I don't see how any human being can be that racist. That's...have you even seen "Code of Honor"? How were you not shocked and repulsed by the Darkest Africa stereotype?
I can't...I just can't.
So, if it was the same exact script, same set, same props and clothes, but had been peformed by white people would it have been racist? When I saw that episode, I saw a different culture that just happened to have black/brown skin. In the end of that episode, didnt we see that ghere were still checks and balances to it ( albeit the lady was lucky to be saved by Dr. Crusher). If I remember that lady made a chastising statement the Picard and the gang about looking down on thier cultures rules of civilization with knowing very little about it?
If they had used all whites, to avoid racial stereotypes, there would have been complaints saying that they were racist in hiring supporting non-reocurring actors.
...except that he claims to be a Native American, which is offensive to real Native Americans because he's a racist caricature/mash-up of about 18 Native cultures and a Polynesian society from halfway across the world.
Well...in fairness, the Maya had a thing for tattoos themselves, not in that specific design but maybe Chakotay left to join the Maquis in a hurry before they could finish his tattoo. Plus the actor is Mexican-American, and appearance-wise certainly looks like he could pass for an ethnic Mayan. If they had stuck with the Mayan thing and named the character, I dunno, Chava or Chimal or Ichik or something else (seriously VOY, how hard is it to find a book or website of baby names?), then they might have been able to do more with the character.
Mmn...I'm going to side with valoreah insofar as the ancient alien thing is concerned. In real life the idea of ancient aliens being needed to get **** done is dumb, dumb, dumb. But it's a pretty useful Sci-Fi trope.
Might have been better to not have the ancient aliens be white, or at least to have one of them say, "hey, how's it hanging, jut introduced the folks in Germania to farming, figured we should spread the love to this place as well."
Well, it just so happens that I know a couple of real Native Americans who also happen to be Trek fans. None of them ever found Chakotay to be offensive, except for his poor acting. Actually, to them, he was just a man. His race had nothing to do with whether they liked or disliked his character. That's a big part of what Star Trek is all about.
Which is interesting, because I know multiple Native American Trekkies (one's a Lenape, one's Lakota I think but I've never asked for sure; I know he's from the Great Plains and is from one of the Sioux nations), and both of them were highly insulted by Chakotay because he's an offensive stereotype.
I didn't say you knew nothing of science. I simply said that you would need to conclusively prove or disprove either "theory" in order for me to believe it. Evolution is not scientific fact. It's a "best guess". Ancient aliens are also a guess.
To put evolution in perspective;
Oh, nice quote mine. Very nice quote mine.
And false equivalence. There's literally zero evidence for ancient aliens at all. Also, evolution works by Occam's Razor; in incredibly simple terms, a population changes over time as a certain set of traits in the random sample become more useful to ensure reproduction. Ancient aliens work by "We can't explain this so we're going to come up with a ridiculous and overly complicated piece of BS to explain it instead."
Also,
To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real.
Which just shows you that it's up to the individual. Making blanket statements like "Chakotay was an offensive stereotype to all Native Americans" isn't true. Some people care, others don't.
That's essentially what evolution is too. When you can unequivocally and irrefutably connect the dots from single celled organism evolving into a human being, I'll believe it. Until then, it's just a best guess at best.
No, it's really not.
Also, what you're asking for is scientifically impossible and would technically invalidate the theory because every scientific theory MUST be hypothetically falsifiable.
I don't see how any human being can be that racist. That's...have you even seen "Code of Honor"? How were you not shocked and repulsed by the Darkest Africa stereotype?
I can't...I just can't.
Nope I don't find it to be racist at all. Have you even watched the episode? Are you so blinded by the color of their skin as to not be able to glean anything deeper from the episode?
I don't understand why you feel the need to grasp at straws to feel "offended". What you really mean is "disappointed". Disappointment in lazy writing, vision, and stereotyping. And in that sentiment, I agree fully.
But to be offended, can't do it. If the writers were intentionally attempting to portray people of African descent as "backward" then why is LaForge easily one if the smartest, most loyal, and down right upstanding men in all of Trek?
Can we agree that an episode like Code of Honor was disappointing? Most likely due to a number of behind the scenes failures, instead of a nefarious desire to "be racist".
