/c/TenFoward: Your home-away-from-home for all things Star Trek!
Re-route power to the shields, emit a tachyon pulse through the deflector, and post all the nonsense you want. Within reason of course.
~ 1. No bigotry. This is a Star Trek community. Remember that diversity and coexistence are Star Trek values. Any post/comments that are racist, anti-LGBT, or generally "othering" of a group will result in removal/ban.
~ 2. Keep it civil. Disagreements will happen both on lore and preferences. That's okay! Just don't let it make you forget that the person you are talking to is also a person.
~ 3. Use spoiler tags. This applies to any episodes that have dropped within 3 months prior of your posting. After that it's free game.
~ 4. Keep it Trek related. This one is kind of a gimme but keep as on topic as possible.
~ 5. Keep posts to a limit. We all love Star Trek stuff but 3-4 posts in an hour is plenty enough.
~ 6. Try to not repost. Mistakes happen, we get it! But try to not repost anything from within the past 1-2 months.
~ 7. No General AI Art. Posts of simple AI art do not 'inspire jamaharon'
~ 8. No Political Upheaval. Political commentary is allowed, but please keep discussions civil. Read here for our community's expectations.
Fun will now commence.
Sister Communities:
Want your community to be added to the sidebar? Just ask one of our mods!
Honorary Badbitch:
@jawa21@startrek.website for realizing that the line used to be "want to be added to the sidebar?" and capitalized on it. Congratulations and welcome to the sidebar. Stamets is both ashamed and proud.
Creator Resources:
Looking for a Star Trek screencap? (TrekCore)
Looking for the right Star Trek typeface/font for your meme? (Thank you @kellyaster for putting this together!)
Googling around, I've seen a lot of users and journos claiming they are a jewish stereotype. I struggled to even compare them to what HP did. And as a partially jew, I'm really jealous of qualities these bigots paint and the thinking process Quark put to work. He's probably my favorite character of the whole franchise.
Pretty sure I can. Quark's mother and Troi's mother.
"If there was one it has completely faded from my mind."
Yeah, about that. Not once did I or anyone I know took note of that star of David in the bank in any of the films until it became a trend years after the fact to be upset by it.
You don't remember one thing, I don't remember another. Why is the thing I don't remember more important than yours?
It's interesting that while the situations are similar, we can make excuses for the one we're biased towards. On one side there's an amazing space culture that degrades women, lies, cheats and steals, but it's ok because the presented characters are likeable and the society reluctantly grows out of it later. On the other side, there's an evil magical culture that makes use of a historical stereotype steeped in folklore and which also lies, cheats and steals in an lore ok kind of way, but it's not ok because they don't have likeable characters and don't grow out of it as much as some people would have liked.
Now you might say it's not the same. That would be correct. They're only similar because while the details surrounding them are different, they both revolve around topics that should be equally disapproved, yet are not. For reasons.
...is there some reason you didn't point out that I forgot the episode rather than leading on by saying similar arguments could be made about the goblins? Or was the "similar thing" you were talking about the fact that anyone can just say "I don't remember"?
So yes, in one episode Ishka appears naked, appropriately covered for broadcast TV of course. And the entire point of that episode was that Ferengi traditions surrounding women were discriminatory, old fashioned, and should not be accepted.
Also, Lwaxana isn't Ferengi, so I'm not sure how she's relevant here.
It wasn't okay. That was literally the point.
The point we're dancing around is whether to boycott a work of fiction due to its use of uncomfortable topics and under which circumstances.
The comparison between Harry Potter and Star Trek is that both had persons in charge that are considered to have or have had extreme views in regards to those topics.
The views on Ferengi traditions were within the lore of its fictional universe. The practices outside of it were very much not in line with those same beliefs at the time.
And we're remembering different things. The practice was not outdated, but very much in use within the Ferengi core space. Even at the end it became a tradition that could be practiced freely, not eliminated completely. And not because of morals, but because of profit.
I'll concede on Troi's mother because I'm vague on the details of her circumstances.
The core idea remains. Women treated poorly on one side, Jewish people treated poorly on the other. One side praised, the other shunned. Both in the same place.
Star Trek brought up uncomfortable topics quite regularly specifically to address them. In the context of the episode in which Ishka disrobes, the Ferengi practice of naked and subservient women is literally the central driving contention of the plot, with the protagonists clearly on the side of "women shouldn't have to be naked, and they should be able to do things on their own without men."
Harry Potter goblins are there because... look at the funny little greedy men with big noses, aren't they annoying and mean, haha?
Equating those as being "in the same place" is asinine.
Sure, Star Trek had its own list assholes in charge of production and scummy behaviour, and calling that out for what it is is fine, but the way that Ferengi were portrayed and developed was definitely not an example of that.
You really don't know much about HP goblins, do you?
They aren't just there to look funny. They hold the wizards bank because they're master craftsmen. They're defeated rivals who still rebel from time to time whenever able to. They can use magic just as well as wizards if not better and were banned from using wands as a matter of status, something they didn't much care for anyway because they prefer using violence in combat over magic. The half-goblin professor is a master duelist and attributes part of that to his aggressive goblin blood.
That's just basic stuff you learn from the movies.
Sure, the exposition is poor, but it makes sense considering it's being done from the perspective of wizards.
That's exactly how the wizards see them. Bravo to the directors for instilling that notion so well in the viewers. It means they did their job well in this regard.
You say the protagonists in Star Trek had a system of values they respected, but didn't they also have to respect the culture of other species? To impose their own views and values on another was also considered self-serving and foolish.
Also the human civilization was post-enlightenment. Is the wizard society in HP also enlightened? Not really. Rowling calls them backwards, centuries behind the rest of civilization.
How were we a century ago, let alone two?
This is why I said similar. Circumstances are different. The world, the lore, the setting.
The goblins were given a foundation and it was built on in accordance with the rest of the world it was in. With the type of background the story portrayed. In line with every other exposition of that world.
In the first movie they were there to scare a newcomer, but it also showed they took their role in that bank seriously. And with each movie beyond that, more and more was uncovered of their culture, their history and their way of life. To anyone who cared to look at least.
Goblins didn't just remain funny little greedy men with big noses until the end, but at the same time they also didn't change much of their culture. And neither did the wizards. Only a little. A small step forward. Together. Because they're long-lived, don't like each other all that much and change is slow.