(TV) Star Trek: Discovery

[ClassicPeon]

You specifically argued that woke is the antithesis of racism. Why is that a bad thing? Seems like its a very, very good thing.

Thats not really how it works. There are radicals on both sides in almost any conflict. And i didnt argue, at any point, that being racist was better.

[Ivanstone]

Thats not really how it works. There are radicals on both sides in almost any conflict. And i didnt argue, at any point, that being racist was better.

Its exactly how it works. Being "Woke" isn't being radical. Its just opposing bigotry and nothing else. Your specific words.

Furthermore, why is being a radical for positive idea the equivalent of being a radical for a negative idea?

[ClassicPeon]

Its exactly how it works. Being "Woke" isn't being radical. Its just opposing bigotry and nothing else. Your specific words.

Furthermore, why is being a radical for positive idea the equivalent of being a radical for a negative idea?

Yes. Being woke is literally being radical.

Let me explain it to you like this. Take Star Wars.

You have the dark side and the light side.

The light side is the antithesis of the dark side. But in reality they are just as radical in their ideas. They instigate conflicts, they help fuck up the entire galaxy just as much as the dark side does.

The only objective intelligent and good side is the middle. People without radical ideas.

Be inclusive - dont be inclusive at the cost of everyything else.

Directly inthe context of the star trek show(i'm going back to this now because these offtopic hate accusations have taken up enough space now):

Star trek's viewer base is extremely dominated by straight white guys. Its the segment - simply put. We are talking something like 80+%.

How many straight white guys do you think audition for a new star trek show? Probably a lot yeah. How many straight white guys are in the main cast right now? How many straight white guys can the literal viewer segment identify themselves as?

Thats overly inclusive and not representative.

Just gonna add this:

Doesnt mean the light side is as objectively evil or bad as the dark side

Just like the woke people arent as objectively "bad" as racists are.

[Ivanstone]

Yes. Being woke is literally being radical.

Let me explain it to you like this. Take Star Wars.

You have the dark side and the light side.

The light side is the antithesis of the dark side. But in reality they are just as radical in their ideas. They instigate conflicts, they help fuck up the entire galaxy just as much as the dark side does.

The only objective intelligent and good side is the middle. People without radical ideas.

Be inclusive - dont be inclusive at the cost of everyything else.

Directly inthe context of the star trek show(i'm going back to this now because these offtopic hate accusations have taken up enough space now):

Star trek's viewer base is extremely dominated by straight white guys. Its the segment - simply put. We are talking something like 80+%.

How many straight white guys do you think audition for a new star trek show? Probably a lot yeah. How many straight white guys are in the main cast right now? How many straight white guys can the literal viewer segment identify themselves as?

Thats overly inclusive and not representative.

Star Wars is a movie about wizards punching Nazis. The light and dark are not remotely equivalent. The wizards sometimes don't live up to their stated ideals but they're still the good guys. The dark side are fucking Nazis.

I'll need a citation about Trek's viewer base.

Even if its dominated by straight white males, those straight white males should heed the show's lessons. You literally just made an argument that all Trek shows should be majority straight white males in their casting so their alleged viewer base doesn't feel uncomfortable.

[ClassicPeon]

Star Wars is a movie about wizards punching Nazis. The light and dark are not remotely equivalent. The wizards sometimes don't live up to their stated ideals but they're still the good guys. The dark side are fucking Nazis.

I'll need a citation about Trek's viewer base.

Even if its dominated by straight white males, those straight white males should heed the show's lessons. You literally just made an argument that all Trek shows should be majority straight white males in their casting so their alleged viewer base doesn't feel uncomfortable.

Its a comparison of the ideologies not the content of the show. I mean cmon.

Why should straight white males heed the shows lessons? And what lessons is that?

No i "literally" didnt "made an argument that all Trek shows should be majority straight white males". Once again you jump to conclusions not based on fact.

I made the argument that its OVERLY repressentative. Just like it wouldnt make sense to take a show like the OT who's demographic is very dominated by african americans and exhange all the african americans in the show with white people. Because that means the literal demograhpic cant identify themselves as well with it.

The funny reality is that if they simply took a %segment of the people who applied to be in Star Trek it would be dominated my straight white men. So what they are doing is going out of their way to make sure its the exact opposite. Which literally just makes no sense - hence the "woke isnt the good side" argument

[Ivanstone]

Its a comparison of the ideologies not the content of the show. I mean cmon.

