Star Trek Discovery - Season 3

[Michael]

because the past shows had over representation does not negate the point I am making for this show, deflecting to say the old shows did this and that, is an entirely different argument and deflection tactic.

Not at all. I am merely pointing out that what Discovery has done concerning the main cast is consistent with what most of the other shows have done.

That there is more representation with one group or another in a single case isn't an issue given that in any random distribution you will at times have numbers come up which don't follow the percentages you would expect. There could very well be cases in which one group might show up with three or four in the main crew of a starship (gay, Asian, or straight white males).

My point was that based on the demographics, I can't see where the lack of straight white males in a main cast indicates any sort of problem.

That said I could not care if the show was all black or gay of whatever if the show was decent, but its not, the writing sucks...

Then I don't understand why the lack of straight white males matters.

[Gazomg]

I thought it was obvious why I highlighted the obvious lack

If there were no black people I would ask the same question why
if the were no gay people I would ask why, because they are large groups of people

Trans and non binary are not as numerous,

[Michael]

... because they are large groups of people

Straight white males aren't a large group. At 5.5% of the human population you would expect to see maybe one straight white male in the main cast which we did (season one, Lorca, and season two, Pike) just as we did on DS9 and VOY.

[Gazomg]

... because they are large groups of people

Straight white males aren't a large group. At 5.5% of the human population you would expect to see maybe one straight white male in the main cast which we did (season one, Lorca, and season two, Pike) just as we did on DS9 and VOY.

gay white males are rarer, we got one of them
black gay males rarer again...got one of them
Trans people are rarer....need I go on ?

Answer me this, has I said there was not enough gay character on enterprise, would I have got the same replies ?
No, because it would be true
But if I say white straight males in discovery which is also true you get people jumping all over it.

On one ignorant forum they had people basically accusing me of being some sort of racist, homophobe and sexist for daring to even ask.

[sirus]

You know, this whole debate has nothing to do with Star Trek. I don't care if characters are black, white, asian, gay, straight, non-binary or whatever. It doesn't matter and it never did. hell, I've written POC and LGBT characters in Trek fanfiction and roleplay and I encourage others to explore ideas of sexuality and race in the stories. But I think the media patting themselves on the back for including people is sickening and I think they are flat out lying about these being the first non-binary/transgender characters. If they are human characters it might be a first, but it would also cause some massive problems continuity wise, not that they care.

But the point doesn't matter anyway. Star Trek is not about the color of the characters or their sexuality. Its a problem when they make it about that, but again that has more to do with the bigger problem.

The writing is crap.

I care about is good stories and ever since "The Trouble with Edward" I have come to realize that Trek is fully dead, or at least Trek labeled as such is dead. The themes and stories are so different that I don't see any hope of a return to form. As such, I will be skipping season of Discovery and if Picard gets a season 2, I will skip that as well. I will be skipping the rest of Lower Decks and when Prodigy comes I will more than likely skip that too.

The optimistic and joyful era of the show is gone and now Trek is written by edgy idiots who care more about shock than story, who care more about sex than sensuality, who care more about saying the right thing than doing the right thing. Characters are flat out the worst humanity has to offer. Star Trek is aspirational and currently being written by people with no aspirations beyond the moment. The idea of self improvement is gone and replaced with melodrama and nihilism.

I don't see a point to Trek anymore and I find it impossible to enjoy. At least BSG was saying something about faith and militarism beyond just being grim dark.

[Gazomg]

and add in that the modern breed of new trek fans are the biggest snowflake ever,
soft delicate flowers who get upset over the slightest criticism, and if your criticism is aimed at an appalling character like burnham, these little pc snowflakes automatically wrongly assume its a gender issue or a color issue, basic comprehension of deciphering posts is lost on them.

look at the other forums, where any person slates lower decks, that picard rubbish or discovery, and they come out of the woodwork lecturing you on trek, people who were not even born when TNG was out, never mind the original series, thinking they always knows best
some people even take criticism as personal, I have given up even trying to have a conversation with people on most forums

[sirus]

and add in that the modern breed of new trek fans are the biggest snowflake ever...

It is a real frustration that criticism of modern Trek is often taken as criticism of certain characters race or sexuality.

Put simply, before he started doing shrooms Stamets was a terrible character with no spark of joy. It didn't matter that he was gay or not, it mattered that he was an asshole. Once he started doing shrooms he was enjoyable and quickly became the only character who appeared to be having a good time. True his plot was ruined, but my initial dislike had nothing to do with him being gay and everything to do with him being unlikable.

Mike started out crap. Her being Spock's sister had nothing to do with her being black, but it was the first hint we were getting a Mary Sue, like how many crap fanfics have we seen where the main female lead is the secret sister of the canon character?

I feel like we have all read bad Star Trek fanfiction and it felt like STD and STP were both inspired by bad fanfiction.

[Gazomg]

cant argue with that.

I remember Ira Behr saying he always had to fight to get what he wanted, he has a plan for ds9, and he would not budge, and you have to credit a person who sticks to their guns, and keeps true to his beliefs.

Many people did not like ideas on religion, the introduction of arcs, how he made the ferengi less comedic and gave them substance, as he did with many races including the cardassians, dominion , etc

Where as discovery seem to have no plan, no long term vision, they dont know what they want, other than trying to be woke and introducing as many diverse characters, to mask the fact the writing sucks.

