Hold on, you should have used Quark. Rom is the one who is the decent one who wouldn’t sell out his brother for a profit.
John Horstmansays
Did Jason ever get around to making his MRA-Ferengi blockquote class available site-wide, or was that scrapped as impossible, or put on the back-burner due to his much-increased workload? I suppose I could just ask him directly…
In an excellent bit of synchronicity, I’m about to go home and watch the DS9 episode where Grand Nagus Zek is deposed after Ishka convinces him to grant feeeemales equal rights.
And seconding Alverant, Rom is actually one of the few feminist Ferengi who values social justice and social relationships over profits; they really should have used Quark for the image.
futurechemistsays
I also thought they used the wrong Ferengi
Also, as troubling as Gohmert’s whole abortion discussion is in its own right, I find it even worse that Gohmert said “Our Republican females.” Which seems to imply that Republican men own the Republican women and allow them to be in Congress as long as they don’t screw up the men’s plans. I’m sure that implication was unintentional.
latveriandiplomatsays
Hey Ferenginar eventually introduced reforms to give rights to women. It happened in a terrible, terrible episode, but it happened.
I don’t see any sign of that sort of open-mindedness in the Republican Party.
I would have used FCA Inspector Brunt. Rom was a liberal, as Ferengi go. AND he eventually became the Grand Nagus! After forming a union, arguing for worker’s rights, women’s rights, and environmental responsibility.
I am amazed by y’all’s ability to identify which Ferengi it was in the picture; I have great difficulty telling them apart under all the makeup. Admittedly, I have a fair amount of difficulty tracking faces even when people aren’t wearing enormous latex prosthetics, but still.
unclefrogysays
he could have used one of the other none or barely named Ferengi. though to be fair the ferengi usually were pretty clear that they were not about doing anyone else a favor and were strictly in it for themselves unlike the conservatives. profit above all else!
uncle frogy
Bensays
For crying out loud! Rom nearly gave up his life to save the entire alpha quadrant from enslavement by the dominion!
ck, the Irate Lumpsays
Rom’s son, Nog was also usually portrayed as a good person, more interested in helping others rather than merely enriching himself. Yeah, definitely should’ve been Quark.
ck, the Irate Lumpsays
Hell, Nog’s justification for why he wanted to join Starfleet was that he knew his father could’ve been a great engineer, but instead caved to societal pressures to become a (quite lousy) merchant instead. That’s pretty near full-on SJW there.
PaulBCsays
It would be sort of an obvious snark to say “This comparison is unfair–to the depicted Ferengi!” so I admire the way the discussion has veered off into very sincere protestations along those lines.
phhhtsays
Nah, he’s no Ferengi. Hasn’t got the lobes for it.
Louis Gohmert is no Ferengi. The Ferengi have principles. Not always the best ones, but they do have them. Gohrmert is just an idiot.
Ichthyicsays
these stupid memes are dangerous.
In the end, what’s the difference between comparing Gohmert to a fictional ferengi, or a stereotype of a jew?
really, just fucking stop it already.
if you were thinking it, you probably should take a moment to NOT express that thought.
antepreprosays
Ichthyic:
In the end, what’s the difference between comparing Gohmert to a fictional ferengi, or a stereotype of a jew?
lolwut?
One is something exists entirely in fiction, and the other is a group of real people that have been heavily discriminated against for centuries? Is that the difference? Is this a trick question?
Acolyte of Sagansays
Ichthyic, I’m glad I wasn’t the only one thinking it!
Alverantsays
Dalillama it’s the expressions of the actors that make the difference. Rom, for all his good heart, perpetually looks like he’s confused. Quark looks like he’s the kind of person who calls everyone “friend” but has no idea what that word means.
sugarfrostedsays
@16 Yes, a purely fictional species that is greedy and big ears and a big nose. I might add a fictional being almost explicitly based on Jewish stereotypes. The “it’s fictional” doesn’t rectify that.
What a Maroon, oblivioussays
My takeaway from this is that I’m wearing practically the same shirt as George Takei (though mine’s a lot older and has a lot fewer buttons).
I feel uncommonly cool right now.
James Chalkersays
Seriously uncool using Rom for that. It would be bad enough using Quark, but Rom is 1000X more enlightened then Gohmert.
Ichthyicsays
One is something exists entirely in fiction
right, and you’re comparing gohmert to ferengi because?
guess what, those stereotypes of Jews? also fictional.
which is kinda why i brought it up. you KNOW memes like this touch on the exact same mental impulses.
hell, it’s places like this that TAUGHT me to start recognizing it.
phhhtsays
Yes, a purely fictional species that is greedy and big ears and a big nose. I might add a fictional being almost explicitly based on Jewish stereotypes.
So you see Jews as being greedy and having big ears and big noses? And being short, and enslaving “their” females? And living on distant planets, and traveling in starships?
You won’t see the stereotypes everywhere you look unless you buy into them to some degree.
A. Rsays
I believe Ichthyic et al. have fallen victim to the error of assuming that every cigar is more than just a cigar. AKA “taking it way too far”.
taikisays
Even if the Ferengi aren’t based off of Jewish stereotypes it still looks awful.
Still. I can’t help but to love the DS9 Ferengi. Even former Grand Nagus/Liquidator/Mercenary Brunt.
The first stereotype I thought of (and continue to do so) when I saw the Ferengi was Republicans. When we went to start going through Voyager and Next Generation together, we both shouted at once “Hey, it’s Republicans in Space” when they started talking. Given Roddenberry’s politics, I can’t help but think this is deliberate.
unclefrogysays
well taiki I will absofuknlutly agree that they resemble the rank and file born again repubs and the tea baggers at least in attitude
uncle frogy
chigau (違う)says
It’s a bald joke.
Ichthyicsays
So you see Jews as being greedy and having big ears and big noses?
OH, that is such intellectually dishonest bullshit.
So you see Jews as being greedy and having big ears and big noses? And being short, and enslaving “their” females? And living on distant planets, and traveling in starships?
What? Whether you agree that that’s the stereotype being portrayed or not, claiming that others are racists for knowing of it and worrying that it might be is, well, dishonest and quite a bit shitty.
FossilFishy (NOBODY, and proud of it!)says
For what it’s worth, I don’t like othering, even in jest; it’s a bog-standard tactic of those I oppose. And the fact that the other in this case is a fictional creation makes no difference, it’s still a sucky tactic.
F.O.says
Is it that bad to use “male” and “female” for people? (as an adjective, not a noun)
Gregory Greenwoodsays
Ichthyic @ 15;
these stupid memes are dangerous.
In the end, what’s the difference between comparing Gohmert to a fictional ferengi, or a stereotype of a jew?
Seconded. I have always found the Ferengi to be a questionable fictional creation at best. It seems more than a little suspicious to me that we have a fictional social group defined by two things above all others – its tendency to enshrine personal greed and elevate it to the ultimate virtue, and an extremely exaggerated facial feature taken to a grotesque extreme. Compare that to antisemitic slurs – that trade in bigoted stereotypes about the ‘grasping jew’ and which famously employ ‘satrical’ caricatures of Jewish figures with vatly exaggerated noses – and you begin to see the Ferengi, and the minds that created them, in a very disturbing light indeed.
Even the Ferengi tendency toward revolting misogyny played for notionally comedic effect has shades of stereotypes about foreigners coming over to ‘our’ societies and lusting after European women – not quite the ‘libidinous native’ trope, but related to it, and again holding disturbing resonances with how bigots view the Jewish diaspora.
We shouldn’t be in the business of amplifying that crypto-racism. Isn’t Pharyngula supposed to be better than that?
kevinalexandersays
The whole ‘physical ugliness equals moral degeneracy’ trope in any fiction bothers me. I noticed it in the original Star Trek although they did make some progress. Anybody who didn’t know that was going on in LOTR could watch the films with the sound off and still be able to tell the players without a score card.
Seven of Mine: Shrieking Feminist Harpysays
Apart from the gross implications it’s not even that good a comparison in practice. The prominent characters don’t fit the fictional stereotype. Rom, the pictured guy, has no head for numbers, treats women decently and lets his son go to a human school. His son, Nog, becomes the first Ferengi in Starfleet. Quark and Rom’s mother is instrumental in setting reforms in motion to change the misogynist Ferengi culture. Quark nurses a crush on Jadzia Dax (a strong, independent non-Ferengi woman) and has a fling with a Klingon woman. He also repeatedly puts himself in danger or gives up on some get-rich scheme to help his friends.
Which leads to an additional gross implication: the actual Ferengi characters on DS9 are “the good ones” that bigoted people keep around for “I have minority friends” cred while they continue to disparage other members of said minority.
Anrisays
anteprepro @ 16:
One is something exists entirely in fiction, and the other is a group of real people that have been heavily discriminated against for centuries? Is that the difference? Is this a trick question?
A. R @ 24:
I believe Ichthyic et al. have fallen victim to the error of assuming that every cigar is more than just a cigar. AKA “taking it way too far”.
What did you think of Jar Jar Binks?
No possible problems there, right?
‘Cause fiction!
– – – –
Seven of Mine: Shrieking Feminist Harpy @37:
Which leads to an additional gross implication: the actual Ferengi characters on DS9 are “the good ones” that bigoted people keep around for “I have minority friends” cred while they continue to disparage other members of said minority.