Why should straight white males heed the shows lessons? And what lessons is that?

That racism is bad for a start.

No i "literally" didnt "made an argument that all Trek shows should be majority straight white males". Once again you jump to conclusions not based on fact.

Your words:

How many straight white guys can the literal viewer segment identify themselves as?

Do you know how many characters in DSC that straight white guys can identify themselves with? All of them. That's what being tolerant means. If you can't identify with them, that's a you problem.

Seriously here are things that you can identify with:
Burnham - Impatience vs duty.
Tilly - Insecurity.
Stamets - Ethical boundaries.
Culber - Love.
Saru - Fear.
Georgiou - Powerlessness. Also love (family instead of romantic).

They don't need them to be straight white males for me to identify with these problems.

[Shakadam]

So, 3 seasons in is usually when a Star Trek show starts getting good. I don't have high hopes for discovery though, since season 3 was by far the worst one. Just completely nonsensical throughout. It was on an upward trajectory with season 2, especially towards the end which I'd even classify as "pretty good" but season 3 just undid all that and plummeted hard.

[Koriani]

I am a trekkie. My husband is a trekkie. My cousins are Trekkie - my cousin-in-law has headed up the StarFleet Federation Chapter in our County area for over two decades now. We all love Star Trek. We all agree its always been inclusive and its always been progressive - and none of us have problems with any of that.

We all enjoy Discovery.

But none of us defend it as a 'well-written' show. We accept its limitations for what it is, and enjoy what we got. Its "close enough" and "good enough" for the bunch of us - but we have plenty of discussions about the weaknesses of plot and how the writers have chosen to develop the Burnham character and the show around her.

Its not hating. Its being able to critically discuss both pros AND CONS of something we still enjoy. Just because we like it doesn't mean it has to be the best ever. Not at all. You can still enjoy the hell out of something while also acknowledging how some things aren't great.

And we all manage to do this without hating and bashing and insulting and calling people names.

You can be a Trekkie and not like Discovery. You can be a Trekkie and like Discovery. Or you can be a Trekkie in the middle! Ain't life grand.

[ClassicPeon]

That racism is bad for a start.

1. There are plenty of racists outside of straight white males my friend.

2. You think literal racists - who have been hearing this their entire life is going to learn that from watching star trek? Or are you just trying to annoy me by insinuating all straight white males are racist?

Your words:

Yeah you need to formulate an argument if you are going to make a comparison like that. Saying that one segment currently doesnt have anyone they can identify themselves with isnt the same as saying that everyone in the show should be their segment.
Your arguments are extremely faulty.

Do you know how many characters in DSC that straight white guys can identify themselves with? All of them. That's what being tolerant means. If you can't identify with them, that's a you problem.

This is actually the funniest thing i've seen. Do you know why woke people have been advocating for many years to have more inclusion in mainstream media? Its literally because they want to be able to identify with the characters. You are just straight up spouting bs now

As to the rest of the post - thats not how identifying with someone works. Thats just you being obtuse again

[SavoirFaire]

The Romulan's definitely used dilithium but it was never explained how. Their drive was used because of its utility with the cloaking device and nothing else.

Dilithium is used as a control rod in matter/anti matter reactions as it is not destroyed by either as I understand it. I’d imagine the burn should have cost trillions of lives if you’d logically think that planets used these reactors as well. You rupture anti matter containment with the dilithium explosion and... kapow!

I’d much rather discovery had found the source, and through Timey-Whimey circumstances try to stop the burn and end up causing it. The “wtf” part? The federation knew they caused it, but because of the temporal accords didn’t interfere in spite of the massive destruction. Discovery spends the rest of it’s existence trying to atone for what it’s done with dilithium delivery, with the galaxy not knowing they caused it, and with them encountering new (to them) races and experiences.

[Ivanstone]

1. There are plenty of racists outside of straight white males my friend.

2. You think literal racists - who have been hearing this their entire life is going to learn that from watching star trek? Or are you just trying to annoy me by insinuating all straight white males are racist?

Stop justifying racism.

Yes, there are racists who watch Star Trek. Capitalists watch Star Trek. Flatearthers watch Star Trek. Is that insane? Yes but people like what they like.

