP has posted about Trek poorn parody before – by itself, not an issue. I don’t expect it to be taken down, but it’s stimulated conversation about where the franchise has come from the rather overt sexism that was on display in TOS. I’d be suprised if spouses of folks who post here don’t play dress up for fun in the bedroom…and that’s between them. I don’t need to hear about it here, and as we do have kids on this site exploring the 50 shades of Trek is best left to consenting adults…

68. Marja - peeved! - March 19, 2013

My first reaction was, why wouldn’t Uhura be HELPING Leia? That, too, would show the superiority of Star Trek, as in, “we” are willing to help no matter that we are “warring factions” !

THANK YOU #51 Phil, RedDeadRyan for the first post way above and here at #55, and to others who’ve commented on the sexism.

While some have apparently taken the image “all in fun” …

I feel compelled to say I haven’t cared for the smirking sexism displayed from time to time on the site, and the seemingly common trope that it’s okay to show a little “lezzie action” when the males using the trope would adamantly oppose a little “homo action” [and yes, the terms I just used are *deliberately* objectionable, because from my point of view, those objectionable and juvenile terms express the equally objectionable and juvenile mindset I see from the people that post such images and support such images in science fiction]. Not to mention the ridiculously awful “choking a slave” image.

Sorry folks if I’m coming across as a “prude,” I’m making my statement as a person [and retired female member of the military] who has long objected to the sexist female uniforms of Star Trek and the sexist portrayal of Leia, a powerful woman in the earlier movies in SWars, as a sex slave in “Return of the Jedi” because it would appeal to fanboys [and incidentally entrench in their minds the sexist trope I mentioned above], and the additional baggage of “taking uppity Leia down a peg.”

Here portrayed is a sexist image that may have been meant in the “fun” spirit of Star Trek taking on Star Wars and winning, but it comes across very badly.

69. Hat Rick - March 19, 2013

This site is supposed to be a “general audiences” site, so anything that wouldn’t be appropriate viewing for, say, someone who is seven or eight years of age should probably not be pictorially depicted.

Personally, I don’t think the Uhura/Leia pic was very tasteful and I think a link would have sufficed.

70. Frederick - March 19, 2013

Thanks for posting about the Spock blog, it has really increased awareness of my Scrapbook page! Wow. Who would have thought?

71. Frederick - March 19, 2013

Also, if anyone is wanting the final word on the color of female underwear on TOS, check out this page: http://mystartrekscrapbook.blogspot.com/2012/02/uhuras-panties.html

72. Aurore - March 19, 2013

@70&71

“Thanks for posting about the Spock blog, it has really increased awareness of my Scrapbook page! Wow. Who would have thought?”
______

Yours is truly an amazing site.
Thank you for sharing!

:)

73. Trekkiegal63 - March 19, 2013

Still entirely too tired (experiencing a terrible bout of insomniac lately) so if this comes out disjointed you’ll have to forgive me. Anyway…

#68 Marja:

Sorry folks if I’m coming across as a “prude,” I’m making my statement as a person [and retired female member of the military] who has long objected to the sexist female uniforms of Star Trek and the sexist portrayal of Leia, a powerful woman in the earlier movies in SWars, as a sex slave in “Return of the Jedi” because it would appeal to fanboys [and incidentally entrench in their minds the sexist trope I mentioned above], and the additional baggage of “taking uppity Leia down a peg.”

Wonderfully stated. And you touch on a very important facet, here. Which is dismissive language. i.e. labeling someone a “prude” because they disagree with sexual objectivism (and confusing objectivism with views on adult relations to begin with).

Not geared towards Marja or anyone else who has addressed this issue because they already knows this, but just in general because it has come up on this site A LOT the past couple of weeks…. objectivism and consenting relations between two adults? Entirely separate topics. The latter involves freewill and encompasses adult individuals making decisions together towards their mutual benefit and the former is about taking a person and narrowing them down to one facet and one facet only, i.e. sexual imagery and/or use.

To confuse the two, intentionally or in ignorance, is dismissive towards a legitimate concern and also feeds into the issue being addressed to begin with, i.e. how objectivism of women, a common problem still entirely relevant today, 47 years after TOS first aired, is inherently sexist in nature.

As Phil pointed out, the adverse effect of objectification is that young girls are being conditioned to confuse their worth with body image and sexual appeal.

Of a similar vein, labeling a character like Leia, who was a political leader and a person of authority within the universe in which she was crafted, as ‘an uppity woman who needs to be taken down a peg thus yay gold bikini’ is also dismissive of the inherent objectivism and sexism involved in that scene. Objectifying her undermines her position as a leader, whether you personally like her personality or not is irrelevant to her role as a figurehead within the Rebel Alliance. Likewise Uhura is an officer and a professional (and a smart cookie to boot). Both are far, far more than fodder for male hormonal fantasy.

Just throwing all of this out there as points to ponder…

74. Frederick - March 19, 2013

Anyone who thinks that Leia and Uhura are at odds and the situation is a “vs” one, has the same lack of understanding that a kid does who walks in on his parents and thinks they are wrestling.