No, it's really not. You've clearly got no scientific training at all; this is stuff you're expected to know by heart before you show up at class on the first day of Bio 1.
I had thought that scientific fact was an observation that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances? I've yet to see anyone conclusively prove that we are the ancestors of a single celled organism and repeat the process.
...Not quite on your first statement and what the actual hell on your second.
Evolution is the change in the makeup and average traits of a population over time. No more, no less. It's generally in response to environmental stimuli (technically including human interference) but sometimes occurs as a simple result of random chance.
Demanding that someone somehow prove that Humans are the ancestors of some single-celled organism and that they then repeat the process isn't just ignorant, it's LUNACY.
Are you so blinded by the color of their skin as to not be able to glean anything deeper from the episode?
Glean something deeper? What the hell is wrong with you? It was offensive on Trek, it was offensive on SG-1, it'd be offensive if all the actors were white Europeans wearing lederhosen and kilts! Because it's a disgusting stereotype laden with fake accents, the implication that it's somehow romantic for a dude to kidnap a woman, the complete lack of any reasonable response by the kidnapped woman's superior officer, and...you know what? I'm not continuing. Someone else covered why it's racist upthread.
I don't understand why you feel the need to grasp at straws to feel "offended". What you really mean is "disappointed". Disappointment in lazy writing, vision, and stereotyping. And in that sentiment, I agree fully.
I don't understand why you feel the need to impose your opinions of what I'm feeling on me.
It was a disgusting episode laden with disgusting racist stereotypes, and if you can't understand that then you should check your own tolerance.
But to be offended, can't do it. If the writers were intentionally attempting to portray people of African descent as "backward" then why is LaForge easily one if the smartest, most loyal, and down right upstanding men in all of Trek?
Because LeVar Burton would've used his considerable fame and influence to destroy the entire show if they wrote him as a racist caricature.
It may or may not have been intentional in Code of Honor, but it WAS deeply racist and laden with harmful and offensive stereotypes that should have had the script stopped and rewritten before they filmed.
Can we agree that an episode like Code of Honor was disappointing? Most likely due to a number of behind the scenes failures, instead of a nefarious desire to "be racist".
Where have I implied that the offensiveness was intentional?
I said from the start of the thread that this covers primarily unintentional racism, sexism, homophobia, and other bigotry. Like "Profit and Lace" or "Tattoo".
But to be offended, can't do it. If the writers were intentionally attempting to portray people of African descent as "backward" then why is LaForge easily one if the smartest, most loyal, and down right upstanding men in all of Trek?
Different episode writers. The casting director of "Code of Honor," Russ Mayberry, was actually fired by Roddenberry, either for his casting choices or because of some racist comments made to several of the black extras (accounts vary as to which).
Disappointment might be a better phrase for our reactions (excpet worffan101, he angers easily), but there is no doubt that, intentionally or otherwise, the episode is racist. You're right that replacing the black cast with white actors would make there be no issue, but that wasn't what happened, and simply being able to flip out one group of people for another without actually changing anything in the episode doesn't help when the group of people actually used have as much history behind them as do African-Americans.
Worffan, don't engage the trolls. They get off on it. Both val and fats know perfectly well what you're saying; they just want to argue with you about it because if they're not annoying someone, I guess they're not sure they're alive or something.
Ignore them from here on out. It's best for everyone.
I'd just like to point out that I don't find any of the 'anti-religion' episodes offensive in any way. Every comment Picard made in 'Who watches the Watchers' were characteristics of terran religion at the Mintaakans' stage of evolution. Religion did contribute to fear and intolerance and stagnation in the dark ages - it was one of the main factors. Picard's comment is completely fair - at the Mintakkans' stage of society, a religion based around him would likely have led to their own dark age.
And I'm saying this as a Christian.
Besides, I think what offended him more wasn't the idea of a Mintaakan religion, but one with him as its deity - he refused to be responsible for starting a religion based on a misunderstanding.
As for what episodes I find offensive?
There is no particular episode, but that scene where Kirk tries to pass Spock off as Chinese in 'Guardian of Forever'. I let him off for the fact that he was put on the spot by a cop, and because Spock's reaction was hilarious, but still...