…and that they were enlightened and gained the courage to stand up to their backwards-thinking tribe due to their interactions with, and emulation of, Starfleet officers.
Paging Rudyard Kipling to the literary salon, paging Rudyard Kipling…
(At least in DS9, it wasn’t a literal White Man at the top. At least not locally.)
Doug Hudsonsays
As much as I like the individual Ferengi characters from DS9, I have to admit that their design always troubled me–as a Jewish stereotype they are just a little too on the nose (so to speak). Hell, I’m pretty sure Quark rubs his hands together and grins evilly over making a profit at some else’s expense. Only some superb writing and acting manages to salvage the characters.
Oddly, the original concept for the Ferengi was less stereotypical–they weren’t greedy merchants but ruthless pirates, designed to take the place of the Klingons as the “bad guy aliens”. Problem was, given their physical appearance, the audience didn’t take them seriously, so they were turned into comical caricatures. Which, probably unintentionally, happened to correspond closely to Jewish stereotypes.
So I agree with Ichthyic 100%–even setting aside the potential dehumanizing effect of comparing a human to a nonhuman, comparing a human to this particular species of nonhuman is highly problematic. I think the pushback to his posts comes from (understandable) fondness for the charactes, but if you compare the presentation of the Ferengi with that of anti-Semitic literature (and especially pictures), the similarity is irrefutable.
I was never a consistent DS9 watcher, but I did see bits of a couple of the Ferengi heavy episodes. I too found myself wondering if certain things weren’t a bit too close to being Jewish stereotypes.
David Marjanovićsays
You won’t see the stereotypes everywhere you look unless you buy into them to some degree.
Wow, that’s not remotely true, and you know it.
I will admit that I never made the connection Ferengi = Jewish*
Oh, neither had I, and probably for the same reason: I’m not exposed to antisemitic stereotypes on a daily basis. People have been pretty careful about not expressing them out in the open since 1945.
Similarly, I used not to know American stereotypes about black people, so Jar-Jar sailed way above my head until recently, and so did the crows in Dumbo.
ck, the Irate Lumpsays
I thought the Jewish stereotype involved hooked noses rather than merely large ones. The flat nose belonged to other racial stereotypes.
Doug Hudsonsays
ck, the Irate Lump @44,
There is much more to the Jewish stereotype than just the nose–particularly the slander that they are money-grubbing misers who gladly backstab any non-Jew to make a few shekels. I won’t link to any of this here, but do a google search for antisemitic propaganda or Nazi propaganda to get an idea.
The exaggerated ears of the Ferengi could, theoretically, be linked to other racist stereotypes, but in conjunction with their cartoonish love for money, their evil grins, and other behavior, they are clearly Jewish stereotypes.
I think the main reason that this didn’t cause a big uproar (besides white people not noticing) was that the Ferengi in DS9 are clearly treated affectionately by writers and cast–even Quark is a generally likeable character. If they were portrayed as bad guys, I think the show would’ve gotten in trouble.
Acolyte of Sagansays
Doug Hudson, #45, what the hell does the colour of the people not noticing have to do with anything?
I’ve never watched the programme but saw the negative connotation as soon as I saw the comparison picture above.
I’m also white, as are a lot of Jewish people.
So what exactly was your point?
Like a few others, I have the privilege not to have made the connection between Ferengi and Jews, but having seen it now, doubt I’ll ever unsee it. Thanks for raising it, Icthyic.
Also, Armin Shimerman, who played Quark, was the only Jewish regular on the show. Just FYI.
burgundysays
I can see how someone could make the Ferengi/Jewish connection, and I’ve seen it discussed before. For myself, I never noticed while watching the show and don’t have any strong feelings about it, but then my experience with antisemitism growing up was some really nasty graffiti outside the Jewish Community Center once and maybe one or two people assuming that because I was Jewish I had a lot of money. So it’s not something I’m sensitized to, and just because I’m not bothered doesn’t mean the people who are bothered are wrong.
But here is my question – Gohmert is being compared to a fictional race that arguably embodies antisemitic stereotypes, but the point of comparison (feeemales) is not related to the stereotype. So, to what degree is the comparison itself problematic? I’m a little bewildered by that. If someone were being likened to the Ferengi because they were greedy, I would more easily understand saying “hey, not cool.”
PaulBCsays
I haven’t really followed Star Trek much since the first couple of seasons of ST:TNG. I do remember being very disappointed by the introduction of the Ferengi and thinking the writers didn’t have a coherent plan for them.
The Ferengi are originally described as being like “Yankee Traders” (The Last Outpost) and this would have implied an entirely different demeanor and external stereotype. They would still have been unscrupulous, but might have been a bit more worldly wise and jolly. I had envisioned something like Captain Ahab, or a figure out of a Joseph Conrad story. Instead, they turn out to be clueless geeks who aren’t even very accomplished at their stated goal of ripping off their customers. If Ruben Bolling’s comic Tom the Dancing Bug had existed, I might have made the comparison to “Dinkle, The Unlovable Loser.”
But I agree that the makeup gives the appearance of unfortunate stereotypes. I wouldn’t think it intentional, not because I want to give anyone a free pass, but just because I don’t see how that helps the Star Trek franchise. They were obviously so annoying that they had to be retrofitted from the original premise of fearsome adversaries to minor, comic characters. It would probably have been better just to have them all go away–say into a wormhole promising great profit at the other end. Or maybe just sacrifice the whole first season and have Picard wake up to a WTF was that about dream and get a fresh start to TNG for season two.
Doug Hudsonsays
Acolyte of Sagan @46,
White people are the dominant ethnicity in the U.S., and so 1) have white privilege and 2) are more likely to be heard if they object to something. So if the stereotype had been one that was offensive to whites, it would be much more likely to become an issue. I’d say this is fairly obvious, really.
burgundy @48, that’s an interesting point, but I think its a very fine distinction and requires careful handling to make it clear. For example, PZ’s post makes it clear that he is talking about the Ferengi attitude toward women, and that’s fine, but if you just look at the picture or the title, it’s not clear.
Kevin Kehressays
That literally made me snort. And I don’t snort.
Doug Hudsonsays
CaitieCat, Harridan of Social Justice@47,
I truly doubt that anyone involved in Star Trek intended for the Ferengi to be Jewish stereotypes. I think its clear from watching the show that Armin Shimmerman enjoyed playing Quark.
Curiously, “ferengi” (transliteration varies) is an Indian word for “foreigner”, which in pre-Raj times was used as a slur for white people! (Similar to gwailo or gaijin)
PaulBCsays
burgundy #48
But here is my question – Gohmert is being compared to a fictional race that arguably embodies antisemitic stereotypes, but the point of comparison (feeemales) is not related to the stereotype. So, to what degree is the comparison itself problematic? I’m a little bewildered by that.
It’s a valid point, but in practice it’s nearly impossible to be that nuanced, like Krusty the clown protesting that the Wha-Cha-Ma-Carcass sandwich uses only the “non-diseased meat from diseased animals.” A reference is going to be assumed to be a package deal.
Gohmert deserves derision for his comment whether you think of a Ferengi or not. I suspect that his word choice was a kind of overdefensive reaction to what he perceived as PC criticism. I.e., he probably wanted to say something like “our little ladies in the House got in way over their heads on this one” and knew he couldn’t say that, so he went to the opposite extreme to make the same statement in what he perceived as neutral language, but which actually sounded like he was from outer space (Ferengi or not).
unclefrogysays
I have no idea how you have alien species in a science fiction film and not run very close to racial stereotypes. The audience wants them to look different and they are written with some exaggeration all of which come out of the social context they are written from and they need to be acted be human actors in masks.
uncle frogy
A. Noydsays
burgundy (#48)
Gohmert is being compared to a fictional race that arguably embodies antisemitic stereotypes, but the point of comparison (feeemales) is not related to the stereotype.
I don’t think it’s the only point. Gohmert is one of those libertarian types obsessed with the free market and corporate profits at the expense of everything else, after all.
Acolyte of Sagansays
Doug Hudson @#50, in your comment #45 you said that there was no uproar at the time in part because white people weren’t noticing, not because it wasn’t offensive to whites as you switched to in comment 50.
These are two different claims, but assuming that the former comment was intended to be understood as the latter then I take your point.
PaulBCsays
I have no idea how you have alien species in a science fiction film and not run very close to racial stereotypes.
I would handle it by creating an intentional dissonance between the external stereotype and the behavioral stereotype. The makeup artist may have a particular non-stereotypical vision, but a focus group might have the impression of a racial stereotype anyway. If that impression appears to be backed up by behavior, then some of the audience will jump to the conclusion that the stereotype is intended. If you mix it with an entirely different behavior, then the behavior and external appearance might just be taken at face value. Of course, it could look contrived and might not be as easy as all that. These are big budget productions, and they should be able to hire someone with more expertise than I have (if they care enough!).
However, I think there is usually a tendency to match the stereotype and appearance. Certainly, the Pakled (Samaritan Snare) looked, talked, and behaved as if they were cognitively impaired. I remember really not liking that episode, and wondering how Star Trek could stray so close to making R-word jokes.