Yeah you need to formulate an argument if you are going to make a comparison like that. Saying that one segment currently doesnt have anyone they can identify themselves with isnt the same as saying that everyone in the show should be their segment.
Your arguments are extremely faulty.

I already explained to you how you can identify with someone else. Just try it. You'll be a better person.

This is actually the funniest thing i've seen. Do you know why woke people have been advocating for many years to have more inclusion in mainstream media? Its literally because they want to be able to identify with the characters. You are just straight up spouting bs now

As to the rest of the post - thats not how identifying with someone works. Thats just you being obtuse again

Actually they've just been saying that different kinds of people should have the same opportunity.

- - - Updated - - -

Dilithium is used as a control rod in matter/anti matter reactions as it is not destroyed by either as I understand it. I’d imagine the burn should have cost trillions of lives if you’d logically think that planets used these reactors as well. You rupture anti matter containment with the dilithium explosion and... kapow!

I’d much rather discovery had found the source, and through Timey-Whimey circumstances try to stop the burn and end up causing it. The “wtf” part? The federation knew they caused it, but because of the temporal accords didn’t interfere in spite of the massive destruction. Discovery spends the rest of it’s existence trying to atone for what it’s done with dilithium delivery, with the galaxy not knowing they caused it, and with them encountering new (to them) races and experiences.

The burn killed a lot of people. Coping and rebuilding after a disaster is also an interesting story line.

[s_bushido]

Dilithium is used as a control rod in matter/anti matter reactions as it is not destroyed by either as I understand it. I’d imagine the burn should have cost trillions of lives if you’d logically think that planets used these reactors as well. You rupture anti matter containment with the dilithium explosion and... kapow!

As far as I know, everyday systems (pretty much everything but warp engines) were powered by fusion reactors. Both on starships and starbases. The warp reactor can be used to power other things (like when they do the "divert warp power to the shields" thing), but that's not normally its function. It's also how the ships can function just fine, both in and out of combat, after they've ejected their warp core.

[ClassicPeon]

Stop justifying racism.

Check yourself before you come with any more unsubstantiated wild claims please. Grow the fuck up.

Yes, there are racists who watch Star Trek. Capitalists watch Star Trek. Flatearthers watch Star Trek. Is that insane? Yes but people like what they like.

This has nothing to do with what i wrote. Feel free to read it again and try replying again in aproper way.

I already explained to you how you can identify with someone else. Just try it. You'll be a better person.

Explain that to these people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_...of_LGBT_people

Actually they've just been saying that different kinds of people should have the same opportunity.

That is either a straight up lie or it shows you know absolutely nothing about what you are talking about

[Ara Myrr]

I already explained to you how you can identify with someone else. Just try it. You'll be a better person.

You didn't explain that at all. Relating to the traits a person possesses is not tolerance.

Tolerance is accepting someone (or their opinions) for who they are, regardless of how much they might differ from you.

That still doesn't mean you can identify with them or their views, sometimes that's just not possible.

[Grapemask]

Many others don't. Everyone i know is loving it and several are trekkies. I only see strangers online hating on it, but somehow still keep looking up what is happening. It's suspicious.

I mean, I think the show is fun, but it's still a groaner and getting to be more of one with every episode. I think Discovery fixes some of the issues that popped up in later Treks, where "technobabble deus ex machina" became the solution to every episode's problem. Instead, Discovery makes action and adventure the center, and the tech talk is usually just the setup for that action and adventure. That's fun, and I think that gets closer to TOS than some of the more recent Trek series have been.

My issues with Discovery I think aren't necessarily Trek-specific other than that older Treks did these things better: just poor storytelling in general, because it caters to dumb viewers that they hope won't give even a moment's thought to the premise. Old Trek also didn't always stand up to tough scrutiny either, but good storytelling doesn't have to be perfect - it just has to get you to believe that this thing is plausible.

Using just the one example that sticks with me from the season finale, the trill. Ivan pointed out that it's known that trill personas can split off from the greater whole and do their own thing - and that's perfectly plausible and not at issue. But then you get into the magical computer that can apparently read minds, and then translate that mind reading into a new body that everyone can see. Even in the future, that's a little harder to swallow, and opens up about a trillion questions about why, well, anything else in this universe works the way it does - seriously, they have computers that read minds! No, no, that's only half of the revolutionary bit: it reads minds, and can even project data back into those minds. That holo was able to walk to a position outside of the host's line of sight and see everything going on. At this point, I was expecting a big reveal that no one in the future actually lives out in the real world, and that everyone sleeps in a Matrix tube astral projecting their consciousness into the universe... but it never came. But it should be a thing, because I mean, that's nuts.

