this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2023
151 points (100.0% liked)

Star Trek Social Club

452 readers
3 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.


New to Star Trek and wondering where to start?


Rules

1 Be constructiveAll posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.


2 Be welcomingIt is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.


3 Be truthfulAll posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.


4 Be niceIf a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.


5 SpoilersUtilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episode. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.


6 Keep on-topicAll busmittions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books, etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/Quarks.


7 MetaQuestions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.


Upcoming Episodes

Date Episode Title
11-28 LD 5x07 "Fully Dilated"
12-05 LD 5x08 "Upper Decks"
12-12 LD 5x09 "Fissure Quest"
12-19 LD 5x10 "The New Next Generation"
01-24 Film "Section 31"

Episode Discussion Archive


In Production

Strange New Worlds (TBA)

Section 31 (2025-01-24)

Starfleet Academy (TBA)


In Development

Untitled theatrical film

Untitled comedy series


Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.

Allied Discord Server


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I found this after reading and responding to this post here about early Trek fans' prejudicial negative reaction to TNG. One of my responses (see here) was to point out that any fans of the progressiveness of Trek ought to have been mindful of the room for improvement over TOS, with female representation being an obvious issue. I posed the question "when did Trek start consistently passing the Bechdel test", thinking that it didn't start happening until Voyager, which those hard-line TOS fans would never have allowed to be made (along with TNG and DS9).

And of course, someone's done the analysis with graphs and everything! Awesome! (though note the links to tumblr posts at the bottom that are now behind a sign-in wall ... fun).

The results aren't surprising to me, generally. I expected TNG to do worse, but also thought it did a pretty good job with female guest characters so it might score higher than I thought. DS9, I expected to do better than TNG, which, to my surprise is only marginally true. But I didn't expect, from memory, how much of that is attributable to so many characters breaking off into (hetero, yes even Odo) couples. Voyager obviously does very well. And Enterprise ... well we shouldn't expect much of that ... honestly, for me, this cements the show's status as a blight on this era to lean so masculine straight after voyager.

And of course TOS shows its age, which, surely by 1987, good Trek fans should have been aware of?

Beyond that, I can't help but think of SNW here, which, IMO has a wonderful cast/crew that's well balanced and which I'd expect to be doing well on the Bechdel (as low and superficial bar as it is). But, as it starts to transition into a TOS prequel/reboot (as it is trending from S2 and as the show runners are indicating), all of those TOS characters are going to carry that 60s baggage with them. They'll all be men (Uhura is already there!) and all be special miracle workers. La'an's story has already been sidelined into a Kirk romance. Pelia the engineer was already somewhat substituted by Scotty the engineer. As it goes on (presuming it does), I think it could begin to look awkward once you squint.


EDIT: For those asking about new seasons/series ... I found this page/blog by the author of the parent blog post ... which provides data for some new Trek (Disco and Picard S3 and SNW S1 it seems).

Somewhat notably to me (though only one data point) ... the one episode of SNW S1 that (clearly) fails the test is the one with Kirk in it.

In a similar vein though, while Disco generally does well (best of all Trek so far it seems), the author notes that Season two had the most episodes that were close to the line, because Michael’s arc was so intertwined with her search for her brother, Spock. That is, the more new Trek leans into TOS nostalgia, the worse this gets.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] teft@startrek.website 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not even one episode of season 1 TOS passed it. For shame. What were the 60s thinking?

Edit: /s by the way. I'm aware of the culture in the 60s.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, it was another time. Their first pilot had number one, and that didn't fly. But that's the point, it was another time, and staying stuck in that time will always have drawbacks. As the article points out, the TOS Kelvin timeline reboots don't do well on the bechdel at all, and it's not a coincidence. If SNW heads toward more TOS prequel/reboot territory, you'll probably see it in bechdel data like this.

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The first pilot literally had them talking about how weird it is to have a woman on the bridge.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That was likely added to quell reactions to a woman as a first officer. But the Network had notes even so on how negatively test audiences reacted to Majel Barrett’s Number One.

Roddenberry tried another tack with blonde, beehived, Whitney in a miniskirt as Yeoman Janice Rand. She was supposed to be a woman main character but even that was too much for the executives and she was written out by the end of the first season.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A yeoman is an odd position to write into a series.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It’s one of the most senior NCO roles, and one that interacts regularly with a captain. It shouldn’t have been portrayed as a secretary.

Roddenberry was told he couldn’t have both an alien (Spock) and a woman as a first officer.

[–] teft@startrek.website 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It shouldn’t have been portrayed as a secretary.

That's exactly what a yeoman does on a modern naval ship.

From wikipedia:

In the modern Navy, a yeoman is an enlisted service member who performs administrative and clerical work.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That’s understating the role.