AlexanderZsays
Doug Hudson #52
I truly doubt that anyone involved in Star Trek intended for the Ferengi to be Jewish stereotypes.
Nobody intended for Trek to be extremely sexist, but it still was, so that’s hardly an excuse.
Besides, Ferengi were played for the most part by Jews: Nog = Aron Eisenberg, Rom = Max Grodénchik, Quirk = Armin Shimerman (who also played many of the one-off Ferengi on TNG), Zek = Wallace Shawn, etc. Given the small percentage of Jewish actors, it’s hardly a coincidence that so many of them were cast as Ferengi (mind you, not all Ferengi were played by Jews. For example, Ishka was played by Andrea Martin, who is Armenian).
Oh and regarding your #39 comment:
the original concept for the Ferengi was less stereotypical–they weren’t greedy merchants but ruthless pirates
The Ferengi were conceived by Roddenberry as they were depicted in their first appearance in The Last Outpost (ST: TNG, se1ep05) when Roddenberry was still firmly in charge of everything. They were supposed to be the complete opposite of the tall and proud cmdr Riker. Their acting instructions were to move like evil, excitable hamsters. There was nothing subtle, or imposing in their design. Unlike the Klingons they weren’t supposed to be an equal adversary – they were supposed to be something to loathe and despise.
Seven of Mine: Shrieking Feminist Harpysays
I think people kind of need to get over thinking that Star Trek is this bastion of inclusiveness/progressiveness. It’s certainly better than most media in that regard simply for trying but it’s still produced, directed and acted by people who are steeped in the same cultural biases as everyone else.
I have to admit at this point that I am speaking from a position of some ignorace; I’ve never seen any DS9, which is evidently where we see the most of the Ferengi. My first exposure to them was the Voyager episode where a pair of them have set themselves up as gods on some low-tech world and are making everyone live by some Randist screed about the virtues of profit and exploitation. All that said, I can see what people are saying about it looking like some anti-Semitic stereotypes; I don’t think for a moment that’s what they were going for, but intent, not magic, all that sort of thing, so I’m not going to stand here and say that there’s no problem. On the gripping hand, though, we have things like:
Hell, I’m pretty sure Quark rubs his hands together and grins evilly over making a profit at some else’s expense.
You mean like Mitt Romney did during the last presidential election? I don’t recall him actually rubbing his hands together on camera, but he certainly gloated about making profits at someone else’s expense often enough. When a self-selected group of people (Republicans/Conservatives) is actually behaving like this, what is the best way to parody/mock them without running afoul of anti-Semitic tropes? (Would they have been better as a renegade faction of one of the established Trek polities, for instance, where it’s clearly a case of being a (principally; I know there’s a lot of cultural pressure towards various conservative beliefs in a lot of places in the same way there’s a lot of social pressure towards, say, being religious) self-selected political group, perhaps? I mean, malevolent Randist greedheads do make good villains, and I’m also all in favor of mocking them (and they’re actually often ineffectual at their stated goals in real life, as Doug Hudson notes the Ferengi as being, for instance), but I also don’t want it to even look like there’s anti-Semitic bullshit going on. How, hypothetically, might other folks here have put Randist greedhead villains into Star Trek in a way that wouldn’t look potentially anti-Semitic? (Serious question; like I said, those assholes could do with some mocking, but ethnic(and other, of course) bigotry needs to be torn up root and branch.)
Also not giving Trek a pass on problematic stereotyping in general, even when I don’t think it’s deliberate; there’s unfortunate implications all over the place, starting with the ethnic and gender makeup of the various bridge crews/main casts, and the total fucking lack of any sexual or gender minorities. (The United Federation of Planets supposedly represents all of humanity, everywhere. Starfleet should be a lot less white).
PaulBCsays
There was nothing subtle, or imposing in their design. Unlike the Klingons they weren’t supposed to be an equal adversary – they were supposed to be something to loathe and despise.
That’s an interesting point. I have nothing against introducing an unworthy adversary if you can somehow make it into a good story. But using stature as a proxy for unworthiness just shows a lack of imagination. SF at its best is supposed to defy expectations, not reinforce them.
Anyway, whatever the Ferengi were supposed to be, they never really worked, except possibly in their later use as comic foils.
PaulBCsays
Another thing… I have a pretty clear memory of the excitement when ST:TNG first came out. And I recall conversations with friends about how they were going to introduce an entirely new adversary that wasn’t Romulan or Klingon. So there was a lot of anticipation about the Ferengi before they appeared in an episode. When they actually did, what I recall (imperfectly I am sure) was a fairly unanimous WTF?!?! I mean, they had a chance to break down ground and they completely blew it. If Roddenberry’s brilliant idea was to create contemptible rodent-like enemy (according to AlexanderZ), I just have to ask what was he smoking.
The Borg actually did succeed in creating a new, fearsome opponent–and the only equal opportunity employer in known space–but that had to wait for several years.
I have no idea how you have alien species in a science fiction film and not run very close to racial stereotypes.
It would help a lot if they would avoid the whole Planet of Hats (TVtropes link) thing, and actually have cultural and ethnic diversity among the aliens (the latter of which would be accomplished by, of course, ethnic diversity among the actors playing them, something that’s sorely needed anyway. Possibly especially in science fiction, since ethnic makeup of the planet is quite different to that of any given nation, and sci fi is very prone to planetary polities and world governments, so, as I said above, we should see a much smaller percentage of white people in, say, Starfleet than in fact we do, and a much greater ethnic diversity overall.
It would help a lot if they would avoid the whole Planet of Hats (TVtropes link) thing, and actually have cultural and ethnic diversity among the aliens
You know, even when I was a not that educated teen I was wondering how all other planets apparently have just ONE ethnicity with ONE language while earth got a few thousands of each (unless the plot is an ethnical conflict between the TWO ethnicities)
AlexanderZsays
PaulBC #61
If Roddenberry’s brilliant idea was to create contemptible rodent-like enemy (according to AlexanderZ)
Looked it up and the original quote (as retold by Armin Shimerman in “Star Trek: The Next Generation – The Continuing Mission“) was that they were supposed to “jump up and down like crazed gerbils.”
Gene wasn’t smoking anything other than his own overinflated ego. He has always made questionable decisions (just compare Star Trek: The Motion Picture to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan), but only in TNG he got full reign without any supervision from the studio. He blocked any idea that introduced conflict and drama into the show, because in his mind the future should be perfect and without conflict (which is why the first two seasons of TNG were so bad). Michael Piller described this as a “Roddenberry Box” that forced writers to think only within it (source: “Fade in: From Idea to Final Draft, The Writing of Star Trek Insurrection“).
Dalillama #60
When a self-selected group of people (Republicans/Conservatives) is actually behaving like this, what is the best way to parody/mock them without running afoul of anti-Semitic tropes?
Colbert used to do this pretty well. When your enemies are cartoonish, simply present them as they are. Otherwise you’ll have to enter some arms race where reality and parody will try to out-ridiculous each other.
burgundysays
Seven of Mine @59 – ideally, in my head anyway, Star Trek’s reach will inherently exceed its grasp at least a little bit, because it’s a story about people who are more progressive than the people writing it. The idea is that humanity can and will be better in the future, but it requires an awful lot of self-awareness to pull off. So, the original series made a really bold statement by putting a black woman on the bridge, but the show otherwise was really sexist, because the writers couldn’t see beyond their own sexism to imagine a more egalitarian future.
And it’s why I find the new movies so disappointing, because they don’t seem to even be trying. I would love to see the 21st century equivalent of making a Russian an important member of the crew. What kinds of casting decisions would be shocking, would show just how much had changed over the centuries? But it doesn’t seem like anyone is thinking about it in those terms.
Seven of Mine: Shrieking Feminist Harpysays
burgundy @ 66
Seven of Mine @59 – ideally, in my head anyway, Star Trek’s reach will inherently exceed its grasp at least a little bit, because it’s a story about people who are more progressive than the people writing it. The idea is that humanity can and will be better in the future, but it requires an awful lot of self-awareness to pull off. So, the original series made a really bold statement by putting a black woman on the bridge, but the show otherwise was really sexist, because the writers couldn’t see beyond their own sexism to imagine a more egalitarian future.
Definitely. Further, even if you can see past your own biases, it’s still a bit of a dilemma because, if you’re portraying this egalitarian world, it’s very hard to comment on 21st century social problems except to mention in passing that it used to be that way.
Gregory Greenwoodsays
burgundy @ 66;
And it’s why I find the new movies so disappointing, because they don’t seem to even be trying. I would love to see the 21st century equivalent of making a Russian an important member of the crew. What kinds of casting decisions would be shocking, would show just how much had changed over the centuries? But it doesn’t seem like anyone is thinking about it in those terms.
Seven of Mine: Shrieking Feminist Harpy @ 67;
Definitely. Further, even if you can see past your own biases, it’s still a bit of a dilemma because, if you’re portraying this egalitarian world, it’s very hard to comment on 21st century social problems except to mention in passing that it used to be that way.
