Does anyone ever feel like Data or Spock from Star Trek?

Post Reply New Topic

I'm not sure if a straight, gay or bi thing applies here. They were boffing other species, I don't think human sexuality was an issue. As a captain, they didn't try to turn her into Kirk and make her a slut. I just saw her as the leader who could not get involved....married to the ship and all of that. I know she had a relationship with a man at one point in the series though. Something about a dog (not confused with Archer on "Enterprise") that the ex kept or something.

TBH, I never read too much into Janeway's sexuality, I figured she's just a captain in uncharted territory and that takes all her focus. That's kind of what I liked about the show, it's almost sexually neutral. As for mentoring, etc, I do that a lot for people I'm not sexually interested in because I like helping people overcome obstacles. That being said, I've had to clarify my role repeatedly over the years when I help people (especially women, but there have been a few gay/bi men here or there too that confuse the relationship).

@Startrekker. Personally, my favorite was DS9, precisely for the reasons you hated it. I liked the fact that there was a long term story arc, and not just a bunch of "random encounters" like all the other Star Trek sub-franchises. As for character development, I've always felt the entire series was void of true character development because they won't move into situations where characters actually have to make tough decisions-- the kind where a main character may not come back. It's part of the "great 23rd century" meme, and how everyone is peaceful and friendly on Earth-- without conflict characters don't make real decisions, and then they don't develop. Just look at the main characters in each series (Kirk, Picard, Sisko, and Janeway): take an episode from the last season of the series, then apply the character as introduced in the first season-- their first season character would probably be making the same decisions as their last season character (no change in the character, thus no development).

edit: grammar.

That has always been my take on it too. Good to hear that I'm not the only one to appreciate that quality.

I do agree with that assessment. I think DS9 was my favorite on an objective level. It's one of the reasons I liked Babylon 5. I knew from the beginning it was a planned 5 year arc that in hindsight was good. Things that didn't make sense in the beginning, or really at any point, did at the end. Expecially when you find out at the eventual end, humans had evolved to be much like the Vorlons. I don;t mind a long ride as long as I think someone is steering the story properly and has a goal.

That's a good point. But, did you notice that when the character made a cameo in one of the movies, it was so stock and trade in execution?

^ I too thought B5 was an excellent show.

Did you see the episode where 5 billion years passed and the last human was observing the history banks as the sun was about to go kaflooey?

While we're on Star Trek, it's interesting to me personally to note that DS9 (as I noted) is my favorite, and it's the only one to not have a Data/Spock style "emotionless/logic-oriented" character. It does have Odo, who I relate to more strongly than any of them as an "outsider" who knows he will always be different but nonetheless appreciates and wishes to help and understand people; while still maintaining his own strongly-held principles and perspectives.

Only sci fi I liked was 2001 rather than kitchy characters our culture holds dear.

You stopped... about right before DS9 started developing the characters.

Granted, DS9 is more "man vs man" (or "civ vs civ") conflict-driven than "man vs self" or even "man vs tech", which makes it something of a standout among Treks... but over the course of seasons 4-7 they explored most of the characters at a deeper level and I'm not going into spoilers! But they gave Quark depth, they gave Sisko depth... Kira honestly always stays kinda shallow - or that's my bias because the whole Bajoran-religion thing really really peeves me... Julian gets depth as well as a group of peers that are straight outta the DSM criteria for ASD... plus I believe if I were to pull out calendars, DS9 attempted "smart sex symbol" with Leeta the dabo girl before Seven joined Voyager... even Dukat got depth.

I appreciated DS9's willingness to critically examine The Uniform and the Doodies that come with it. I also thought the situations in which regulars were put that tested their "core" beliefs and principles to be more skilfully and subtly written... Picard is my favorite captain, but come on, "Picard has to cut a baby in half" was the rising action in a few too many storylines in TNG.

So, ignore the soap opera cut shots ("Now hold that expression of anguish for three more seconds! This is leading into our commercial break!") - DS9 is worth a chance. Probably won't end up being your favorite, from the sound of things, but you really did watch the wrong half of the show

They gave Quark depth. They gave that whole stupid species depth. Sorry, I just never liked the Ferengi. So, if they made me enjoy those clowns, well....that's a miracle. LOL

HAHAHahahahahahaha!! I don't know if you meant it, but having been in the military, it is a crappy job! LOL

Well, l for me it was...

I'm an artist with all the attendant quirks and rebelliousness, I'm an Aspie...don;t do well with authority, don't do well with boundaries, went through a lot of confusion, was discovering aspects of myself that was completely counter to the miltary at the time and really not so ok even today.

So, bad match...the first of many really, really bad mistakes.

I meant it. Words are fun!

I am sorry you had to go through that.
I spent a couple months on base as a civilian, and found it completely overstimulating.
It was like being on Camazotz, from A Wrinkle In Time.

But - your "mistakes", remember, are actually lessons because you discovered all those aspects of yourself
(I say to you, because I say the same thing to myself when the mistakes of the past loom large and numerous.)

Sometimes I feel a lot like Reginald Barclay from ST: TNG.

I feel like eugene from the walking dead who gives off a similar awkward endlessly processing vibe, except I end up ranting like a madman instead of delivering a somehow simultaneously florid and robotic succinct analysis of a situation.

Last edited by DancingCorpse on 30 Apr 2016, 9:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

I just feel like a big, neurotic ball of stress.

At the least, this would just make you a 'Ballsy' person....Jus' keep on rollin', rollin', rollin'...keep them doggies rolling....rawwwwHIDE!! !! !


sooo.....when you finish groaning, you are welcome to burn a tiny 'fetish' doll to make me pay for such bad punauchery.

I was arrested once for being a punographer......The charge was crossing state lines with intent to practice under prepared jokes.....

Sorry, I forgot about this. Yes, I've seen it; I've seen every episode at least twice (when they aired and when I checked the DVD), and some I have watched over and over and over. It was a very interesting episode, it was exciting to see how the history continued and how it was seen in future times, the debates that would come up later.