I totally agree on the first part.
The second part? Hehe.... It's similar to what Kirk said about Spock in "Save the Whales". he made up something on the spot to try and explain why Spock is different from a human. In the other example he dlaimed that Spock's demeanor was the result of taking too much "LDS".... Which carries the connotation that he's brain damaged as a result. :P
I also think Chakotay is done very disrespectfully towards Native American culture.
I actually think the fix would have been very simple though...expressly have him not follow the ways of any current culture but have him follow a New Age religion that came into being in the 22nd century--something new kind of like some of the "new paganism" type movements or Wicca. It still might not be as good as doing proper cultural research for Native American culture but stating onscreen that he follows a new religion would remove the need to worry about authenticity (and IMO new religions coming into being would be more realistic than Roddenberry's enforced atheism).
To be honest.... Chakotay was not any specific variation of Native American. And what he thought of a traditional beliefs.... AFAIK they don't actually match a specific tribe.
Worffan, don't engage the trolls. They get off on it. Both val and fats know perfectly well what you're saying; they just want to argue with you about it because if they're not annoying someone, I guess they're not sure they're alive or something.
Ignore them from here on out. It's best for everyone.
Damn, you're right. Sorry, I've got food poisoning so not much to do today, and I'm super grouchy. My bad.
There are a lot of little things that have popped up over the years, mostly due to the personal issues of specific writers. For example there are many cases where female characters are treated first and foremost as a sex objects. The prevalence of fan service heavy costume choices in every show of the series is easily the most noticeable. However there have also been cases where descriptions of aliens cultures such as those of the Deltan and Betazoid seem to revolve heavily around their mating habits.
----
On a personal level I find the most disagreeable part of Star Trek to be the habit of writers to engage in finger wagging to the viewer/reader. There seems to be this strong need for writers to have the characters openly brag about how great they are and then turn around and insult anyone who isn't like them.
My brother is non-fan who only has a passing knowledge of Star Trek, but from what he has seen (primarily of TNG) he believes the Federation is an aristocratic society where only the scientists and artists were allowed to rule and that everyone else was a member of a lowly servant class. Sadly it is hard to disprove this as the most we see of Federation society comes from the smug boasting of the Starfleet elites.
Probably the worst case of this was in the TNG episode "The Neutral Zone" where Picard openly disparages the 21st century guests despite knowing nothing about them personally. At one point he even went as far as openly wishing they were dead and defended his stance when one of the crew tried to chastise him.
How would you respond if I called an African-American "brownskin"? Or a person of Asian descent "Squinty-eyes"?
To me, with this comment you are just blowing the term "offensive" out of proportions.
Calling someone brownskin or squinty-eyes isn't offensive, it's what they are, it is how they look like. Now calling a black man white, that is offensive - because it is untue and against what they really are.
If you are black, I can't call you black?.. Knowing you are? So I have to call you what - African-American - the whole entire word just to point you out of the crowd?..I don't have to do that, I can just say; "YO BROWNSKINED, over here!"
And automatically you know who I am talking too.
You don't have to take things so far off just to try to prove a point, it doesn't always work bro.
If anyone gets offended by it then they have a serious personal issues of being whatever race they are, when one shouldn't - EVER!
(And the reason "bro" is Italic and Underlined is because you would probably find it offensive too judging by the way you are typing.)
Worffan, don't engage the trolls. They get off on it. Both val and fats know perfectly well what you're saying; they just want to argue with you about it because if they're not annoying someone, I guess they're not sure they're alive or something.
Ignore them from here on out. It's best for everyone.
I'm really not trying to troll here. I really just don't see those episodes as racist. To me, racism is a type of ad hominem; using the race of an individual to dismiss or discredit an individual or entire people. I see intent as a necessary component of racism.
When I saw a depiction of the current US President as a tribal African, I saw racism. Similarly, certain attacks made by the left on Sarah Palin were sexist. Both of these were attempts to denigrate the other side by use of an irrelevant attribute.
But when I see a show, forty minutes of fiction, fail to be as racially sensitive as they could have been, I don't necessarily see racism. Was the intent to make all Natives seem silly or backwards based on the color of their skin? I don't think so. I think that such episodes were/are a product of its time while simultaneously being a lazy product.