And let’s not forget that even if the writers and performers can see beyond their own biases, there is no guarantee that the money men (and depressingly they are still, for the most part, cis/het White middle class men) will feel the same way, as we saw when they blocked the idea of casting a man to play the hemaphroditic alien Riker falls in love with in one of the TNG series, because teh deaded ghey. Or how they were prepared to have gender complex female aliens have sort-of-almost same sex relationships in DS9 (Dax being involved for the most part), but no human characters or groups with close anologues to human life experience or sexuality were allowed to do that (apart from that atrocious mirror universe Kiera Nerese character who signals her sadism and capacity for evil by wearing tight PVC getups and being bisexual in a ludicrously stereotypical rapacious man/woman eater fashion – a two for one on bigotry), and male same sex relationships could not even be hinted at. Trans* people also only got a nod by means of the conveniently-non-threatening-to-the-patriarchy fudge of Trill ‘passed lives’ . The show winds up walking a tightrope, with the threat of enforced rewrites or even being pulled altogether of it goes ‘too far’ as a bunch of conservative middle aged men judge such things, which rather impinges on the writers’ freedom to write anything that is meaningfully progressive or asks genuinely tough questions about the failings of our contemporary society.
And that doesn’t even address the often less than enlightened attitude of segments of the public at large, as can be seen by the bigoted reaction of all too many to the kiss between Kirk and Uhura in the original series, and later an almost carbon copy ridiculous reaction to an extremely chaste kiss between Dax and the host of one of her symbiont’s former wives from a passed life.
Until attitudes change – both from the top down and the bottom up – we simply aren’t going to see meaningful improvement, and right now we have misogynist tools popping (including among the – still overwhelmingly male – directorial and production staff themselves, as evidenced by Into Darknesses’ use of a character who, while allegedly a scientist with specialist knowledge, seemed to principally be there to alternately scream helplessly and parade around in her underwear for the titilliation of Kirk and by extension the audience) up everywhere who look back on the ludicrous sexism of the Original Series as a golden age, leaving us with a very real risk of the franchise going backwards rather than forwards when it comes to inclusivism.
I’m afraid this is going to be an uphill struggle.
antepreprosays
Apologies for my early baffled response to Icthyic, I did not understand that the meaning was that the Ferengi were dangerously close to Jewish stereotypes, for some reason I thought the objection was to ANY comparison between a person and a fictional species.
Gregory Greenwood:
(including among the – still overwhelmingly male – directorial and production staff themselves, as evidenced by Into Darknesses’ use of a character who, while allegedly a scientist with specialist knowledge, seemed to principally be there to alternately scream helplessly and parade around in her underwear for the titilliation of Kirk and by extension the audience)
I am pretty sure the only plot relevance that character had was her connection to a later villain and the subsequent, inevitable Damseling. Fucking dammit. And even Uhura seems to only exist in the movie to develop Spock’s character. A far better character than that other one who I can’t even remember the name of (even if, of course, she is portrayed as Angry Irrational Woman, starting an argument about her and Spock’s relationship in front of Kirk right before they are about to put their lives in danger). But she doesn’t do shit. Doing shit is for the Big Damn White Male Heroes.
Tethyssays
I had heard the ferengi = jewish stereotype thing before, ( and agree that it is a problem) but I an learning a lot of fascinating ST backstory in this thread.
Alexander Z #58 ~~ Besides, Ferengi were played for the most part by Jews: Nog = Aron Eisenberg, Rom = Max Grodénchik, Quirk = Armin Shimerman (who also played many of the one-off Ferengi on TNG), Zek = Wallace Shawn, etc. Given the small percentage of Jewish actors, it’s hardly a coincidence that so many of them were cast as Ferengi (mind you, not all Ferengi were played by Jews. For example, Ishka was played by Andrea Martin, who is Armenian).
I realize they are different series, but Leonard Nimoy and William Shatner are both of Jewish ancestry. source I don’t have statistics for all actors, but judging by the list at the source, I’m fair certain that people with jewish ancestry are very well represented in Hollywood, and the entertainment industry in America. MGM studios stands for Metro Goldwyn Mayer , I highly doubt it would tolerate any anti-semitic discrimination.
Doug Hudsonsays
anteprepro@69,
While one could make an argument that any comparison between a (real) human and a (imaginary) non-human “others” the human and is therefore bad, I’m not prepared to make that argument, and I think in this case it’s all the issues around the Ferengi that make it so problematic.
For example, if I said a politician was “as sneaky as a Romulan”, would that be a problem? The Romulans are based on the ancient Romans, so there is no invocation of unpleasant modern-day stereotypes, and they certainly ARE sneaky.
Or perhaps the problem would be avoided if the real person were compared to a specific fictional character. Would it make a difference if Gohmert were compared to “Quark” rather than to “a Ferengi”? Not enough of one, perhaps, since Quark is pretty stereotypical Ferengi…hmmm. Worth thinking about.
I never even saw Into Darkness, because I was so annoyed at the first film, Into Lens Flares. Every member of the main crew got a Moment of Awesome: Sulu got a folding katana fight, Scotty did transwarp beaming, and so on.
Uhura got one too, almost. She did all the great work as a linguist to notice the dialect clues as to who the opponent was – but the big reveal about her incredible work went to Old Blue Eyes, in the captain’s chair because obviously you’d give that seat to the biggest fuckup and honourless cheater in the Academy.
He brings it up in the meeting, and Uhura’s line is something like “yes, I did.”
The only woman in the major crew, and even in the 23rd century she’s still having men steal her ideas and her thunder, before she can properly grab the glory herself. And that’s her only moment of awesome; her only other purpose seems to be to promise this generation’s entitled pseudo-Vulcans to think they too can have an incredibly hot girlfriend without having to learn human social skills.
Guh. I had the same problem with the “more progressive” TNG: the old white guy runs things, the next old white guy is the XO, one black man is large and aggressive and inarticulate, the other is an emasculated nerd, and two of the three women are the “looking after people” leaders of the crew. Queer people don’t exist, as noted above. The only thing close to new was Tasha, but then it turned out she was from Rape City, New Violatia, in the Sabine Cluster.
DS9 got better at some of that; Sisko is my favourite captain in Trek, followed by Janeway. But yeah, I’ve been a fan since I read the Blush novelizations, and Trek’s progressiveness is at best relative, throughout its history.
antepreprosays
Doug Hudson: I think it is related to another interesting point I saw brought up of whether ANY fictional humanoid species might, intentionally or incidentally, wind up being racist or reflecting a racist ideology (to illustrate the latter: Dwarves and Orcs might be considered racist stereotypes directly, while Elves are not stereotypes but rather reflect a racist ideology, in that they are a lilly white race of flawless, long-living superhumans). Honestly, I realize that it is definitely a danger and it is far more rampant than we might realize or fully appreciate.
Gregory Greenwoodsays
anteprepro @ 69;
I am pretty sure the only plot relevance that character had was her connection to a later villain and the subsequent, inevitable Damseling. Fucking dammit. And even Uhura seems to only exist in the movie to develop Spock’s character. A far better character than that other one who I can’t even remember the name of (even if, of course, she is portrayed as Angry Irrational Woman, starting an argument about her and Spock’s relationship in front of Kirk right before they are about to put their lives in danger). But she doesn’t do shit. Doing shit is for the Big Damn White Male Heroes.
Exactly – you have all of two female characters with anything approaching worthwhile character development in the film (reminds me somewhat of the original Starwars trilogy), and both effectively function as little more than conventionally attractive ambulatory set dressing for most of the time. The scientist new addition (I can’t remember the character’s name at all, which gives you some notion of how much impression the character made on me) supposedly has some poorly explained high tech sci fi bomb disposal skill set, and as you say has some minor, largely throwaway connection to Khan only revealed much later on. Other than that it is all screaming, broken ankles and crudely contrived excuses to show her striking a pose in her underwear.
I can also definitely see your point that Uhura does practically nothing beyond prettying up the place, unless one counts that weird sequence you mention where she acts in a grossly unprofessional fashion and decides that the best moment to argue with her boyfriend is in the midst of a crisis situation (I somehow doubt that that sort of thing would be tolerated in any professional setting, still less the demi-military kind of environment that neo-Trek seems to be heading toward), which is heinously sexist in its own right and has more than a whiff of some misgynist attempt to nod and wink at the audience with a ‘women, you know what I mean?’ sentiment, or looking on anxiously as pointy eared Zachary Quinto engages in fisty cuffs with a genetically engineered Benedict Cumberbatch in a not entirely convincing fashion. All told, there really isn’t very much there for anyone to work with, which seems rather a waste of Zoe Saldana’s talent.
As you say the only people who seem to be allowed to do anything in the show are all suspiciously uniform in their whiteness and maleness, whether it is the still really chauvanistic ‘heroic’ Kirk or the anti-heroic/villainous (depending upon what point of the movie you are in) Khan. And even the Khan plotline itself annoyed me – a reasonably good case is made over the course of the bulk of the film that while Khan is capable of violence and villainy it is because he was driven to it by desperation. His people were afterall created to fight and then betrayed after society decided it had no further use for them. Even the notionaly enlightened Federation had no trouble viewing Khan and the other augments as a disposeable class of person. There was a conspiracy within Starfleet to secretly create new generations of weapons and warships without any civilian oversight, and those conspirators did seek to kill the entire Enterprise crew and Khan along with them. All the stuff we are shown seems to back up Khan’s version of events; that he has been paintd as the bad guy unfairly to cover up the actions of the true villain of the piece, and his own criminality and violence was primaraily driven by a lack of better options when he had learned the hard way that he couldn’t trust anyone who wasn’t like him.