75. Keachick - March 19, 2013

You know, personally I could not care less about the so-called pourn. I am not a big watcher of Star Wars (unlike many here it seems), so I did not notice or was aware that Leia may be chained.

What I cannot ignore is the fact that while so many women (curiously, both women who so fervently object to “sexism” in film are from the military), people are quite happy with a good amount of violence. They want it. They expect it, especially in blockbusters. This includes any Star Trek iteration.

I came here almost three years ago and one of the first posts I read here was someone wanting Bob Orci (he was posting to the thread) to put in scenes showing pitched explosive battle scenes with lots of people suffering from plasma burns etc. The poster seemed to revel in the idea. I was deeply shocked and horrified. Before that I had read people on other boards saying how cool it was to see Kirk “getting what he deserved” by being punched several times in the face…

The thing is that I suspect that many people have to live (and die) as a result of bullying violence exacted on them than they might have to do with sexual abuses etc. My partner is one such person – years of chronic pain. The NZ Welfare system officially categorizes him as “disabled” – they know he can’t hold down any fulltime job. He was bullied by morons and they threw a 50kg sack of pool salt right at him (earlier they kicked him in the groin). Both incidences, they claimed, were accidental, but Chris found out that they weren’t but had no way to prove it. Too *shocked/traumatized to call the Police…Unfortunately, for him, it set off a chain reaction that no one can switch off – maybe gene therapy – 20 years away. I have no doubt he is not the only person who has been left disabled by some bullying thugs.

The movie industry spends millions of dollars showing mayhem and violence, long drawn out scenes with people punching each other up, being shot at, antagonists being tortured by their enemies (think James Bond, Royal Casino) and yet I do not hear even a muted sound from anyone here about these scenes that often make up a large part of any big movie, only people complaining about a photo that portray women in a pose that may encourage male hormonal fantasies. Bullying, violence and war are real and they HURT in very REAL ways – undeniable and objective ways.

It was I, who pointed out the real and horrendous sexism that goes on in many parts of the world and the fact that many females, as yet unborn, are often denied their right to be born and grow up simply because they come with XX chromosomes instead of XY chromosomes and let’s not forget the tortuous and unspeakable crime of forced female circumcision (FGM), forced pregnancies, forced abortions, rape victims being stoned/beheaded and so it goes on and on and on… I am against violence and true sexism – are you?

I guess I try to live and let live and accept the notion of inclusiveness. However, what several posters here have shown is their inability to allow for inclusiveness. They wish to exclude and only wish to see portrayed on film that which they deem “appropriate”. I can’t stop and nor do I necessarily want to stop movies showing people fighting, shooting, exploding, destroying cities or parts of – these are part of life and no doubt play an important part in any unfolding story being told. So is sexuality, playfulness, nudity as well. If you are going to show one kind of human behaviour in all its goriness, then it is only fair, reasonable and right to show some aspects of other kinds of ordinary human behaviour, of which sex and sex play is among them.

I adhor the double standard that I see here. It is painful for me, given the life that I now share with someone who is disabled and in constant pain from the moronic behaviour of two people against one, my own Chris!

#74 – Yes, Frederick – I guess I must be one of those kids. Thing is that I have three children which my own body pushed into this world all three times. I guess it is a matter of perspective and where your thinking lies most of the time. My *innocence*, *naivety* is being constantly assuaged by people who constantly complain about what they deem to be sexist and pournographic.

* It is possible that my Chris suffers from a form of PSTD – for real.

PS – I apologize, in advance, for my ramblings, but how else does one say what they feel needs to be said?

76. Red Dead Ryan - March 19, 2013

Can you please stop lecturing/bullying those of us with opinions that differ from yours, Keachick?

77. Keachick - March 19, 2013

I could say the same about you, Red Dead Ryan.

Now get off my case. My opinions are as valid as anyone’s, including yours, something you have never been able to acknowledge. Your past behaviour towards me proves this.

I have simply given posters another perspective on all this. Why don’t people call out the violence and bullying shown in movies? Never mind that bullying in real life can lead to a victim (yes, they are VICTIMS) committing suicide…

My husband and I are not bullies, but we certainly know what it is like to live with the results of other people’s bullying, 24/7. He survives it, as I do. I speak out…

78. dswynne - March 19, 2013

I guess no one here remembers the TOS episode “Gamesters of Triskelion”. The Uhura/Leia pic reminds me of that…

79. Keachick - March 19, 2013

#78 – True. As they say, “nothing new under the sun”…

80. Trekkiegal63 - March 19, 2013

#75 Keachick:

You know, because of our previous conversations I had developed a healthy respect for you, as a fellow mother and an older generation female Star Trek fan, I figured we had enough in common that our differences in terms of philosophy could be categorized under the header ‘we’ll just agree to disagree and move on’. We’ve disagreed in the past, but came to the consensus, or so I thought, that while we both had our own rather unbendable belief system, we at least came out understanding each other’s perspective.

But after what you just said I cannot hold my tongue any longer. I no longer feel you understand any view but your own.

I spoke earlier of dismissive terminology commonly used when one addresses the subject of sexism. You just used two more. ‘Appeal to worse problems’ and ‘false dilemma’. Both are fallacies of logic.