Administration does not equal secretary, except in the old British usage where the Secretary to the Prime Minister is what’s now called a Chief of Staff.

A yeoman is one of the most senior NCOs, responsible for communication with command and the admiralty, also responsible for performance assessments of all the enlisted ranks and more junior NCOs.

[–] teft@startrek.website 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeoman can rate from E-1 to E-9 so I'm not sure why you think they are only senior NCOs.

This is directly from a naval site:

General Description

Yeoman perform administrative and clerical work. They receive visitors, answer telephone calls and sort incoming mail. They type, organize files and operate modern office equipment such as word processing computers and copying machines.

What They Do

The duties performed by YNs include:

Preparing, typing and routing correspondence and reports

Organizing and maintaining files

Receiving office visits and handling telephone communications

Operating personal computers, word processing, duplicating, audio-recording and other office machines

Performing office personnel administration

Maintaining records and official publications

Performing administrative functions for legal proceedings

Serving as office managers

Performing other various clerical and administrative duties

That's a secretary, or more properly today an administrative assistant.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The level would be relative to the officer they are supporting. On a ship with a captain who was a full captain, they would be a senior NCO.

Not to mention that the ranks in the 1960s were a bit different.

[–] teft@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Their position would increase as they increased in rank but they are still just secretaries, even at the highest level.

On a ship with a captain who was a full captain, they would be a senior NCO.

This is false. In the documentary Carrier (2008) which follows the USS Nimitz on a deployment in the gulf they follow a yeoman, Shaneka McReed for some of it. She is promoted during the episode to E-4, Yeoman Petty Officer 3rd Class. She was a yeoman who served on the bridge of the carrier. (I just recently watched this which is why I thought you were incorrect on your description).

I don't know about rank changing since the 60s other than in 2016 they no longer referred to sailors by their ratings, only their rank.

[–] StillPaisleyCat@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It’s tricky to know because technology has changed the nature of these jobs significantly, and Star Trek has tended to map to roles as they are, despite projecting further technology.

In the 60s, 70s & 80s, a Yeoman would have held the encryption keys and would have been responsible for interactions with command. (The Comms officer would have had communications engineering and codes, but not necessarily access to the highest command codes.)

Likewise, responsibility for personnel assessment and promotion recommendations among ratings was a senior NCO responsibility that interlinked with the responsibilities of the XO.

It’s easy to portray a lot of these jobs as ‘merely clerical’ and it can be a kind of erasure of the people of colour and women who were in these ratings.

It brings to mind the work of the WW2 Wrens who did all the naval gaming in the UK and in Halifax, modeling, innovating and teaching tactics to UK and allied navies, but who got no credit. Or the women ‘computers’ and code breakers at Bletchley. Their commanding officers got all the credit and they were erased.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] someguy3@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Kirk: "Rand, tell Scotty we need more power!"

vs

Kirk: "Scotty, we need more power!"

I know which one is more compelling.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

A petty officer performing chiefly clerical duties in the US Navy.

Clerical duties don't make for exciting tv. It may be important in real life, but doesn't work for tv. [Insert joke about TPS report.]

[–] Tischkante@discuss.tchncs.de 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Isn't this just a meme test to raise awareness? I see it often being failed because women talk about their straight romantic interests. I guess that's something most men could even do without in their entertainment. My takeaway is that more diverse groups of writers should be hired, to give us fresher stories.

[–] nxdefiant@startrek.website 20 points 1 year ago

It's a super low bar. The story just has to have two women talk about something other than a man. Troi telling Beverly how hot Yar was would technically pass the test, yes.

Correct conclusion though, more diverse groups of writers is definitely the way to go.

[–] jon@lemdro.id 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yep, using it as a literal test seems to miss the point, namely that there is a significant %age of films and TV that fail to meet even that low a bar.

[–] Ferk@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's a low bar in the sense that a show can be misogynistic and yet pass the test.

But the show can also be a strong case for equality and fail it (ie. have both males and females involved in all conversations).

If a movie has only 2 characters, a man and a woman, and the movie is all about their relationship, then passing the Bechdel test will be a high bar for that movie.

The article mentions how many episodes in Voyager were very Janeway-centric, and yet didn't pass the test because in all the conversations there was one way or another one male involved, even though the focus was on Kathryn.

I feel that it's not a very good test in general. There are also shows/movies that don't pass the reverse Bechdel test (having 2 males talk about something not involving a female) and yet I wouldn't say those shows are sexist.

[–] argv_minus_one 15 points 1 year ago

No surprise with Voyager. On the ship of the valkyries, there are plenty of opportunities for women to talk to each other about starship stuff.

[–] theinspectorst@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's interesting to me that Voyager does that much better than TNG. Both shows had the same number of women in the main cast (Crusher, Troi, Yar/Guinan vs Janeway, B'Elanna, Kes/Seven) so other things being equal there should be similar number of opportunities for conversations that meet the test.

