Triaxiansilk.com

That's one of the things I loved about ENT - it retroactively did a way with the TOS sense that a women could not be in command! And people hated the idea of a prequel. Love Erika.

I liked Erica Hernandez being in command of the Columbia. I disliked what happened to her character and what happened to the Columbia crew in the Destiny Books.

Part of the TOS attitudes about women in authority were based on test audience reactions to "The Cage." Remember, Majel Barrett played the first officer. Women, of all people, didn't like it. "Who does she think she is?" t hey complained. Threw Gene for a loop. They were ready for a racially integrated cast, but not a take-charge woman.

While that is true, I will also say that there's some evidence that the focus groups of women back then were deliberately chosen to reinforce the attitudes of the males in power. I don't know that happened with the Cage, I have seen stories of advertising agencies pre-screening their female focus groups to be make sure they represented "the average" woman - the average woman being someone who wants to be a homemaker and nothing else.

So, while I'm sure that sexism played a part in the axing of the Number One character - I am skeptical that it was all because women didn't want to see a woman in power. Some women didn't - but some did.

What about Elizabeth the first of England? Cristiaa Of Sweden Elenaor Of Aquatain, Catherine of russia? Cieopatra? Historicaly the Cambodians had Women Generals who led Armies in to Battle. Outstanding women whe made a great mark on the World.

Focus groups are SOOOO easy to screw up at so many levels. All it really takes is one overbearing loud-mouth to totally skew the results even if you don't mess up the pre-screening survey.

And if the guys running the groups are already skeptical ... forget it. It's doomed.

honeybee wrote:While that is true, I will also say that there's some evidence that the focus groups of women back then were deliberately chosen to reinforce the attitudes of the males in power. I don't know that happened with the Cage, I have seen stories of advertising agencies pre-screening their female focus groups to be make sure they represented "the average" woman - the average woman being someone who wants to be a homemaker and nothing else.

So, while I'm sure that sexism played a part in the axing of the Number One character - I am skeptical that it was all because women didn't want to see a woman in power. Some women didn't - but some did.

If that is indeed the case, that would've been the network's doing, not the studio's (owned by a woman) or Gene's (wanted his girlfriend to have a job and lots of screen time).

Reanok wrote:I liked Erica Hernandez being in command of the Columbia. I disliked what happened to her character and what happened to the Columbia crew in the Destiny Books.

Yeah. me too.

Her character had so much potential to do good in ENT/The Romulan War era too.

Oh yeah, Gene Roddenberry talked about how constrained he was by the studio, (and I have no idea where the studio got their ideas; I suppose it could be focus groups). He was going to have the crew be half male and half female, but the studio refused because (NOT ACTUAL QUOTES/ BASED ON MEMORY) "people will think there is alot of funny business going on." So the compromise was a crew that was 1/3 female. And addressing the criticism that the show used women as sex objects he said, "yes abosultely, the show used women as sex objects and will continue to do so; In my defense I also believe in using men as sex objects, and Star Trek will continue to do so."

Thank you, Gene!!!

It is also important to remember the context. We've come a long way, Baby! (And who are you calling "Baby"?!) On one of the Star Trek Anniversaries, TV Guide reposted it's early review of Star Trek and it had some cringe-worthy lines. One was a joking aside about Spock. Something like: "Mother warned not to marry beneath yourself." Referring to the fact that Spock was a "half-breed."