We already saw burnham magically turn out to be spocks half sister or whatever, the best character of pike, was already an established character, even the mirror universe was more all over the place than usual.

Section 31, seemed to have a fleet,. and this secret org even had logos....why in the flying fuck would a supposed secret org have logos, an evident fleet etc.

Only for the show was Star Trek, if only in name , is why I persisted, but then to get Picard and lower decks its like kicking someone while they are down

[Michael]

gay white males are rarer, we got one of them
black gay males rarer again...got one of them
Trans people are rarer....need I go on ?

My point about demographics isn't to say there has to be a certain number from this group or a certain number from that group. (And yes, sometimes you'll get more than what demographics would indicate because you can't have a fraction of a person. People come in whole numbers. But if you were to average out all the command staff on all the starships, you'd expect to see the demographics play out.)

The point was that given the demographics, that if a certain group is 6% of the population, and for a main cast of 10 or less, then if there is only one person from that group (or even zero from that group) then that is what we would expect due to demographics.

Answer me this, has I said there was not enough gay character on enterprise, would I have got the same replies ?
No, because it would be true
But if I say white straight males in discovery which is also true you get people jumping all over it.

If someone were to have said, "only two gay characters in Discovery isn't enough, there's something wrong here" I would have made the same point concerning demographics.

Straight white males show up in the main cast of Discovery (and DS9 and VOY) at a number which exceeds what you would expect from demographics. It makes sense that would be the case within the context of the show's universe. Given that, I don't see what the problem is. Are you suggesting there's some reason straight white males should show up with more characters in the main cast than demographics would indicate?

... and introducing as many diverse characters, to mask the fact the writing sucks.

To me, that doesn't make any sense at all. How exactly does introducing many diverse characters mask bad writing?

That's a writing trick I've never heard of before.

Introducing diverse characters is what Star Trek does, and has done from the beginning. Roddenberry was very open about that, and the shows have continued that practice through to the present.

[sirus]

... and introducing as many diverse characters, to mask the fact the writing sucks.

To me, that doesn't make any sense at all. How exactly does introducing many diverse characters mask bad writing?

The idea is simple. Introduce a POC character, don't put a lot of effort into the writing, if someone criticizes it deflect the criticism by saying they don't like it because of the race/sexual of the character they are complaining about. Various websites back up the narrative that the people who don't like it don't like it because of reasons of racism or sexism. In that way diversity covers for bad writing.

I am surprised you haven't seen this before, they did it for Ghostbusters 2016, Star Wars (see Rose Tico/Finn), Doctor Who (female doctors covering up for that massive sloppy retcon), and several other franchises recently. Heck, pick your nerdy franchise and you will find the same narrative, especially around those shows that have writers who are more left-leaning.

This has been a thing and continues to be a thing. Well written POC characters are sadly becoming rarer and in their place, poorly written ones and the cry of "racism" make it impossible to critique them.

[Gazomg]

you read my post wrong Michael. I wrote :

Where as discovery seem to have no plan, no long term vision, they dont know what they want, other than trying to be woke and introducing as many diverse characters, to mask the fact the writing sucks.

I was saying the writers in an effort to cover their shitty writing , lack of vision etc, think bringing in the diverse characters will mask the bad writing and we will all somehow forget the writing is shit. I am not saying it will work, in fact I am suggesting they will end up with even more characters with no direction on the show.

Until the writing is addressed, there will always be issues.

[Michael]

The idea is simple. Introduce a POC character, don't put a lot of effort into the writing, if someone criticizes it deflect the criticism by saying they don't like it because of the race/sexual of the character they are complaining about. Various websites back up the narrative that the people who don't like it don't like it because of reasons of racism or sexism. In that way diversity covers for bad writing.

You're saying writers come up with a diverse cast of characters just to deflect future criticism of bad writing they will write... in the future?

Really?

[Gazomg]

I think there is clearly a policy where having a trans or non binary person in a show could lead to people using that to attack people who will complain.

I on another forum was practically accused of being a bigot for daring to slate the character of burnham,by a moderator no less, and was banned for standing up for myself... seems because burnham was black and female the criticism must therefore be anti female and anti black.

That sort of insecure response to attack posters is pretty common place in trek today, is sad, and the sort of thing that would only serve to drive away people, a case where some people can scream bigot, and if they do it long enough and loud enough people soon assume wrongly it must be true.

It wont matter if the new additions are black or white, male or female, gay or straight etc, the writing needs addressing, the other characters need better writing and if people still criticize, the "you must be a bigot" card is whipped out fast....to me that is not only sad, but disgusting.

Thankfully that level of insecurity and vindictiveness is not on here,

[Michael]

I think there is clearly a policy where having a trans or non binary person in a show could lead to people using that to attack people who will complain.

What evidence do you have to support that such a policy exists?

[Gazomg]

I think there is clearly a policy where having a trans or non binary person in a show could lead to people using that to attack people who will complain.

What evidence do you have to support that such a policy exists?

the fact a moderator on trekcore accused me of being a bigot and banned me.
Assholes think any criticism is anti something or other, and using their position to try control people. When I spoke up and put him in his place with facts and asked him to point a single example of such bogotry, he not only banned me but deleted my posts, and his own as well as he knew he was caught out

On another forum where I complained about Burnham, I was automatically asked about picard and kirk as if that negated the point about discovery.

The very fact we are having this discussion shows how things get to this point.