At every turn the audience is encouraged to believe that Khan is different, but different doesn’t have to mean evil – that what he really wants is to save those like himself from oblivion, an entirely reasonable goal, doubly so after the audience discovers that the charactersiation of him as a violent butcher comes from a less than reliable source. The audience is lead to believe that maybe he could become more than he is, and more than he was engineered to be, for a major chunk of the running time, but the filmamkers just don’t stick the landing, suddenly having him declare that he was an augment supremacist all along, and now has some poolry definied plan to kill a whole bunch of unmodified humans and non-humans for revenge/as part of some poorly explained power grab/for poops and giggles/all of the above. The take away message seems to be that different is evil, at least in this case, and that Khan’s violent and treacherous actions make it OK to condemn all the other modified humans (who afterall didn’t ask to be modifed before they were born, and who haven’t demonstrably actually done anything to anyone except according to the testimony of a now comprehemively dead would-be genocidal warcriminal) to endless cryostasis just in case they are nasty sorts as well, because being really smart and having a mean right hook totally means that it is too dangerous to allow a person to even be conscious and in a secure facility while the potential threat they may present is assessed – we are supposed to believe that the best a supposedly technologically advanced and ethically enlightened idealised culture can manage is a permanent sojourn as a set of transhuman popsicals. Even by Star Treks’ frankly rather low standards of ‘morality’ that is a pretty poor outcome.
And don’t even get me started on the magic resurrection blood…
burgundysays
But there are also different ways to be progressive, beyond the casting. I’ve been watching soem TOS episodes lately, and I’m thinking of “Devil in the Dark.” It starts off as a straight-up “kill the monster” story. And then something happens… Kirk, despite being adamant about killing it earlier, decides *not* to kill it when he encounters it and it does not threaten him. He and Spock try to communicate with it. It is in pain so they get it medical help. When Spock is able to establish a connection, they find out that she is not a mindless monster, the humans were the ones (unknowingly) behaving monstrously, and they immediately take her side against the other humans. And then, wonder of wonders, when the miners find out why she has been attacking them, they (in a vague way) acknowledge their culpability, are sorry, and no longer try to kill her (and Kirk brokers an agreement that lets everyone peacefully get what they want).
Genre fiction that has action elements but does not position physical force as the ultimate means of settling conflict is still pretty rare, I think. (I admit that I’m not totally on top of current TV, but that’s the sense I get.)
ROFL.
What, you let your feeemales wear clothing??!?!?!
Hold on, you should have used Quark. Rom is the one who is the decent one who wouldn’t sell out his brother for a profit.
Did Jason ever get around to making his MRA-Ferengi blockquote class available site-wide, or was that scrapped as impossible, or put on the back-burner due to his much-increased workload? I suppose I could just ask him directly…
In an excellent bit of synchronicity, I’m about to go home and watch the DS9 episode where Grand Nagus Zek is deposed after Ishka convinces him to grant feeeemales equal rights.
And seconding Alverant, Rom is actually one of the few feminist Ferengi who values social justice and social relationships over profits; they really should have used Quark for the image.
I also thought they used the wrong Ferengi
Also, as troubling as Gohmert’s whole abortion discussion is in its own right, I find it even worse that Gohmert said “Our Republican females.” Which seems to imply that Republican men own the Republican women and allow them to be in Congress as long as they don’t screw up the men’s plans. I’m sure that implication was unintentional.
Hey Ferenginar eventually introduced reforms to give rights to women. It happened in a terrible, terrible episode, but it happened.
I don’t see any sign of that sort of open-mindedness in the Republican Party.
I would have used FCA Inspector Brunt. Rom was a liberal, as Ferengi go. AND he eventually became the Grand Nagus! After forming a union, arguing for worker’s rights, women’s rights, and environmental responsibility.
I am amazed by y’all’s ability to identify which Ferengi it was in the picture; I have great difficulty telling them apart under all the makeup. Admittedly, I have a fair amount of difficulty tracking faces even when people aren’t wearing enormous latex prosthetics, but still.
he could have used one of the other none or barely named Ferengi. though to be fair the ferengi usually were pretty clear that they were not about doing anyone else a favor and were strictly in it for themselves unlike the conservatives. profit above all else!
uncle frogy
For crying out loud! Rom nearly gave up his life to save the entire alpha quadrant from enslavement by the dominion!
Rom’s son, Nog was also usually portrayed as a good person, more interested in helping others rather than merely enriching himself. Yeah, definitely should’ve been Quark.
Hell, Nog’s justification for why he wanted to join Starfleet was that he knew his father could’ve been a great engineer, but instead caved to societal pressures to become a (quite lousy) merchant instead. That’s pretty near full-on there.
It would be sort of an obvious snark to say “This comparison is unfair–to the depicted Ferengi!” so I admire the way the discussion has veered off into very sincere protestations along those lines.
Nah, he’s no Ferengi. Hasn’t got the lobes for it.
Louis Gohmert is no Ferengi. The Ferengi have principles. Not always the best ones, but they do have them. Gohrmert is just an idiot.
these stupid memes are dangerous.
In the end, what’s the difference between comparing Gohmert to a fictional ferengi, or a stereotype of a jew?
really, just fucking stop it already.
if you were thinking it, you probably should take a moment to NOT express that thought.
Ichthyic:
lolwut?
One is something exists entirely in fiction, and the other is a group of real people that have been heavily discriminated against for centuries? Is that the difference? Is this a trick question?
Ichthyic, I’m glad I wasn’t the only one thinking it!
Dalillama it’s the expressions of the actors that make the difference. Rom, for all his good heart, perpetually looks like he’s confused. Quark looks like he’s the kind of person who calls everyone “friend” but has no idea what that word means.
@16 Yes, a purely fictional species that is greedy and big ears and a big nose. I might add a fictional being almost explicitly based on Jewish stereotypes. The “it’s fictional” doesn’t rectify that.
My takeaway from this is that I’m wearing practically the same shirt as George Takei (though mine’s a lot older and has a lot fewer buttons).
I feel uncommonly cool right now.
Seriously uncool using Rom for that. It would be bad enough using Quark, but Rom is 1000X more enlightened then Gohmert.
right, and you’re comparing gohmert to ferengi because?
guess what, those stereotypes of Jews? also fictional.
which is kinda why i brought it up. you KNOW memes like this touch on the exact same mental impulses.
hell, it’s places like this that TAUGHT me to start recognizing it.
Yes, a purely fictional species that is greedy and big ears and a big nose. I might add a fictional being almost explicitly based on Jewish stereotypes.
So you see Jews as being greedy and having big ears and big noses? And being short, and enslaving “their” females? And living on distant planets, and traveling in starships?
You won’t see the stereotypes everywhere you look unless you buy into them to some degree.
I believe Ichthyic et al. have fallen victim to the error of assuming that every cigar is more than just a cigar. AKA “taking it way too far”.
Even if the Ferengi aren’t based off of Jewish stereotypes it still looks awful.
Still. I can’t help but to love the DS9 Ferengi. Even former Grand Nagus/Liquidator/Mercenary Brunt.
might I suggest another fictional species the republicans remind me of?
The first stereotype I thought of (and continue to do so) when I saw the Ferengi was Republicans. When we went to start going through Voyager and Next Generation together, we both shouted at once “Hey, it’s Republicans in Space” when they started talking. Given Roddenberry’s politics, I can’t help but think this is deliberate.
well taiki I will absofuknlutly agree that they resemble the rank and file born again repubs and the tea baggers at least in attitude
uncle frogy
It’s a bald joke.
OH, that is such intellectually dishonest bullshit.
NOT what they were saying at all.
fuck you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2jmT35fygc
wow, what a bunch of hypocrites.
bookmarked for future reference.
phhht #23:
What? Whether you agree that that’s the stereotype being portrayed or not, claiming that others are racists for knowing of it and worrying that it might be is, well, dishonest and quite a bit shitty.
For what it’s worth, I don’t like othering, even in jest; it’s a bog-standard tactic of those I oppose. And the fact that the other in this case is a fictional creation makes no difference, it’s still a sucky tactic.
Is it that bad to use “male” and “female” for people? (as an adjective, not a noun)
Ichthyic @ 15;
Seconded. I have always found the Ferengi to be a questionable fictional creation at best. It seems more than a little suspicious to me that we have a fictional social group defined by two things above all others – its tendency to enshrine personal greed and elevate it to the ultimate virtue, and an extremely exaggerated facial feature taken to a grotesque extreme. Compare that to antisemitic slurs – that trade in bigoted stereotypes about the ‘grasping jew’ and which famously employ ‘satrical’ caricatures of Jewish figures with vatly exaggerated noses – and you begin to see the Ferengi, and the minds that created them, in a very disturbing light indeed.
Even the Ferengi tendency toward revolting misogyny played for notionally comedic effect has shades of stereotypes about foreigners coming over to ‘our’ societies and lusting after European women – not quite the ‘libidinous native’ trope, but related to it, and again holding disturbing resonances with how bigots view the Jewish diaspora.