Obviously Janeway being the captain (and therefore a more prominent character, even within an ensemble cast) should give Voyager a boost, but I hadn't anticipated the difference would be so extreme!

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The relationship between Janeway and Seven was heavily emphasised and not distracted at all by either character having any romances. Moreover, Seven, at least in seasons 4 and 5, is basically as major a character in the show as Janeway, which means it had two female leads, who's whole relationship basically passes the bechdel test, not just a one off line every episode.

[–] theinspectorst@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Great point. I did think that Seven and Janeway (who I agree were a very prominent pairing - akin to the attention given to Data and Picard in TNG) would help Voyager, but then discounted it a bit by that pairing only even existing from season 4 onwards. I don't think that's enough alone to explain Voyager doing 42 percentage points better than TNG (44.9% vs 86.9%), but it would certainly have helped a lot!

[–] tukarrs@startrek.website 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Guinan only appears in 29/176 episodes. Yar was in 28/17 6 episodes. So for the majority of the run there's essentially only two main cast.

[–] theinspectorst@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Wow - I hadn't realised Guinan was in that few!

[–] AspieEgg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’d be curious to see how the newer shows stack up. I’d bet they’d do a bit better, but it’s hard to know. For example, Discovery has Burnham and Tilly, and they even share quarters so they are likely to talk a lot, but it is still a pretty male dominated cast. Lower Decks on the other hand, I’d be surprised if it didn’t get a 100% since half of the starring characters are women (Mariner, Tendi, Freeman, T’Ana).

[–] Kbin_space_program@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Voyager, where you have two women(and later three) in very high ranking positions on the ship should easily pass.

Arguably DS9 too, since you have a similar situation ŵhere two women have critical roles on the station. The show even has at least one scene that shows that the test is flawed.

That scene being Worf's introduction to Kira and Jadzia, where Kira and Jadzia are talking about a relationship based situation for comedic effect.

[–] AspieEgg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The article linked shows voyager pretty high, but DS9 surprisingly low for how many women are part of the show.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I feel like DS9's problem was that Kira and Dax never really had too many situations they would interact with each other. A science officer wouldn't need to report a lot to the first officer. Hell, they even had entire seasons in which they were never together on camera.

[–] JWBananas@startrek.website 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Half of Jadzia Dax's dialog was gossip, especially about relationships.

And almost all of Kira Nerys's personal life was about relationships.

Blame Berman.

[Yes, not literally half. It's hyperbole. Don't @ me.]

[–] Uranium3006@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I liked the Kira Nerys personal life stuff. I feel like it rounded out her character to see stuff like her dealing with dead lovers and going to bajorian church

[–] rovingnothing29@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Does the bechdel test take the job of the characters into account? For example if Dr Crusher is talking to Dr Selar about a patient's health does the patient's sex alone decide if the talk passes?

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

The test is that two women (with names) have to talk about something other than a man. A male patient is probably an edge case where its effect would depend on who is running the test (where these things prop up all the time). Though, again, with the bechdel test, the point is that's a very low bar. That an episode may pass the test based entirely on whether a male patient is a man or a patient, itself, is part of the point of the test, and, whether the episode passes or not, it certainly and deservedly will attract critique from any bechdel test assessment.

[–] skellener@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Now do Lower Decks and Strange New Worlds

[–] AspieEgg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think Lower Decks would be difficult to not get a 100%. 4 of 8 starring cast members are women.

[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Very, very little romance in it too.

[–] Doublepluskirk@startrek.website 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Quite a lot of horny though... 😳

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Article's from 2014. I'd really like to know how the more recent shows have faired.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Did a search and found this: https://trekkiefeminist.com/category/bechdel-wallace-test/

Maybe a separate post should be made to share ... seems like a good resource on this.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

Nice one!

The question I was wondering: SNW passed with 9/10 episodes in season 1.

Disco was 93-100%, Picard 90-100%. They don't have Prodigy or Lower Decks, though.

[–] HappyMeatbag 2 points 1 year ago

The initial article left we wishing for more current information. Thanks!

[–] stephfinitely@artemis.camp 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Wow I was shocked how low enterprise was. I figured it did better. As for the newer shows I have to imagin that SNW passes this test and for sure lower desks. I think the other newer show might struggle.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

Oh yea ... I thought about lower decks, and once again, I'm guessing it shines brightly as a good Trek show. Mariner and her Mum, +Tendi and Mariner probably pass the test every episode.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Also ... tangentially ... is artemis.camp a kbin instance affiliated with the app in some way? Are you a/the developer for the artemis app??

[–] UESPA_Sputnik@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm surprised that the rates are as high as they are. TOS had only 1 female character in the main cast. TNG (after Tasha left), DS9 and ENT only had two. So disregarding any guest characters the female main characters don't have a lot of choice of whom to talk to, if they want to pass the test.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

Well as the article points out, guest or secondary (like Guinan) characters helped out in TNG's case (which, from memory, makes sense ... one thing I remember noticing about TNG was how often a guest character in a position of power would be a woman, and sometimes a non-anglo one).

[–] williams_482@startrek.website 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For level setting, I would like to see the results of the "reverse Bechdel" test: a scene where two named male characters talk about something other than a woman.

The numbers will surely be higher than for the standard Bechdel, but I doubt they are 100%: for example, any episode primarily about heterosexual romance will risk failing both tests. TOS seems like it should hit that mark pretty reliably, but the prevalence of episodes where Kirk gets stuck on an alien world and spends most of his time chatting up a lady cut into the odds. (Likewise if we were to take literally Kirk's absurd characterization of the Enterprise as a woman, but... no). DS9 and TNG will run into problems with their volume of mixed-gender conversations, and for TNG especially the prevalence of significant female guest stars who male characters are likely to be discussing will cause some failures. Etc, etc.

To be clear, we know damn well that Star Trek has had problems with sexism, with instances both subtle and gross (Qpid and clay pots, anyone?). The Bechdel test also seems to be accepted as both a ludicrously low bar and an unreliable measure, but I have yet to see it put in appropriate context against the reverse test. What does it tell us if 98% of Trek episodes pass the reverse Bechdel? or if "only" 75% do? Does Voyager's 86.9% standard score exceed or fall flat relative to their reverse Bechdel? Etc, etc. I would posit that the relationship between the Bechdel and reverse Bechdel should tell a pretty strong story about the level of subtle sexism in how the show is written, while an aggregation of the two scores is mostly just a measure of how (in)frequently the characters are chatting about their coworkers.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I take your point. DS9, as the linked article's author points out, scores worse on the bechdel over time because characters get paired off into couples more and more, which would arguably show in the reverse bechdel too.

Given the numbers and the low bar of the bechdel, some quick sampling could probably be done to get a picture. Select 10 episodes that pass the bechdel test and 10 that fail, maybe some from TNG ans some from voyager, and we here collectively try to see if they pass/fail the reverse bechdel test in a group effort?

My personal bet is that until the bechdel pass rate goes up into ~90%, your point won't really fly and the reverse will be passed all of the time ... still interesting to find out.

Test definition

  • Two named men
  • Have a conversation
  • about something other than another woman
[–] williams_482@startrek.website 2 points 1 year ago

My personal bet is that until the bechdel pass rate goes up into ~90%, your point won’t really fly and the reverse will be passed all of the time … still interesting to find out.

In the era of "just asking questions", I certainly understand any implicit assumptions that I'm oh-so-cleverly concealing some ill-conceived "point" about feminism. Certainly a case can be raised that by presenting a possible chink in the supporting evidence of your post is an inherently disruptive and destructive act; clearly your broader point about closet bigotry affecting fan biases is both correct and worth emphasizing. I'd far rather strengthen your argument than tear it down. I hope that's ultimately what I'm doing here.

Given the numbers and the low bar of the Bechdel, some quick sampling could probably be done to get a picture. Select 10 episodes that pass the Bechdel test and 10 that fail, maybe some from TNG ans some from voyager, and we here collectively try to see if they pass/fail the reverse bechdel test in a group effort?

I don't think I would trust the results of this, unfortunately, as there's probably a reverse correlation between the Bechdel and reverse Bechdel tests; in a sample this small that would pollute the results. For example, take any episode where two characters of the same sex are stuck together in some sort of trouble. That episode will surely pass one of the tests (Bechdel for two women, reverse for two men) but has an increased chance of failing the other because much of the dialogue for the rest of the characters is likely to revolve around the plight of the imperiled pair.

...which isn't to say that what you suggest isn't worth the attempt. Certainly raising an issue and then shooting down a proposed solution to it isn't very helpful. Episode transcripts are out there; maybe there's a software solution here? Automatic identification of conversations between two characters would be imperfect but manageable, running that dialogue up against a list of names of male/female characters and then manually checking up on the episodes that missed to avoid false negatives would probably be the most technically efficient way about this?

Circling back on your actual point, though... You are absolutely and unambiguously correct that TOS did a horrible job with gender representation, much worse than TNG did (or could have been expected to by fans when it was about to air). It's also clear that Voyager did much better than it's contemporaries, and ENT was a pretty harsh step backwards. You don't need to know the base rate to establish if one number is bigger than the other, only to draw more nebulous, general conclusions about how well shows are doing with gender representation.

load more comments
view more: next ›