Appeal to worse problems is your biggest offense. And the name of the fallacy should, in and of itself, be rather self-explanatory. As a product of the baby boomer generation I can name a common one of these that parents often used on their children while I was growing up, my own parents being no exception… ‘eat all of the food on your plate because there are children starving to death in other parts of the world’.

The unpleasant side-effect of this example is that it became one (out of many) contributing factors to a nation where heart disease is now a (some years ‘the’) major cause of death.

What I’m trying to say here, in essence, is that you are claiming is that sexual objectivism within the film industry is utterly okay because female infanticide exists in other parts of the world, and the public stoning of women in the other. And this after I’ve posted, at least twice now, on two different threads (threads where you have participated in the conversation) the link to a study produced by the American Psychological Association detailing the damaging psychological effects of gender related sexual objectification. Or, to put it far more bluntly, the rise in diseases like anorexia or bulimia, and low self-esteem and/or pressure to conform to sexualization far before a young girl may be mentally prepared to do so are not issues for you because at least these girls weren’t killed at birth and/or stoned to death for being raped?

Moving on… false dilemma. This is where you take two unpleasant situations and place them into an either/or presentation. In psychological terms this is called ‘splitting’. In cognitive distortion this is called ‘black and white thinking’. It’s also been referred to ‘Morton’s Fork’. To elaborate on how this relates to what you said… one does not have to choose between protesting sexism or protesting violence. One can actually object to both. Or, though this person would consist of rather questionable ethics, they could object to neither. The point is that discussing one wrong does not automatically negate all others. Also a person doesn’t have to choose between them. No one is holding a gun to anyone’s head saying ‘pick just one sociological concern and stick with it’!

FYI: I also object to bullying. It is an issue I, and other parents, talk about at length during the board meetings at my daughter’s school. Happy?

BTW: To correct a false assumption here, I never said that * I* was in the military. I said I was a Navy brat, i.e. the daughter of a career naval officer and one who was raised within that community. Marja, however, has served and she should be heralded and praised for it, not have her, entirely valid, concerns dismissed because of it. (Marja: I know I’ve said this at least once before, but thank you so much for your service.)

However, Keachick, though we vehemently disagree and I deeply protest the methods you use to get your point across, I am sorry for what happened to your husband. It’s terrible that he has to suffer for the rest of his life because two unscrupulous individuals were so ruthless in their cruelty. My empathy goes out to him, and you and your children who have to watch him struggle with his chronic pain.

81. totally random - March 19, 2013

So I guess some people have forgotten that Riker once asked Picard to buy him a statue that means “I want to f—” when displayed publicly (Captain’s Holiday). Cause frankly this picture is no more inappropriate that any episode that takes place on Risa, at least in my opinion.

82. Marja - March 19, 2013

#75, Keachick, said “You know, personally I could not care less about the so-called pourn. I am not a big watcher of Star Wars (unlike many here it seems), so I did not notice or was aware that Leia may be chained.”

I presume you didn’t even see Return of the Jedi then, as Leia’s slavery was featured. I am not a big watcher of Star Wars either, yet I did understand what I was seeing.

“What I cannot ignore is the fact that while so many women (curiously, both women who so fervently object to “sexism” in film are from the military), people are quite happy with a good amount of violence. They want it. They expect it, especially in blockbusters. This includes any Star Trek iteration.”

Women in the military deal with sexism every day of their working life, and I should hope to high Star Trek heaven that by the era of Star Trek, sexism will be a thing of the past.

I am not “quite happy with a good amount of violence” and nor do I clamor for it in the movies. It’s expected, it’s common, and in blockbuster movies such as Star Trek it is unavoidable, because few moviegoers would go watch the crew of the Enterprise conduct a search and rescue mission, for example, although I for one would enjoy such a story.

It may interest folks to know that I was in the US Coast Guard, a “peacekeeping and humanitarian armada” of sorts. I specifically joined the USCG because back in the day we were “The Lifesavers” and part of the International Ice Patrol, and that was the sort of military force I was interested in serving with. So please put your easy assumptions to rest.

83. Keachick - March 19, 2013

Marja and trekkiegal: I apologize if I have offended you. My bad, I thought you were in the military. No matter, because I did not intend to put either of you down for having any connections with the military. I merely noted that I found it interesting/curious…(please do not make any negative assumptions of your own in this regard).

“It is estimated that 8 million Americans have an eating disorder – seven million women and one million men
One in 200 American women suffers from anorexia
Two to three in 100 American women suffers from bulimia
Nearly half of all Americans personally know someone with an eating disorder (Note: One in five Americans suffers from mental illnesses.)
An estimated 10 – 15% of people with anorexia or bulimia are males

Anorexia is the 3rd most common chronic illness among adolescents
95% of those who have eating disorders are between the ages of 12 and 25
50% of girls between the ages of 11 and 13 see themselves as overweight
80% of 13-year-olds have attempted to lose weight

RACIAL AND ETHNIC MINORITIES

Rates of minorities with eating disorders are similar to those of white women
74% of American Indian girls reported dieting and purging with diet pills
Essence magazine, in 1994, reported that 53.5% of their respondents, African-American females were at risk of an eating disorder
Eating disorders are one of the most common psychological problems facing young women in Japan.”

http://www.state.sc.us/dmh/anorexia/statistics.htm

For those millions, it is bad and causes and cures need to be found, however, to call for censorship of certain material that some of you find “inappropriate” because of the above and other, is not right. In terms of obesity as the result of yet another eating disorder and eating disorders in general, perhaps one should be directing their queries and concerns to the Food Technology Industry and/or FDA.