We shouldn’t be in the business of amplifying that crypto-racism. Isn’t Pharyngula supposed to be better than that?
The whole ‘physical ugliness equals moral degeneracy’ trope in any fiction bothers me. I noticed it in the original Star Trek although they did make some progress. Anybody who didn’t know that was going on in LOTR could watch the films with the sound off and still be able to tell the players without a score card.
Apart from the gross implications it’s not even that good a comparison in practice. The prominent characters don’t fit the fictional stereotype. Rom, the pictured guy, has no head for numbers, treats women decently and lets his son go to a human school. His son, Nog, becomes the first Ferengi in Starfleet. Quark and Rom’s mother is instrumental in setting reforms in motion to change the misogynist Ferengi culture. Quark nurses a crush on Jadzia Dax (a strong, independent non-Ferengi woman) and has a fling with a Klingon woman. He also repeatedly puts himself in danger or gives up on some get-rich scheme to help his friends.
Which leads to an additional gross implication: the actual Ferengi characters on DS9 are “the good ones” that bigoted people keep around for “I have minority friends” cred while they continue to disparage other members of said minority.
anteprepro @ 16:
A. R @ 24:
What did you think of Jar Jar Binks?
No possible problems there, right?
‘Cause fiction!
– – – –
Seven of Mine: Shrieking Feminist Harpy @37:
…and that they were enlightened and gained the courage to stand up to their backwards-thinking tribe due to their interactions with, and emulation of, Starfleet officers.
Paging Rudyard Kipling to the literary salon, paging Rudyard Kipling…
(At least in DS9, it wasn’t a literal White Man at the top. At least not locally.)
As much as I like the individual Ferengi characters from DS9, I have to admit that their design always troubled me–as a Jewish stereotype they are just a little too on the nose (so to speak). Hell, I’m pretty sure Quark rubs his hands together and grins evilly over making a profit at some else’s expense. Only some superb writing and acting manages to salvage the characters.
Oddly, the original concept for the Ferengi was less stereotypical–they weren’t greedy merchants but ruthless pirates, designed to take the place of the Klingons as the “bad guy aliens”. Problem was, given their physical appearance, the audience didn’t take them seriously, so they were turned into comical caricatures. Which, probably unintentionally, happened to correspond closely to Jewish stereotypes.
So I agree with Ichthyic 100%–even setting aside the potential dehumanizing effect of comparing a human to a nonhuman, comparing a human to this particular species of nonhuman is highly problematic. I think the pushback to his posts comes from (understandable) fondness for the charactes, but if you compare the presentation of the Ferengi with that of anti-Semitic literature (and especially pictures), the similarity is irrefutable.
I will admit that I never made the connection Ferengi = Jewish*, but I find the #notallferengi discussion hillarious.
*Which does not mean it’s not a valid concern. It’S just me. Better said, 10 years ago me.
F.O., #34
I wouldn’t say it’s bad as much as it’s ridiculous:
How many female humans are in the audience?
I met a male human yesterday.
Good morning, female and male humans. This is your captain speaking.
I was never a consistent DS9 watcher, but I did see bits of a couple of the Ferengi heavy episodes. I too found myself wondering if certain things weren’t a bit too close to being Jewish stereotypes.
Wow, that’s not remotely true, and you know it.
Oh, neither had I, and probably for the same reason: I’m not exposed to antisemitic stereotypes on a daily basis. People have been pretty careful about not expressing them out in the open since 1945.
Similarly, I used not to know American stereotypes about black people, so Jar-Jar sailed way above my head until recently, and so did the crows in Dumbo.
I thought the Jewish stereotype involved hooked noses rather than merely large ones. The flat nose belonged to other racial stereotypes.
ck, the Irate Lump @44,
There is much more to the Jewish stereotype than just the nose–particularly the slander that they are money-grubbing misers who gladly backstab any non-Jew to make a few shekels. I won’t link to any of this here, but do a google search for antisemitic propaganda or Nazi propaganda to get an idea.
The exaggerated ears of the Ferengi could, theoretically, be linked to other racist stereotypes, but in conjunction with their cartoonish love for money, their evil grins, and other behavior, they are clearly Jewish stereotypes.
I think the main reason that this didn’t cause a big uproar (besides white people not noticing) was that the Ferengi in DS9 are clearly treated affectionately by writers and cast–even Quark is a generally likeable character. If they were portrayed as bad guys, I think the show would’ve gotten in trouble.
Doug Hudson, #45, what the hell does the colour of the people not noticing have to do with anything?
I’ve never watched the programme but saw the negative connotation as soon as I saw the comparison picture above.
I’m also white, as are a lot of Jewish people.
So what exactly was your point?
Like a few others, I have the privilege not to have made the connection between Ferengi and Jews, but having seen it now, doubt I’ll ever unsee it. Thanks for raising it, Icthyic.
Also, Armin Shimerman, who played Quark, was the only Jewish regular on the show. Just FYI.
I can see how someone could make the Ferengi/Jewish connection, and I’ve seen it discussed before. For myself, I never noticed while watching the show and don’t have any strong feelings about it, but then my experience with antisemitism growing up was some really nasty graffiti outside the Jewish Community Center once and maybe one or two people assuming that because I was Jewish I had a lot of money. So it’s not something I’m sensitized to, and just because I’m not bothered doesn’t mean the people who are bothered are wrong.
But here is my question – Gohmert is being compared to a fictional race that arguably embodies antisemitic stereotypes, but the point of comparison (feeemales) is not related to the stereotype. So, to what degree is the comparison itself problematic? I’m a little bewildered by that. If someone were being likened to the Ferengi because they were greedy, I would more easily understand saying “hey, not cool.”
I haven’t really followed Star Trek much since the first couple of seasons of ST:TNG. I do remember being very disappointed by the introduction of the Ferengi and thinking the writers didn’t have a coherent plan for them.
The Ferengi are originally described as being like “Yankee Traders” (The Last Outpost) and this would have implied an entirely different demeanor and external stereotype. They would still have been unscrupulous, but might have been a bit more worldly wise and jolly. I had envisioned something like Captain Ahab, or a figure out of a Joseph Conrad story. Instead, they turn out to be clueless geeks who aren’t even very accomplished at their stated goal of ripping off their customers. If Ruben Bolling’s comic Tom the Dancing Bug had existed, I might have made the comparison to “Dinkle, The Unlovable Loser.”
But I agree that the makeup gives the appearance of unfortunate stereotypes. I wouldn’t think it intentional, not because I want to give anyone a free pass, but just because I don’t see how that helps the Star Trek franchise. They were obviously so annoying that they had to be retrofitted from the original premise of fearsome adversaries to minor, comic characters. It would probably have been better just to have them all go away–say into a wormhole promising great profit at the other end. Or maybe just sacrifice the whole first season and have Picard wake up to a WTF was that about dream and get a fresh start to TNG for season two.
Acolyte of Sagan @46,
White people are the dominant ethnicity in the U.S., and so 1) have white privilege and 2) are more likely to be heard if they object to something. So if the stereotype had been one that was offensive to whites, it would be much more likely to become an issue. I’d say this is fairly obvious, really.
burgundy @48, that’s an interesting point, but I think its a very fine distinction and requires careful handling to make it clear. For example, PZ’s post makes it clear that he is talking about the Ferengi attitude toward women, and that’s fine, but if you just look at the picture or the title, it’s not clear.
That literally made me snort. And I don’t snort.
CaitieCat, Harridan of Social Justice@47,
I truly doubt that anyone involved in Star Trek intended for the Ferengi to be Jewish stereotypes. I think its clear from watching the show that Armin Shimmerman enjoyed playing Quark.
Curiously, “ferengi” (transliteration varies) is an Indian word for “foreigner”, which in pre-Raj times was used as a slur for white people! (Similar to gwailo or gaijin)
burgundy #48
It’s a valid point, but in practice it’s nearly impossible to be that nuanced, like Krusty the clown protesting that the Wha-Cha-Ma-Carcass sandwich uses only the “non-diseased meat from diseased animals.” A reference is going to be assumed to be a package deal.
Gohmert deserves derision for his comment whether you think of a Ferengi or not. I suspect that his word choice was a kind of overdefensive reaction to what he perceived as PC criticism. I.e., he probably wanted to say something like “our little ladies in the House got in way over their heads on this one” and knew he couldn’t say that, so he went to the opposite extreme to make the same statement in what he perceived as neutral language, but which actually sounded like he was from outer space (Ferengi or not).
I have no idea how you have alien species in a science fiction film and not run very close to racial stereotypes. The audience wants them to look different and they are written with some exaggeration all of which come out of the social context they are written from and they need to be acted be human actors in masks.
uncle frogy
burgundy (#48)
I don’t think it’s the only point. Gohmert is one of those libertarian types obsessed with the free market and corporate profits at the expense of everything else, after all.
Doug Hudson @#50, in your comment #45 you said that there was no uproar at the time in part because white people weren’t noticing, not because it wasn’t offensive to whites as you switched to in comment 50.
These are two different claims, but assuming that the former comment was intended to be understood as the latter then I take your point.