All of this would be great in a fantasy show, because "it works because we say it does" is perfectly valid there. But for those of us who came from and for science fiction that leaned on the science, it's a little offputting.

[Ivanstone]

You didn't explain that at all. Relating to the traits a person possesses is not tolerance.

Tolerance is accepting someone (or their opinions) for who they are, regardless of how much they might differ from you.

That still doesn't mean you can identify with them or their views, sometimes that's just not possible.

We're all unique individuals with innumerable traits. You may not be able to identify with an entire person's being but you can always identify with part of them. The tolerant will try, the intolerant makes excuses.

[ClassicPeon]

We're all unique individuals with innumerable traits. You may not be able to identify with an entire person's being but you can always identify with part of them. The tolerant will try, the intolerant makes excuses.

Does intolerant - in this case- encompass people who call other people racists, bigots and accuse them of justifying racism out of thin air without apology or argumentation afterwards?

Just curious

[Ivanstone]

Check yourself before you come with any more unsubstantiated wild claims please. Grow the fuck up.



This has nothing to do with what i wrote. Feel free to read it again and try replying again in aproper way.



Explain that to these people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_...of_LGBT_people



That is either a straight up lie or it shows you know absolutely nothing about what you are talking about

You need to put more thought into what you say. Some of it wouldn't be out of place on right wing talk radio.

People with values that are different from what's on Star Trek, watch the show. If I can't tell you apart from the legit racists, who also whine about the "lack" of straight white males, then maybe you just need to change how you post.

"Historically, the portrayals of LGBT communities in media have been negative, reflecting the cultural intolerance of LGBT individuals; however, from the 1990s to present day, there has been an increase in the depictions of LGBT people, issues, and concerns within mainstream media in North America." From your link. Smells like tolerance and opportunity.

People who have historically been denied opportunity don't want it? Well, to be fair, Nichelle Nichols wasn't happy with the opportunity given to her but she stuck it out for the betterment of television.

- - - Updated - - -

Does intolerant - in this case- encompass people who call other people racists, bigots and accuse them of justifying racism out of thin air without apology or argumentation afterwards?

Just curious

I didn't do it out of thin air. You engaged in bullshit and I called you on it.

- - - Updated - - -

Using just the one example that sticks with me from the season finale, the trill. Ivan pointed out that it's known that trill personas can split off from the greater whole and do their own thing - and that's perfectly plausible and not at issue. But then you get into the magical computer that can apparently read minds, and then translate that mind reading into a new body that everyone can see.

My bigger issue with that scene is the other memories not coming out to play. Gray is the most prominent of them but I wouldn't have minded a big group hug.

[ClassicPeon]

You need to put more thought into what you say. Some of it wouldn't be out of place on right wing talk radio.

People with values that are different from what's on Star Trek, watch the show. If I can't tell you apart from the legit racists, who also whine about the "lack" of straight white males, then maybe you just need to change how you post.

"Historically, the portrayals of LGBT communities in media have been negative, reflecting the cultural intolerance of LGBT individuals; however, from the 1990s to present day, there has been an increase in the depictions of LGBT people, issues, and concerns within mainstream media in North America." From your link. Smells like tolerance and opportunity.

People who have historically been denied opportunity don't want it? Well, to be fair, Nichelle Nichols wasn't happy with the opportunity given to her but she stuck it out for the betterment of television.

- - - Updated - - -



I didn't do it out of thin air. You engaged in bullshit and I called you on it.

I engaged in what you personally subjectively thought was bullshit which justifies calling aperson racist and a bigot aswell as saying they are justifying racism?

Is that your argument here?

You need to put more thought into what you say. Some of it wouldn't be out of place on right wing talk radio.

Try arguing. Just try it. I'l wait

[Myradin]

The way I see it, Discovery writing would still be bad even if Michael Burnham was a white guy. I imagine the media would be all over him for his 'toxic masculininity' for constantly challenging the captain's authority and doing their own thing (Especially in the first episode where we had the female captain).

Being inclusive doesn't suddenly make a show good, and just because someone hates a poorly written person of color doesn't mean their racist and wouldn't enjoy a well written person of color.