So when I see a comically bad stereotype in works of fiction, I just facepalm. But it's just that, fiction. In my mind, cultures like we saw in Code of Honor are like bad TV tropes, as they lack an intent to put down all black people. If an intent to put down a group or individual based on race is not necessary, and all that's needed to be racist is stereotyping, then all of fiction is racist at one time or another as a necessary evil of storytelling.
Maybe it's because I'm a nurse who deals often with the elderly. I can't say I share the opinion of a client who says "a n***** can't lead, they just follow". Nor do I share all of the opinions of several African American co-workers hold pertaining to "hatin' TRIBBLE cops". But I serve and work with all types of people just fine, regardless of their issues. Maybe hearing all these opinions desensitized me.
I wouldn't define myself as racist, but if you all say so I guess I am.
Okay, this has gone beyond being an interesting conversation and it's past time to close it down.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Comments
So, if it was the same exact script, same set, same props and clothes, but had been peformed by white people would it have been racist? When I saw that episode, I saw a different culture that just happened to have black/brown skin. In the end of that episode, didnt we see that ghere were still checks and balances to it ( albeit the lady was lucky to be saved by Dr. Crusher). If I remember that lady made a chastising statement the Picard and the gang about looking down on thier cultures rules of civilization with knowing very little about it?
If they had used all whites, to avoid racial stereotypes, there would have been complaints saying that they were racist in hiring supporting non-reocurring actors.
Well...in fairness, the Maya had a thing for tattoos themselves, not in that specific design but maybe Chakotay left to join the Maquis in a hurry before they could finish his tattoo. Plus the actor is Mexican-American, and appearance-wise certainly looks like he could pass for an ethnic Mayan. If they had stuck with the Mayan thing and named the character, I dunno, Chava or Chimal or Ichik or something else (seriously VOY, how hard is it to find a book or website of baby names?), then they might have been able to do more with the character.
Might have been better to not have the ancient aliens be white, or at least to have one of them say, "hey, how's it hanging, jut introduced the folks in Germania to farming, figured we should spread the love to this place as well."
Oh, nice quote mine. Very nice quote mine.
And false equivalence. There's literally zero evidence for ancient aliens at all. Also, evolution works by Occam's Razor; in incredibly simple terms, a population changes over time as a certain set of traits in the random sample become more useful to ensure reproduction. Ancient aliens work by "We can't explain this so we're going to come up with a ridiculous and overly complicated piece of BS to explain it instead."
Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_quoting_out_of_context
No, it's really not.
Also, what you're asking for is scientifically impossible and would technically invalidate the theory because every scientific theory MUST be hypothetically falsifiable.
Nope I don't find it to be racist at all. Have you even watched the episode? Are you so blinded by the color of their skin as to not be able to glean anything deeper from the episode?
I don't understand why you feel the need to grasp at straws to feel "offended". What you really mean is "disappointed". Disappointment in lazy writing, vision, and stereotyping. And in that sentiment, I agree fully.
But to be offended, can't do it. If the writers were intentionally attempting to portray people of African descent as "backward" then why is LaForge easily one if the smartest, most loyal, and down right upstanding men in all of Trek?
Can we agree that an episode like Code of Honor was disappointing? Most likely due to a number of behind the scenes failures, instead of a nefarious desire to "be racist".
Evolution is the change in the makeup and average traits of a population over time. No more, no less. It's generally in response to environmental stimuli (technically including human interference) but sometimes occurs as a simple result of random chance.
Demanding that someone somehow prove that Humans are the ancestors of some single-celled organism and that they then repeat the process isn't just ignorant, it's LUNACY.
It was a disgusting episode laden with disgusting racist stereotypes, and if you can't understand that then you should check your own tolerance. Because LeVar Burton would've used his considerable fame and influence to destroy the entire show if they wrote him as a racist caricature.
It may or may not have been intentional in Code of Honor, but it WAS deeply racist and laden with harmful and offensive stereotypes that should have had the script stopped and rewritten before they filmed.
Where have I implied that the offensiveness was intentional?
I said from the start of the thread that this covers primarily unintentional racism, sexism, homophobia, and other bigotry. Like "Profit and Lace" or "Tattoo".