I think the issue is whether film and television has a direct impact on how people, especially these teenagers, see themselves and whether they develop these eating disorders and/or other psychological problems as a result. What of those who do not develop such serious problems or none at all? Surely, they watch much the same stuff. The problem is with all this is that little is known about those who do not present with conditions that require psychological and medical treatment. What I and others have been presented with is the negative and in fact has to do with a very small proportion of the overall population.

Censorship, whether it be of scenes in STID or Anthony’s posting of photos to this site (which is what some people are advocating here) should not been taken lightly. It is exclusive and seeks to undermine and ignore those aspects that we may not personally like (whereas others may like and have no problem with) nor fully understand even.

Why don’t you call out the violence that permeates much of what is seen on television and movies? If scenes showing various kinds of sexuality, sex play can have such a negative effect on young minds, as you suggest, then surely these repeated scenes of various kinds of violence, which are so much more prevalent, must surely be more worrying to you, as concerned parents and others. What do these constant images tell young minds about society’s attitudes to violence and how to deal with conflict in general? Also the young men participating in these violent escapades on film are usually “well stacked”, ie each got a good six-pack – ie trim, fit, with obviously good muscle tone necessitating a lot of gym workouts and strict diets among those actors and their stunt doubles (NB the statistics on young men with anorexia/bulimia disorders).

What about the notion that characters are often seen as merely the “objects” of violence? We joke about the fate of Star Trek TOS’s “red shirts”. We are told little or nothing about these people either, before they end up being punched, kicked, victims of phaser fire and so it goes on…

Finally, if I am to be called a “bully”, then I suggest that everybody here talking fervently about this topic is also a “bully”. trekkiegal has constantly repeated her statistics here and to me, has sometimes felt like she has attempted to “bully?” others into accepting her view of problems and their causes.

Perhaps it was not right to negate problems with genuine sexism that occurs within our society, and instead point to other places where the true horror of sexual discrimination and exploitation are so obvious. However, we do need to put these issues into some kind of overall perspective. This is what I was trying to do and unfortunately was misunderstood…again…oh dear… or was I? Perhaps I wrote stuff that people would rather not know about.

84. Phil - March 19, 2013

@75. I’m not sure why you want to link issues. The conversation is about sexism, and you bring up your irritation with military service, violence, your SO getting mugged, war, abortion, crimes against humanity, etc, etc…I’m sorry, but all this obfuscation does is remind me of this pearl of wisdom from WC Fields…’if you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull$hit’.
Lastly, you pick and choose your references. You were not aware that Leia was a captive in TROTJ? You ignore that plenty of people comment on the level of violence in movies here. You blanketly assume that most who post here don’t keep up on politics or current events. And then you graciously tell us that you will live and let live while delivering backhanded compliments? Then complain that you are being unfairly singled out? I’m sorry, dear, but you talk a hellva lot without saying anything. I can sum up your point in two lines, without mentioning my wifes mammogram, her dead grandomother, my friends broken arm, or my three legged cat. Consider that before you lay into someone for expressing distaste for another pointless lecture. I’m done.

85. Phil - March 19, 2013

@82. Marja. Thank you for your service. My son is in the Navy, and the experience has opened my eyes to the good they do, and the bureaucracy they have to deal with to do it. The services have come a long way in integrating women, and they have a long way to go.

86. Phil - March 19, 2013

@83. Right. Believe what you want…

87. Keachick - March 19, 2013

I made those links to anorexia/bulimia statistics because those were what trekkiegal brought up when she first discussed sexual objectification in movies and some of the impact that such objectification can have on young women in particular, one of the major problems being anorexia/bulimia.

I was asking these two posters why they appeared not to object to the violence in movies as much as they objected to scenes showing any kind of sexuality. Yes, I am aware that others have objected to scenes showing big ‘plosions etc, but still, in the context of this discussion, most people appear much more concerned about the remote possibility of there being a little “pourn in their Star Trek” than with any scenes depicting violence of any kind. In fact, many believe that these scenes depicting explosions, battles etc will be what will attract audiences to this movie and what’s more, many express their positive expectation of such and look forward to seeing it.

“I can sum up your point in two lines, without mentioning my wifes mammogram, her dead grandomother, my friends broken arm, or my three legged cat. Consider that before you lay into someone for expressing distaste for another pointless lecture. I’m done.”

What the hell is that supposed to mean? Duh.

88. Anthony Pascale - March 20, 2013

appreciate all the feedback. When sorting through fan stuff or other things on the web that is Trek-related there is quite a lot that I chose not to cover due to being too controversial or inappropriate but I didn’t find the above to be over the line, nor did other mainstream sites which showed that image like io9.