I would handle it by creating an intentional dissonance between the external stereotype and the behavioral stereotype. The makeup artist may have a particular non-stereotypical vision, but a focus group might have the impression of a racial stereotype anyway. If that impression appears to be backed up by behavior, then some of the audience will jump to the conclusion that the stereotype is intended. If you mix it with an entirely different behavior, then the behavior and external appearance might just be taken at face value. Of course, it could look contrived and might not be as easy as all that. These are big budget productions, and they should be able to hire someone with more expertise than I have (if they care enough!).
However, I think there is usually a tendency to match the stereotype and appearance. Certainly, the Pakled (Samaritan Snare) looked, talked, and behaved as if they were cognitively impaired. I remember really not liking that episode, and wondering how Star Trek could stray so close to making R-word jokes.
Doug Hudson #52
Nobody intended for Trek to be extremely sexist, but it still was, so that’s hardly an excuse.
Besides, Ferengi were played for the most part by Jews: Nog = Aron Eisenberg, Rom = Max Grodénchik, Quirk = Armin Shimerman (who also played many of the one-off Ferengi on TNG), Zek = Wallace Shawn, etc. Given the small percentage of Jewish actors, it’s hardly a coincidence that so many of them were cast as Ferengi (mind you, not all Ferengi were played by Jews. For example, Ishka was played by Andrea Martin, who is Armenian).
Oh and regarding your #39 comment:
The Ferengi were conceived by Roddenberry as they were depicted in their first appearance in The Last Outpost (ST: TNG, se1ep05) when Roddenberry was still firmly in charge of everything. They were supposed to be the complete opposite of the tall and proud cmdr Riker. Their acting instructions were to move like evil, excitable hamsters. There was nothing subtle, or imposing in their design. Unlike the Klingons they weren’t supposed to be an equal adversary – they were supposed to be something to loathe and despise.
I think people kind of need to get over thinking that Star Trek is this bastion of inclusiveness/progressiveness. It’s certainly better than most media in that regard simply for trying but it’s still produced, directed and acted by people who are steeped in the same cultural biases as everyone else.
I have to admit at this point that I am speaking from a position of some ignorace; I’ve never seen any DS9, which is evidently where we see the most of the Ferengi. My first exposure to them was the Voyager episode where a pair of them have set themselves up as gods on some low-tech world and are making everyone live by some Randist screed about the virtues of profit and exploitation. All that said, I can see what people are saying about it looking like some anti-Semitic stereotypes; I don’t think for a moment that’s what they were going for, but intent, not magic, all that sort of thing, so I’m not going to stand here and say that there’s no problem. On the gripping hand, though, we have things like:
You mean like Mitt Romney did during the last presidential election? I don’t recall him actually rubbing his hands together on camera, but he certainly gloated about making profits at someone else’s expense often enough. When a self-selected group of people (Republicans/Conservatives) is actually behaving like this, what is the best way to parody/mock them without running afoul of anti-Semitic tropes? (Would they have been better as a renegade faction of one of the established Trek polities, for instance, where it’s clearly a case of being a (principally; I know there’s a lot of cultural pressure towards various conservative beliefs in a lot of places in the same way there’s a lot of social pressure towards, say, being religious) self-selected political group, perhaps? I mean, malevolent Randist greedheads do make good villains, and I’m also all in favor of mocking them (and they’re actually often ineffectual at their stated goals in real life, as Doug Hudson notes the Ferengi as being, for instance), but I also don’t want it to even look like there’s anti-Semitic bullshit going on. How, hypothetically, might other folks here have put Randist greedhead villains into Star Trek in a way that wouldn’t look potentially anti-Semitic? (Serious question; like I said, those assholes could do with some mocking, but ethnic(and other, of course) bigotry needs to be torn up root and branch.)
Also not giving Trek a pass on problematic stereotyping in general, even when I don’t think it’s deliberate; there’s unfortunate implications all over the place, starting with the ethnic and gender makeup of the various bridge crews/main casts, and the total fucking lack of any sexual or gender minorities. (The United Federation of Planets supposedly represents all of humanity, everywhere. Starfleet should be a lot less white).
That’s an interesting point. I have nothing against introducing an unworthy adversary if you can somehow make it into a good story. But using stature as a proxy for unworthiness just shows a lack of imagination. SF at its best is supposed to defy expectations, not reinforce them.
Anyway, whatever the Ferengi were supposed to be, they never really worked, except possibly in their later use as comic foils.
Another thing… I have a pretty clear memory of the excitement when ST:TNG first came out. And I recall conversations with friends about how they were going to introduce an entirely new adversary that wasn’t Romulan or Klingon. So there was a lot of anticipation about the Ferengi before they appeared in an episode. When they actually did, what I recall (imperfectly I am sure) was a fairly unanimous WTF?!?! I mean, they had a chance to break down ground and they completely blew it. If Roddenberry’s brilliant idea was to create contemptible rodent-like enemy (according to AlexanderZ), I just have to ask what was he smoking.
The Borg actually did succeed in creating a new, fearsome opponent–and the only equal opportunity employer in known space–but that had to wait for several years.
unclefrogy
It would help a lot if they would avoid the whole Planet of Hats (TVtropes link) thing, and actually have cultural and ethnic diversity among the aliens (the latter of which would be accomplished by, of course, ethnic diversity among the actors playing them, something that’s sorely needed anyway. Possibly especially in science fiction, since ethnic makeup of the planet is quite different to that of any given nation, and sci fi is very prone to planetary polities and world governments, so, as I said above, we should see a much smaller percentage of white people in, say, Starfleet than in fact we do, and a much greater ethnic diversity overall.
Dalillama
You know, even when I was a not that educated teen I was wondering how all other planets apparently have just ONE ethnicity with ONE language while earth got a few thousands of each (unless the plot is an ethnical conflict between the TWO ethnicities)
PaulBC #61
Looked it up and the original quote (as retold by Armin Shimerman in “Star Trek: The Next Generation – The Continuing Mission“) was that they were supposed to “jump up and down like crazed gerbils.”
Gene wasn’t smoking anything other than his own overinflated ego. He has always made questionable decisions (just compare Star Trek: The Motion Picture to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan), but only in TNG he got full reign without any supervision from the studio. He blocked any idea that introduced conflict and drama into the show, because in his mind the future should be perfect and without conflict (which is why the first two seasons of TNG were so bad). Michael Piller described this as a “Roddenberry Box” that forced writers to think only within it (source: “Fade in: From Idea to Final Draft, The Writing of Star Trek Insurrection“).
Dalillama #60
Colbert used to do this pretty well. When your enemies are cartoonish, simply present them as they are. Otherwise you’ll have to enter some arms race where reality and parody will try to out-ridiculous each other.
Seven of Mine @59 – ideally, in my head anyway, Star Trek’s reach will inherently exceed its grasp at least a little bit, because it’s a story about people who are more progressive than the people writing it. The idea is that humanity can and will be better in the future, but it requires an awful lot of self-awareness to pull off. So, the original series made a really bold statement by putting a black woman on the bridge, but the show otherwise was really sexist, because the writers couldn’t see beyond their own sexism to imagine a more egalitarian future.
And it’s why I find the new movies so disappointing, because they don’t seem to even be trying. I would love to see the 21st century equivalent of making a Russian an important member of the crew. What kinds of casting decisions would be shocking, would show just how much had changed over the centuries? But it doesn’t seem like anyone is thinking about it in those terms.
burgundy @ 66
Definitely. Further, even if you can see past your own biases, it’s still a bit of a dilemma because, if you’re portraying this egalitarian world, it’s very hard to comment on 21st century social problems except to mention in passing that it used to be that way.
burgundy @ 66;
Seven of Mine: Shrieking Feminist Harpy @ 67;
And let’s not forget that even if the writers and performers can see beyond their own biases, there is no guarantee that the money men (and depressingly they are still, for the most part, cis/het White middle class men) will feel the same way, as we saw when they blocked the idea of casting a man to play the hemaphroditic alien Riker falls in love with in one of the TNG series, because teh deaded ghey. Or how they were prepared to have gender complex female aliens have sort-of-almost same sex relationships in DS9 (Dax being involved for the most part), but no human characters or groups with close anologues to human life experience or sexuality were allowed to do that (apart from that atrocious mirror universe Kiera Nerese character who signals her sadism and capacity for evil by wearing tight PVC getups and being bisexual in a ludicrously stereotypical rapacious man/woman eater fashion – a two for one on bigotry), and male same sex relationships could not even be hinted at. Trans* people also only got a nod by means of the conveniently-non-threatening-to-the-patriarchy fudge of Trill ‘passed lives’ . The show winds up walking a tightrope, with the threat of enforced rewrites or even being pulled altogether of it goes ‘too far’ as a bunch of conservative middle aged men judge such things, which rather impinges on the writers’ freedom to write anything that is meaningfully progressive or asks genuinely tough questions about the failings of our contemporary society.
And that doesn’t even address the often less than enlightened attitude of segments of the public at large, as can be seen by the bigoted reaction of all too many to the kiss between Kirk and Uhura in the original series, and later an almost carbon copy ridiculous reaction to an extremely chaste kiss between Dax and the host of one of her symbiont’s former wives from a passed life.
Until attitudes change – both from the top down and the bottom up – we simply aren’t going to see meaningful improvement, and right now we have misogynist tools popping (including among the – still overwhelmingly male – directorial and production staff themselves, as evidenced by Into Darknesses’ use of a character who, while allegedly a scientist with specialist knowledge, seemed to principally be there to alternately scream helplessly and parade around in her underwear for the titilliation of Kirk and by extension the audience) up everywhere who look back on the ludicrous sexism of the Original Series as a golden age, leaving us with a very real risk of the franchise going backwards rather than forwards when it comes to inclusivism.
I’m afraid this is going to be an uphill struggle.
Apologies for my early baffled response to Icthyic, I did not understand that the meaning was that the Ferengi were dangerously close to Jewish stereotypes, for some reason I thought the objection was to ANY comparison between a person and a fictional species.
Gregory Greenwood:
I am pretty sure the only plot relevance that character had was her connection to a later villain and the subsequent, inevitable Damseling. Fucking dammit. And even Uhura seems to only exist in the movie to develop Spock’s character. A far better character than that other one who I can’t even remember the name of (even if, of course, she is portrayed as Angry Irrational Woman, starting an argument about her and Spock’s relationship in front of Kirk right before they are about to put their lives in danger). But she doesn’t do shit. Doing shit is for the Big Damn White Male Heroes.
I had heard the ferengi = jewish stereotype thing before, ( and agree that it is a problem) but I an learning a lot of fascinating ST backstory in this thread.
I realize they are different series, but Leonard Nimoy and William Shatner are both of Jewish ancestry. source I don’t have statistics for all actors, but judging by the list at the source, I’m fair certain that people with jewish ancestry are very well represented in Hollywood, and the entertainment industry in America. MGM studios stands for Metro Goldwyn Mayer , I highly doubt it would tolerate any anti-semitic discrimination.
anteprepro@69,
While one could make an argument that any comparison between a (real) human and a (imaginary) non-human “others” the human and is therefore bad, I’m not prepared to make that argument, and I think in this case it’s all the issues around the Ferengi that make it so problematic.
For example, if I said a politician was “as sneaky as a Romulan”, would that be a problem? The Romulans are based on the ancient Romans, so there is no invocation of unpleasant modern-day stereotypes, and they certainly ARE sneaky.
Or perhaps the problem would be avoided if the real person were compared to a specific fictional character. Would it make a difference if Gohmert were compared to “Quark” rather than to “a Ferengi”? Not enough of one, perhaps, since Quark is pretty stereotypical Ferengi…hmmm. Worth thinking about.
I never even saw Into Darkness, because I was so annoyed at the first film, Into Lens Flares. Every member of the main crew got a Moment of Awesome: Sulu got a folding katana fight, Scotty did transwarp beaming, and so on.
Uhura got one too, almost. She did all the great work as a linguist to notice the dialect clues as to who the opponent was – but the big reveal about her incredible work went to Old Blue Eyes, in the captain’s chair because obviously you’d give that seat to the biggest fuckup and honourless cheater in the Academy.
He brings it up in the meeting, and Uhura’s line is something like “yes, I did.”
The only woman in the major crew, and even in the 23rd century she’s still having men steal her ideas and her thunder, before she can properly grab the glory herself. And that’s her only moment of awesome; her only other purpose seems to be to promise this generation’s entitled pseudo-Vulcans to think they too can have an incredibly hot girlfriend without having to learn human social skills.
Guh. I had the same problem with the “more progressive” TNG: the old white guy runs things, the next old white guy is the XO, one black man is large and aggressive and inarticulate, the other is an emasculated nerd, and two of the three women are the “looking after people” leaders of the crew. Queer people don’t exist, as noted above. The only thing close to new was Tasha, but then it turned out she was from Rape City, New Violatia, in the Sabine Cluster.
DS9 got better at some of that; Sisko is my favourite captain in Trek, followed by Janeway. But yeah, I’ve been a fan since I read the Blush novelizations, and Trek’s progressiveness is at best relative, throughout its history.
Doug Hudson: I think it is related to another interesting point I saw brought up of whether ANY fictional humanoid species might, intentionally or incidentally, wind up being racist or reflecting a racist ideology (to illustrate the latter: Dwarves and Orcs might be considered racist stereotypes directly, while Elves are not stereotypes but rather reflect a racist ideology, in that they are a lilly white race of flawless, long-living superhumans). Honestly, I realize that it is definitely a danger and it is far more rampant than we might realize or fully appreciate.
anteprepro @ 69;
Exactly – you have all of two female characters with anything approaching worthwhile character development in the film (reminds me somewhat of the original Starwars trilogy), and both effectively function as little more than conventionally attractive ambulatory set dressing for most of the time. The scientist new addition (I can’t remember the character’s name at all, which gives you some notion of how much impression the character made on me) supposedly has some poorly explained high tech sci fi bomb disposal skill set, and as you say has some minor, largely throwaway connection to Khan only revealed much later on. Other than that it is all screaming, broken ankles and crudely contrived excuses to show her striking a pose in her underwear.
I can also definitely see your point that Uhura does practically nothing beyond prettying up the place, unless one counts that weird sequence you mention where she acts in a grossly unprofessional fashion and decides that the best moment to argue with her boyfriend is in the midst of a crisis situation (I somehow doubt that that sort of thing would be tolerated in any professional setting, still less the demi-military kind of environment that neo-Trek seems to be heading toward), which is heinously sexist in its own right and has more than a whiff of some misgynist attempt to nod and wink at the audience with a ‘women, you know what I mean?’ sentiment, or looking on anxiously as pointy eared Zachary Quinto engages in fisty cuffs with a genetically engineered Benedict Cumberbatch in a not entirely convincing fashion. All told, there really isn’t very much there for anyone to work with, which seems rather a waste of Zoe Saldana’s talent.
As you say the only people who seem to be allowed to do anything in the show are all suspiciously uniform in their whiteness and maleness, whether it is the still really chauvanistic ‘heroic’ Kirk or the anti-heroic/villainous (depending upon what point of the movie you are in) Khan. And even the Khan plotline itself annoyed me – a reasonably good case is made over the course of the bulk of the film that while Khan is capable of violence and villainy it is because he was driven to it by desperation. His people were afterall created to fight and then betrayed after society decided it had no further use for them. Even the notionaly enlightened Federation had no trouble viewing Khan and the other augments as a disposeable class of person. There was a conspiracy within Starfleet to secretly create new generations of weapons and warships without any civilian oversight, and those conspirators did seek to kill the entire Enterprise crew and Khan along with them. All the stuff we are shown seems to back up Khan’s version of events; that he has been paintd as the bad guy unfairly to cover up the actions of the true villain of the piece, and his own criminality and violence was primaraily driven by a lack of better options when he had learned the hard way that he couldn’t trust anyone who wasn’t like him.
At every turn the audience is encouraged to believe that Khan is different, but different doesn’t have to mean evil – that what he really wants is to save those like himself from oblivion, an entirely reasonable goal, doubly so after the audience discovers that the charactersiation of him as a violent butcher comes from a less than reliable source. The audience is lead to believe that maybe he could become more than he is, and more than he was engineered to be, for a major chunk of the running time, but the filmamkers just don’t stick the landing, suddenly having him declare that he was an augment supremacist all along, and now has some poolry definied plan to kill a whole bunch of unmodified humans and non-humans for revenge/as part of some poorly explained power grab/for poops and giggles/all of the above. The take away message seems to be that different is evil, at least in this case, and that Khan’s violent and treacherous actions make it OK to condemn all the other modified humans (who afterall didn’t ask to be modifed before they were born, and who haven’t demonstrably actually done anything to anyone except according to the testimony of a now comprehemively dead would-be genocidal warcriminal) to endless cryostasis just in case they are nasty sorts as well, because being really smart and having a mean right hook totally means that it is too dangerous to allow a person to even be conscious and in a secure facility while the potential threat they may present is assessed – we are supposed to believe that the best a supposedly technologically advanced and ethically enlightened idealised culture can manage is a permanent sojourn as a set of transhuman popsicals. Even by Star Treks’ frankly rather low standards of ‘morality’ that is a pretty poor outcome.
And don’t even get me started on the magic resurrection blood…
But there are also different ways to be progressive, beyond the casting. I’ve been watching soem TOS episodes lately, and I’m thinking of “Devil in the Dark.” It starts off as a straight-up “kill the monster” story. And then something happens… Kirk, despite being adamant about killing it earlier, decides *not* to kill it when he encounters it and it does not threaten him. He and Spock try to communicate with it. It is in pain so they get it medical help. When Spock is able to establish a connection, they find out that she is not a mindless monster, the humans were the ones (unknowingly) behaving monstrously, and they immediately take her side against the other humans. And then, wonder of wonders, when the miners find out why she has been attacking them, they (in a vague way) acknowledge their culpability, are sorry, and no longer try to kill her (and Kirk brokers an agreement that lets everyone peacefully get what they want).
Genre fiction that has action elements but does not position physical force as the ultimate means of settling conflict is still pretty rare, I think. (I admit that I’m not totally on top of current TV, but that’s the sense I get.)