Yep. There's an unfortunate amount of people who cloak themselves under the guise of being a feminist, or claiming to care about women's issues, that could be more accurately referred to as misandrists.
It's my belief that there's a heavy overlap between these people and TERFs. With TERFs hating trans women in particular (notice how prominent TERFs like JKR never seem to talk about trans men? It's always "men in dresses infiltrating women's public toilets", which amusingly is also pushing the misogynistic idea that women are delicate fragile flowers that eternally need protection in every aspect of their lives).
But why? Why trans women in particular? Because not only do these TERFs view trans women as men, it's worse. They view trans women as men infiltrating their women-only "club", and that's something they don't tolerate.
It's unfortunate that terminally online minorities within movements that screech the loudest can have such a profound effect on the image of that movement. I think it's also a big part of why menslib movements struggle. People hear anything to do with it and their brain is clouded with preconceptions like angry incels, Andrew Tate, Jordan Peterson, etc. People who often purport themselves as activists of men's rights, when in reality they're usually either grifters or people yearning to be back in the 1950s.
Really? I must have literally completely forgotten.
Didn’t Raffi tell Picard near the end of S1 that she loved him and he said it back? I thought that at that stage they were exploring a romance for them
The whole “human brains aren’t fully developed until you’re 25” is such an annoying quote that gets thrown around by people just because they’ve heard it online.
I swear half the time it’s used to infantise young adults. I’m glad people weren’t pedalling this pseudoscience “fact” when I was that age, it’d probably get on my nerves.
It’s based on essentially nothing.
There isn’t an age where your brain is done developing. It constantly changes all throughout your life, affected by a whole load of factors we don’t really understand yet.
It certainly goes through periods of rapid change, but this happens predominantly years before you’re 25, or after life-changing events that alter how you think - things like moving out and having to manage your own life more, moving country to a very different culture/language, entering a LTR, having children, using drugs, getting a job, losing family members, even learning to drive can have a profound effect on your brain, evidenced by MRI scans.
Much of that stuff happens in your early-mid twenties, so I see why people would erroneously think that it’s the turning 25 part that does it.
In fairness, Picard is extremely upfront and honest that he has broken the Prime Directive in situations where he’s felt it would be callous not to.
Separately, he also said that while rules are a good thing, rules cannot be universally absolute.
Another thing he’s said is that Starfleet doesn’t want officers that will blindly follow orders, but rather to think about them seriously and weigh them in their minds.
Janeway straight up said to another captain that she’s never broken the Prime Directive in her life, despite clearly doing it a bunch of times. She’s in denial.
I mean, that logic was only ever applied by the Vulcans as a personal choice/sacrifice, not something to be enforced by the barrel of a… er… phaser.
Spock sacrificed himself, it wasn’t done forcibly against his will. Kirk didn’t order the execution of one man so that others could live.
I don’t think we should take a slogan as an absolute moral lesson, you can justify all kinds of evil with it.
E.g. your organs could save dozens of lives. Would it be right to pin you down, kill you, and remove them, so that others can live? Surely one life lost is a worthy price to pay? The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, after all.
Ethics are a lot more complex than a catchy slogan.
IMO, once Neelix and Tuvok stop existing, they are dead. They have no consciousness, they aren’t around. They’re gone. They’re ex-people. They’re not sad about the situation, because they no longer exist. There’s no brain there to process any of this. Once you are dead, you don’t have a right to live, especially not if it means the death of another.
Tuvix, on the other hand, existed. He was conscious, self aware, intelligent, alive. He was dragged, crying, begging for his life, pleading for anybody to step in and stop him from being murdered. Then he was killed to bring two people back to life.
Now I know people will say “but 2 is more than 1, so it’s fine to kill him”, but that’s never sat right with me. What was that Picard speech about arithmetic not being a good reason for discarding the rights of sentient beings?
Tbh I’m astounded the Star Trek community is massively on the “murder of an innocent is ok if it saves more people and he’s a little ugly” side
Yeah I was thinking about this recently. Wild blackberries you see all over the place growing like a weed are pretty much the exact same as the ones you see in a shop.
It’s nothing like, say, apples, which have been changed a lot by humans.
“The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, ‘prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia’ also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally–but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness.”
RMS on June 28th, 2003
"I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren’t voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing. "
RMS on June 5th, 2006
"There is little evidence to justify the widespread assumption that willing participation in pedophilia hurts children.
Granted, children may not dare say no to an older relative, or may not realize they could say no; in that case, even if they do not overtly object, the relationship may still feel imposed to them. That’s not willing participation, it’s imposed participation, a different issue. "
RMS on Jan 4th, 2013
That said, when he’s talking about the potential dangers of proprietary software, he’s usually bang on.
Patriarchy harms boys and men, too. Helping them realize this is key to erasing toxic masculinity ( www.salon.com )
Paramount Has A Plan To Bring Star Trek Back To The Big Screen, Says Roddenberry Entertainment Exec ( trekmovie.com )
Interview: Jeri Ryan On Taking Seven From Borg To Bi Captain Of The Enterprise To ‘Star Trek: Legacy’ ( trekmovie.com )
The ‘manning up of boys begins in the cradle.’ But what boys really need is emotional support from their dads ( www.wbur.org )
Janeway’s “Tuvix” Decision Divides ‘Star Trek: Voyager’ Cast: “It Kind Of Hurt Her Character” ( trekmovie.com )
xkcd #2827: Brassica ( imgs.xkcd.com )
xkcd.com/2827...
Wreck the economy because it only works for the billionaire class. ( i.imgur.com )
xkcd #743: Infrastructures ( lem.trashbrain.org )
Title text: The heartfelt tune it plays is CC licensed, and you can get it from my seed on JoinDiaspora.net whenever that project gets going....