this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2023
207 points (91.2% liked)

Star Trek Social Club

10678 readers
420 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 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 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 25 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 19 points 1 year ago (12 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.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] SunriseParabellum@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

TOS is peak "product of its time"

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Tischkante@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 1 year ago (4 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 26 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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 14 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.

[–] Blamemeta@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I thought it was widely agreed that the bechedel test isn't a very good metric? Like lesbian porn passes, but a lot of very good ST episodes don't.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 year ago (27 children)

I think it's more accurate to say that it's such a low bar that it shouldn't ever be failed, unless the reverse bechdel test is also being failed in more or less equal measure. Passing it need not mean much. Failing it, regularly, means plenty.

Also, porn basically has no relevance to the assessment of gender diversity in drama.

load more comments (27 replies)
[–] PapaEmeritusIII@hexbear.net 15 points 1 year ago

The test was never meant to be a metric for whether something is good or not. It’s meant to be a metric for representation of women in media.

The test is based on this 1985 comic from Alison Bechdel’s “Dykes to Watch Out For”:

With that history in mind, I don’t think the fact that lesbian porn passes is a shortfall of the test. The test was created by lesbians, after all.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rovingnothing29@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago (2 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?

[–] mjhagen@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

From the article:

Another question I considered was whether to pass women talking about a man in a work-related (as opposed to romantic) context. There were times when it seemed like it would make sense with the spirit of the test—like passing Dr. Crusher and Nurse Ogawa talking about a collapsed male patient’s medical condition—but it seemed to open the door too much. Ideally, an episode would have more than one scene of women talking, so it wouldn’t be the determining factor.

Part of why the Bechdel Test is so useful is that it’s such a low standard that it’s surprising that so many things fail, and it’s hard to argue there’s not room for improvement.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 11 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.

[–] 1bluepixel@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (8 children)

I'm amused at Voyager not hitting close to 100% for every season with Janeway in the lead. Like, season 3 only has ~65%?!

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't have clear memories of VOY S3 distinct from the other seasons, but I'm guessing it's about then that the writers don't know what to do with Kes any more and that's a big part of it. Of course, once Seven is so prevalent in seasons 4 and 5, it basically goes to 100%, with Janeway and Seven having a personal relationship and neither being sidelined by any romantic plot lines (kinda a big deal, especially for 90s, IMO). The author makes a good point that failing the bechdel test in Voyager's case wasn't always a bad thing from a feminism point of view because they were often Janeway centric episodes that just had talking to lots of men.

[–] 1bluepixel@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I kinda think Voyager failing the test despite Janeway is still a symptom of a representation issue. The test was designed because there are plenty of fully fleshed out female characters in fiction, but usually they exist as exceptions in a man's world and creators still feel too awkward writing women to have two or more of them having meaningful exchanges.

I'd say that despite Voyager being a trailblazer for representation with Janeway, it still had these exact issues. At least until Seven of Nine came along.

It's still important to note that the test is in no way a formal analysis, and not even its creator claims this.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] theinspectorst@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago (4 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 19 points 1 year ago (2 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.

[–] AEsheron@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Janeway takes Torres under her wing a bit too, and talk shop often. I think the rise is almost exclusively due to the Captain being a woman and having at least a single head of staff be another woman means any episode the captain has to consult that character means it will pass. The 7 bit is just gravy filling in episodes that isn't the case.

[–] 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 19 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 7 points 1 year ago

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

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 7 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 9 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 12 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] skellener@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Now do Lower Decks and Strange New Worlds

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] AspieEgg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 year ago (5 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).

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] stephfinitely@artemis.camp 6 points 1 year ago (4 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.

[–] A7thStone@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I was not surprised by Enterprise. I hate watched the the whole series. It was a thinly veiled male power fantasy trying to recapture the bravado of Kirk.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] 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.

[–] IonAddis@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I wasn't shocked. I dropped Enterprise in my late teens because even though I wasn't yet running into the discourse that'd pop up later re gender roles, the show was just creepy with T'Pol, and the male cast was not nearly as interesting or charming as the male cast of any of the other Treks.

I basically noped out before it was done airing due to the sexism. It was that obvious to me even before I had any education on the subject.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›