Earthly Concepts

Lacking Imagination

A few weeks ago, I came across a post from a right-leaning Star Trek fan who denounced Star Trek Discovery as being ‘too woke’, and condemned Star Trek The Next Generation as being ‘too left’ due to a male character wearing a skirt during its pilot episode. Following that, more right-leaning fans of the Star Trek franchise continued to bash every Star Trek series after the original Star Trek with Captain Kirk, saying everything afterwards was all liberal bullshit trying to shove progressivism into the throats of everyone. A few right-leaning Star Trek fans even asserted that the unigender Starfleet uniforms were taken out after the pilot episode, since it obviously didn’t work out and even its own creators thought it was a stupid idea. Most of them even stated that Captain Kirk was obviously an alpha male created through Gene Roddenberry’s vision of a possible future where men and women still had their specific roles.

Now, the problem with all of this is the lack of imagination on the part of these right-leaning fans of Star Trek. It is obvious that in the 1970s, the universe builders (writers, directors, art directors, etc) were all bottlenecked with ideas of what the future might look like, heavily influenced by the political and social atmosphere of their time. Show me a Star Trek TOS episode where a drone was used, or a transparent datapad was accessed, or social media was even mentioned. There were automated defense drones that were used, but they aren’t the same type of drones used in the last ten years by regular consumers. I mean, look at the TOS primary form of communication. They still used handheld walkie talkies! ๐Ÿ˜‰

In short, the reason why the unigender Starfleet uniforms of the pilot episode of Star Trek TNG never caught on, was because it was ‘too wild’ for its time. The pilot episode of Star Trek TNG came out in 1987. I was 8 at the time – eons ago for some. ๐Ÿ˜‰ Star Trek TNG will always be my favourite Star Trek and one of my Top 5 favourite sci-fi universes of all time, but that doesn’t mean I cannot criticize parts of it for being the way it was. However, even then, TNG did a lot of things right. They dared to look into a future where possibilities exist, even in today’s timeline, we’re struggling with the basics of those ideals. Men wearing skirts is not a new liberal thing. It has existed for thousands of years. Today, we call them kilts and robes, but no matter how you spin it with different names, at the end of the day, they are skirts and dresses. Star Trek has always been about possibilities. So it’s mind boggling when there are right-leaning fans of Star Trek who condemn entire story lines because it doesn’t fit their political and social rhetoric. All they have to do is look deeper into the things they love, and they will find all the ‘wokeness’ they condemn in all of the new Star Trek series they so hate.

^To the 60 people who upvoted John Brown’s statement, as well as John Brown himself…

Clearly, they missed the point of that episode and the literal point of the entire show. Humanity’s bigotry against their own doesn’t exist in 2269 when Captain Kirk was captain of the Enterprise. Humanity’s bigotry against their own still exist in 2022. Duh! ๐Ÿ˜‰

1 thought on “Lacking Imagination

  1. I think it’s important to remember that Star Trek was always about exploring new ideas and pushing boundaries. It’s not about fitting into a specific political ideology. People should appreciate the show for what it is and the messages it portrays, rather than dismissing it based on their own biases.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Disclaimer

Leemanism is about my views, my thoughts, and my feelings with as little filtering as possible. These concepts are not reflected in the people I value and are associated with. People who accept me, adhere to the parts where we are compatible and tolerate the parts where we are not. So however people perceive me to be, ultimately it obviously doesn't mean the friends I mention in this blog are the same as me. It means it's possible they are similar or the same, as well as different than me. It is highly unusual for people to be completely compatible with each other.

With that out of the way, and to make things clear, I never said I am a good person, nor am I trying to be one, though I would rather live with the empathetic than with the cruel. I would not deliberately do harm. I rather stand up against injustice than to pretend it doesn't exist. However, I understand consequences. The police is there to enforce the law, but not deter crimes from happening. Which means people must do what they must do to protect themselves, before the law of the land takes over and even then, the law of the land isn't there to protect you. It's there to protect the general consensus. Even if you may be right, society may deem you wrong - even most of your friends may side with society, than protect you. The law will almost always side with society.

We are few. Stay safe. (โ€ขฬ€แตฅแตฅโ€ขฬ)