As I have said before I consider this site to be PG-13.

Imagery like the above is a rare thing here but I will not say it wont happen again and the most likely place would be a ‘Great Links’ article. So perhaps you can skip those in the future if you arent interested.

89. totally random - March 20, 2013

@82. I would also like to thank you for your service and I have a question for you. You mentioned being in the Coast Guard and I was wondering if Admiral Heinlein is still active or if he has retired (if anyone is wondering I am talking about Robert Heinlein’s brother).

90. Trekkiegal63 - March 20, 2013

#83 Keachick:

Finally, if I am to be called a “bully”, then I suggest that everybody here talking fervently about this topic is also a “bully”. trekkiegal has constantly repeated her statistics here and to me, has sometimes felt like she has attempted to “bully?” others into accepting her view of problems and their causes.

Throwing me under a bus to draw attention away from yourself, Keachick? Your stubbornness in your beliefs I can understand, as I am also stubborn. So even though I disagree with your views on the subject of your fervency, I get the fervency, itself. But this I didn’t think you capable of resorting to. I’m saddened.

(BTW: I post statistics because when presenting a perspective in a logically framed argument, the burden of proof falls to me).

Anorexia is the 3rd most common chronic illness among adolescents
95% of those who have eating disorders are between the ages of 12 and 25
50% of girls between the ages of 11 and 13 see themselves as overweight
80% of 13-year-olds have attempted to lose weight

Um, these are your statistical references, which you posted, so at the risk of pointing out the obvious here…. 50% of girls between the ages of 11 and 13 seeing themselves as overweight does NOT seem like a ‘small percentage’ to me. In fact, that percentage is even higher than I had previously thought. 50% of a gender related age demographic is a HUGE.

You do realize that these stats don’t actually support your side of things? I mentioned anorexia and bulimia by name as examples of some adverse effects due to sexual objectification. However, I also mentioned lower self-esteem and, in my post #73, confusing one’s worth as an individual with their appearance. This is an extraordinary example of the point I was trying to make… which is not what I think you were trying to accomplish here, but I thank you for posting these regardless. I’m now even more concerned with the issue of sexual objectification than I was before.

Why don’t you call out the violence that permeates much of what is seen on television and movies?

Occam’s Razor. Sometimes the simplest solution is the answer. The issue of violence in the media is not what is being discussed here. The issue of sexism in the media is. You are deflecting. It’s called a red herring.

However, you do have a valid point and should the topic of excessive violence arise, I, for one, will be more than happy to chime in as I have opinions on that as well (or on anything gratuitous, really).

Censorship, whether it be of scenes in STID or Anthony’s posting of photos to this site (which is what some people are advocating here) should not been taken lightly. It is exclusive and seeks to undermine and ignore those aspects that we may not personally like (whereas others may like and have no problem with) nor fully understand even.

Uh huh. Let me ask you something then. Would you show an x-rated film to a 4-5 year old? How about an R rated film? By not showing such things to one so young are you engaging in censorship?

There is a difference between censorship and sensitivity towards age/demographic/gender-related appropriateness in presentation.

When women are being objectified is a common trend, to the point where the addition of it is formulated, and seemingly meets a quota in almost every film, from G rated (The LIttle Mermaid in her bikini top, and lets not leave out Barbi and her unrealistic chest to waist to hip ratio) to X (self-explanatory) the question becomes is this excessive amount of gender specific sexual objectification responsible and/or appropriate. Particularly when such things relate, rather directly, to sexism.

Let’s use an example near and dear to us all: ST 2009 carried a rating of PG-13 and in this film we saw thin and attractive Uhura, as well as her slender, attractive roommate, in their bra and panties. PG-13 means, according to the MPAA (http://www.mpaa.org/ratings/what-each-rating-means), some material may be inappropriate for children under 13. Let’s go revisit your statistics again, shall we? 80% of 13 year old girls have attempted to lose weight. 50% of girls between the ages of 11 and 13 see themselves as overweight

I take it you see what I’m getting at here?

91. Phil - March 20, 2013

@87. It means, I can make your point in two lines, without dragging unnecessary bull$hit into the conversation.

Next question?

92. MJ - March 20, 2013

Killing two birds with one stone, one can imagine that much of those troubled teen boy’s issues could have been cured if he had been able to spend some “extended quality time” with Uhura and Slave Leia.

93. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - March 20, 2013

@92. MJ
Umm … the troubled teen who wrote to Leonard Nimoy was female, according to what appears on My Star Trek Scrapbook – and in the actual featured article itself.

94. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - March 20, 2013

…actually, she wrote to Mr Spock. I suppose if I’m going to get pedantic about things, I should correct myself as well.

95. MJ - March 20, 2013

@93. Whoops? Well, pehaps this still might have worked all for all involved.? :-)

96. Aurore - March 20, 2013

Regarding the povenance of the photo.

The Uhura/Leia picture was apparently taken by a California-based photographer by the name of Rannie Rodil.

It appears to be from her 2010 calendar.

It was mentioned in the comments section of the Facebook page linked to in the article…Unless I misunderstood the poster who referred to her as a friend of his.

97. Aurore - March 20, 2013

96.

Regarding the povenance of the photo

=

Regarding the provenance of the photo

98. Keachick - March 20, 2013

Hardly calling attention to myself, trekkiegal. I am sick of being called a bully by other posters who can be just as fervent and repetitive as I can be.

Concern over body image is nothing new and it is ridiculous to think that it is. Teenagers just don’t suddenly develop poor self-esteem because of sexual objectification and what people see as sexualization. It is not as simplistic as that. Feeling happy and secure with the body one is growing into comes from very early on and has as much to do with how parents and others respond to their children. It comes with a young child (under 5) being accepted for who he/she is and I think this happens when a child is not immediately told to cover their bodies in order not to rude or immodest. Children hearing from an early age that to be naked is rude, dirty, bad very quickly sets up a negative body image of themselves at a very early age and that stays with them. We are forever covering up ourselves and our children, even in our own homes, as if our nakedness is something to be ashamed of.

Now we can’t even show on television a toddler running naked. The child’s bottom is pixalated. We are now so fearful of pedophilia that we no longer has a sense of proportion when it comes to being seen as we are really are. Children rarely ever see their own parents in their natural state so they never learn what it is to be an adult human being. If they do happen to, it is not uncommon for parents to show embarrassment and immediately cover themselves, even if they have only come from a shower. Once again, we are afraid of our nakedness being considered somehow inappropriate and bad.

Naked and nudity then easily becomes confused with sex and being sexually desirable and desirous. There is no doubt that an attractive naked body of either male or female can be sexually arousing, but nakedness, of itself, is not necessarily sexual. It is simply who and what we are, when we do not cover ourselves up all the time. However, when a young child never sees a parent being comfortable with their own naked selves, the child never learns to appreciate their natural humanity (flaws and all) without projecting feelings, fears, anxieties, because these are what they have learned from their own parents and other caregivers, like a grandmother, like my own well meaning but prudish mother. I was/am angry at how she behaved towards my younger son when he was at that impressionable age.

We constantly reinforce a false and idealized view of our humanity on children. Then the advertisers come trying to sell stuff like the stupid Barbie dolls etc., the apparently provocative tween teeshirts etc. Adults, especially women, are supposed to have perfect looking teeth, the shiniest hair, the smoothest of hands, perfectly manicured and of course, the best of figures, in spite of the fact that many women have undergone pregnancies and childbirth, both events often having a profound and life changing effect on weight control, metabolism etc.

Instead of hiding our bodies away from our children because of some weird kind of modesty (or is it really conceit?), shame and fear, we should allow them to see us, as women, as we really are. Many a mum may carry a little tum, may have some cellulite on the thighs, have breasts that droop a bit (not so pert) – so what? Our children, especially our daughters, need to SEE and hear – “Yes, this is how I am. I do need to take care of what I eat and to get enough exercise and rest so that I do not put on too much weight and have plenty of energy. But no matter how I might look, as not as slim as I used to be and certainly not much like those models and actresses we see on movies and ads, it is a small price to pay because I now have you in my life and that is what so wonderful and important!”

No child should have to resort to sneaking a look at a pourn site in order to see what a naked human being looks like! My daughter (10) can’t stand the sight of all the various dolls sold in shops, including the Barbie dolls. I promise I have not made any negative comment about any of these dolls. She simply doesn’t like them, because they do not look like real girls or women. Michelle also knows about those things that “ladies wear” when they menstruate…because, well, I expect her to need to what “ladies wear” within the next year or so. She has seen me need to use them on occasion. Her school has also gently educated her on early puberty and what to expect.

As far as I know, traditionally in places like Scandinavia where it is quite normal for adults and children to be naked in their homes during the summer months, problems with low self-esteem resulting in eating disorders, teen pregnancies, teen abortions, STDs are not nearly as bad as they are in countries where nudity is rendered bad, indecent etc. Those kids tend to be more secure in their bodies and not as impressionable to negative outside influences as many of our children can be.

99. Phil - March 20, 2013

@98…..in your opinion. Different societies vary on what is culturally acceptable, and there really isn’t any hard evidence one way or another that supports your position. Conservative cultures and exhibitionists alike both raise perfectly normal kids. Not everyone shares your embrace of exhibitionist tendecies, that does not make them bad people.

100. Marja - March 20, 2013

First I would like to thank RedDeadRyan, TrekkieGal, Phil, and others for expressing their opinions on the issue of sexism.

Rose, I definitely support many of your statements in view of Hollywood’s and pop culture’s “idealized” body images. What Phil says about different societies and cultural norms is quite valid too.

19th century novelist Gustave Flaubert was shocked, as he expressed in a letter to George Sand, that his publishers regarded sex as less acceptable to portray fictionally than murder and violence. I tend to feel the same way. My ideas about when such concepts should be introduced to the young may differ from yours, but I support your right to raise your children with favorable body images and personally wish more parents would do the same.

If I had children I should much rather they see nudes than murders in the media. I had much rather explain sex to them than I would sex-intertwined-with-violence, or excessive violence in general. While science has not yet substantiated the effect of viewing violent acts [and participating via videogames] on children and adolescents, I am concerned about the long-term effects of this.

My main objection to Hollywood’s and pop culture’s treatment of women is that they pften seem to exist to be objects of adolescent male fantasy, and unrealistic portrayals perfectly skinny, with large breasts. There are variations on this theme, including women of color, and while I applaud their inclusion in mainstream media I deplore that they are usually vessels for male fantasy. However Hollywood is beginning to realize and depict “ideal males” as well, and as I’ve previously suggested, Star Trek is full of them, and I enjoy that, so again my position is ambiguous, as are so many human viewpoints and opinions.

I posted [or thought I had] a rebuttal of some earlier statements of yours. While I support many of your positions, I can’t support them all, and this is as it should be in democratic debate; we don’t always agree and some of us resent the repeated sounding of the same opinion again and again. I am “guilty” of both. But that is because of my strong stance on my opinions.

So long as we attend screenings of Star Trek, we are to some degree supporting the depiction of violence and some sexism in Hollywood. I find it interesting in myself and in others that we decry violence and yet, oddly, continue to love Star Trek – but I simply can’t help myself in this small area of my life. When Kirk bested Ayel on the Romulan ship, I had to smile. I consider my love for Trek as much more acceptable [in my personal, admittedly ambiguous, view] than “torturep*rn” ["Saw," "Hostel"] and very violent action movies [Tarantino's et. al.], and depictions of sexual violence, and don’t support these latter programs/movies with my customer dollars.

And like Captain Pike, I view Starfleet as a peacekeeping and humanitarian organization [and in fact, the one that influenced my decision to join the Coast Guard].

While we have admirable role models like Uhura, we see misused figures such as Gaila, who enjoyed sex with, but also got abandoned by, Kirk, in service of his desire to beat a test he considered unfair. I can process this through writing fanfic and casting a positive light on Kirk’s regret over this, &c., but there are people for whom Gaila was simply a “hot chick” and Uhura was a “pushy broad” b/c she challenged Spock in the funny, sassy, “infamous” hangar scene in the first movie.

I dealt with day-to-day sexism for nearly 20 years as a Coast Guard petty officer and saw institutional sexism in many cases [while it was not supported officially, it was often swept under the rug]. I was a “pushy broad” b/c I was a feminist, asked for and won one tiny victory after another, and my feminism helped to change perceptions. So I feel strongly that I know whereof I speak, and will not give anyone “quarter” on that particular issue. They are of course free to disagree.

BTW, the USCG *is* one of the five branches of the US military; however, our leading missions such as search and rescue, environmental protection, inspection of marine vessels and port safety are primary to our organization rather than military action per se.

Have a lovely day, all.

101. Keachick - March 20, 2013

“Exhibitionism is the act of exposing in a public or semi-public context those parts of one’s body that are not normally exposed – specifically the genitals or buttocks of a man or woman, or the breasts of a woman. The practice may arise from a desire or compulsion to expose themselves in such a manner to groups of friends or acquaintances, or to strangers for their amusement or sexual satisfaction or to shock the bystander.[1]”

I never inferred exhibitionist behaviour in post at #98. I referred to a more natural way of living where nudity was part of living within a family household. It was not something done in public or if strangers came to visit. In the middle of a very hot, humid summer’s day, I might often sit wearing nothing but a pair of knickers, and if my kids came and found me, what of it? If they saw me come out of the shower and dry off, what of it? The fact is that they simply get on with whatever it is they are doing…and it was not gawking at their parents’ nakedness nor at pictures of naked women on the internet or whatever. They had more interesting things to do…

We are not exhibitionists. Flashers are exhibitionists…ye gods… none of us are those people.

“The word naturism was used for the first time in 1778 by a French-speaking Belgian, Jean Baptiste Luc Planchon (1734–1781), and was advocated as a means of improving the ‘l’hygiène de vie’ (natural style of life) and health.[4][5]

According to the international definition adopted by the XIV Congress of the International Naturist Federation (Agde, France, 1974), naturism is:
“a lifestyle in harmony with nature, expressed through social nudity, and characterised by self-respect of people with different opinions and of the environment.”[1][2]“

102. Keachick - March 20, 2013

Where did my explanation of “exhibitionism” go? Phil referred to me extolling exhibitionist behaviour which I was not. The definition I quoted gave its correct definition.

Marja – I agree. I do not have a problem with any of the scenes showing Gaila with Kirk etc. If there is a problem, it has to do with how many people see such a scene and how a snapshot of a couple can lead people to make so many negative assumptions about the pair. Sure, in one sense, Gaila is a hot chick – Rachel Nichols is an attractive woman – no denying. But that is not all Gaila is…she was also a Starfleet cadet like Uhura and Kirk. She was assigned to the Farragut.

I am a little afraid to go here, but here is my initial reaction when I read this:

“Kirk has a scene in bed (back in San Francisco) in bed with two “cat women””

Oh wow. Interesting. Cool. Exciting. Lovely even. I wonder who these two females could be, what might they look like. Do they come as a pair, as in Kirk does not get one without the other? Had Kirk met them before somewhere? Are they members of Starfleet? Where are they from originally? Presumably (it is to be hoped, KO writing team!) that any sexual intimacy is totally consensual – there is a good chance that whatever happens between the three will be pleasurable, enjoyable, having curiosities and questions answered by all parties, life affirming, potentially life-giving even. Will they see one another again when all the fighting is done?

Unfortunately, what happened in the debate was anything but edifying and I found that my rose-tinted glasses got soiled, stained, broken. I do not think it right that my romantic illusions, even silliness, should have been spoiled by so many people’s negative assumptions about a scene that nobody had even seen.

I want to see that scene more than ever and I want to know who these Caitian(?) females are, even if that scene needs to be filmed again with more explanation and dialogue. Chris Pine and the lady actresses need to go back into the studio to give me a proper James Kirk as lover scene. Edit out some explosion scene if you have to.

103. Phil - March 20, 2013

Excuse me. Nudist might have been a better choice of words.

Regardless of waht you call it, or whatever thrill you get from it, the creepy factor is over the top. It’s one thing to enter a home or establishment where someone putting themselves on display is communicated in advance, it’s another to have it thrust on you. If neighbor Bob likes watering the lawn in the buff, keep it in the back yard.

Smoking was (and depending on what, is) considered healthy at one point in time. Now it’s just a stupid idea. I suspect that forcing one to confront their sexuality in a manner that isn’t within their ability to control isn’t going to end well for anyone. As I’ve mentioned before, it must be a special part of the world you live in where no one has to consider the context and appropiateness of a behaviour. Here in the real world we have to deal with it daily, and it’s usually much better to have very distinct boundries between what we do in private and public.

104. Anthony Pascale - March 20, 2013

Keachick

You realize 20% of the comments are from you and you have written far more copy than the actual article. Do you think maybe once again you (and some others) are taking things too seriously?

105. Mark Lynch - March 20, 2013

Honestly, I don’t see why some are getting in a lather over what is, a bit of fun photograph which is in no way pornographic. It might raise an eyebrow or two, but it is certainly “safe for work”. I’ll definitely be showing it all my work mates, male and female alike.

YMMV of course, although as a great man once said;
No matter where you go, there you are…

106. CoffeeProf - March 20, 2013

To those of you who are up in arms over the Uhura pic, let me quote William Shatner when he said, “Get a life!” There’s nothing pornographic about it so get over yourselves. Hell, Nichelle Nichols posed topless. What do you have to say about that?

107. K-7 - March 20, 2013

@104. But Anthony, we all desperately need to hear Keachick’s theories on sex, sexual images, and the relationship between sex and the media.

I am busy here right now talking note on all of her posts, and am developing a graduate-level course based on her incredible information and wisdom on sex.

She is never wrong on any of this, and represents and internationally-renowned resource on the issues that should be treasured by all of us.

108. Aurore - March 20, 2013

“Thanks for posting about the Spock blog, it has really increased awareness of my Scrapbook page! Wow. Who would have thought?”
_______

Who would have thought?
The attention you are getting is well deserved, in my opinion.
Yours is truly an amazing site. Thank you for sharing!

“Also, if anyone is wanting the final word on the color of female underwear on TOS, check out this page:…”

Thank you for the link!

:)

109. Marja - March 20, 2013

Aurore and others,

I am sorry I failed to note the lovely supportive letter Leonard Nimoy wrote about Spock’s reaction to racial prejudice and his encouraging words to the biracial girl about seeking excellence instead of letting others get her down.

Mr Nimoy truly is a mensch. What a nice guy.

My Star Trek Scrapbook is a great resource for people looking for the history of Star Trek, too. Hats off to the keeper of the site!

110. Keachick - March 20, 2013

Phil – the only person sounding creepy is you. Why don’t you read what I wrote? I said it was done at home, not in public. I am not thrusting anything on anyone.

I posted the official definition of naturism/nudism, but that does not mean that I necessarily adhere to it. In fact, most naturists don’t because they understand the appropriateness or otherwise, depending on the circumstances.

Once again, I am sorry to say, you show yourself as narrow minded, prejudiced individual who seems to not be able to pay attention to the written word.

I’ve said all I need to say. I have been clear about it and I certainly do not need or wish for your approval on such matters.

111. Keachick - March 20, 2013

Sorry, Anthony, but as you can see, the same people are out in force having “a go at me” for expressing yet another viewpoint that they find contrary to their own narrow worldview.

You have no need to concern yourself. I am done here and I hope these other people are done as well. Their comments are not at all surprising unfortunately, monotonous and predictable, as in K-7′s sarcasm, as I would expect…oh dear…:(

112. Phil - March 20, 2013

@111. Promise?

113. Cygnus-X1 - March 23, 2013

11. ObsessiveStarTrekFan – March 18, 2013

—-…actually is it a sweat SHIFT… A shift is a type of dress, which this plainly is. It’s far too long to be a shirt.—-

Thank you for that. Learn something new every day. I have never heard that usage before. Checking the online dictionary, it’s way down the list at #15 of noun uses.
It must have gone out of fashion (pun intended) just before my time…and I can see why!

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.