Different episode writers. The casting director of "Code of Honor," Russ Mayberry, was actually fired by Roddenberry, either for his casting choices or because of some racist comments made to several of the black extras (accounts vary as to which).
Disappointment might be a better phrase for our reactions (excpet worffan101, he angers easily), but there is no doubt that, intentionally or otherwise, the episode is racist. You're right that replacing the black cast with white actors would make there be no issue, but that wasn't what happened, and simply being able to flip out one group of people for another without actually changing anything in the episode doesn't help when the group of people actually used have as much history behind them as do African-Americans.
Ignore them from here on out. It's best for everyone.
The second part? Hehe.... It's similar to what Kirk said about Spock in "Save the Whales". he made up something on the spot to try and explain why Spock is different from a human. In the other example he dlaimed that Spock's demeanor was the result of taking too much "LDS".... Which carries the connotation that he's brain damaged as a result. :P To be honest.... Chakotay was not any specific variation of Native American. And what he thought of a traditional beliefs.... AFAIK they don't actually match a specific tribe.
@Valoreah: that was hilarious
My character Tsin'xing
Damn, you're right. Sorry, I've got food poisoning so not much to do today, and I'm super grouchy. My bad.
----
On a personal level I find the most disagreeable part of Star Trek to be the habit of writers to engage in finger wagging to the viewer/reader. There seems to be this strong need for writers to have the characters openly brag about how great they are and then turn around and insult anyone who isn't like them.
My brother is non-fan who only has a passing knowledge of Star Trek, but from what he has seen (primarily of TNG) he believes the Federation is an aristocratic society where only the scientists and artists were allowed to rule and that everyone else was a member of a lowly servant class. Sadly it is hard to disprove this as the most we see of Federation society comes from the smug boasting of the Starfleet elites.
Probably the worst case of this was in the TNG episode "The Neutral Zone" where Picard openly disparages the 21st century guests despite knowing nothing about them personally. At one point he even went as far as openly wishing they were dead and defended his stance when one of the crew tried to chastise him.
Calling someone brownskin or squinty-eyes isn't offensive, it's what they are, it is how they look like. Now calling a black man white, that is offensive - because it is untue and against what they really are.
If you are black, I can't call you black?.. Knowing you are? So I have to call you what - African-American - the whole entire word just to point you out of the crowd?..I don't have to do that, I can just say; "YO BROWNSKINED, over here!"
And automatically you know who I am talking too.
You don't have to take things so far off just to try to prove a point, it doesn't always work bro.
If anyone gets offended by it then they have a serious personal issues of being whatever race they are, when one shouldn't - EVER!
(And the reason "bro" is Italic and Underlined is because you would probably find it offensive too judging by the way you are typing.)
I'm really not trying to troll here. I really just don't see those episodes as racist. To me, racism is a type of ad hominem; using the race of an individual to dismiss or discredit an individual or entire people. I see intent as a necessary component of racism.
When I saw a depiction of the current US President as a tribal African, I saw racism. Similarly, certain attacks made by the left on Sarah Palin were sexist. Both of these were attempts to denigrate the other side by use of an irrelevant attribute.
But when I see a show, forty minutes of fiction, fail to be as racially sensitive as they could have been, I don't necessarily see racism. Was the intent to make all Natives seem silly or backwards based on the color of their skin? I don't think so. I think that such episodes were/are a product of its time while simultaneously being a lazy product.
So when I see a comically bad stereotype in works of fiction, I just facepalm. But it's just that, fiction. In my mind, cultures like we saw in Code of Honor are like bad TV tropes, as they lack an intent to put down all black people. If an intent to put down a group or individual based on race is not necessary, and all that's needed to be racist is stereotyping, then all of fiction is racist at one time or another as a necessary evil of storytelling.
Maybe it's because I'm a nurse who deals often with the elderly. I can't say I share the opinion of a client who says "a n***** can't lead, they just follow". Nor do I share all of the opinions of several African American co-workers hold pertaining to "hatin' TRIBBLE cops". But I serve and work with all types of people just fine, regardless of their issues. Maybe hearing all these opinions desensitized me.
I wouldn't define myself as racist, but if you all say so I guess I am.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek