this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2023
29 points (96.8% liked)

Daystrom Institute

3470 readers
12 users here now

Welcome to Daystrom Institute!

Serious, in-depth discussion about Star Trek from both in-universe and real world perspectives.

Read more about how to comment at Daystrom.

Rules

1. Explain your reasoning

All threads and comments submitted to the Daystrom Institute must contain an explanation of the reasoning put forth.

2. No whinging, jokes, memes, and other shallow content.

This entire community has a “serious tag” on it. Shitposts are encouraged in Risa.

3. Be diplomatic.

Participate in a courteous, objective, and open-minded fashion. Be nice to other posters and the people who make Star Trek. Disagree respectfully and don’t gatekeep.

4. Assume good faith.

Assume good faith. Give other posters the benefit of the doubt, but report them if you genuinely believe they are trolling. Don’t whine about “politics.”

5. Tag spoilers.

Historically Daystrom has not had a spoiler policy, so you may encounter untagged spoilers here. Ultimately, avoiding online discussion until you are caught up is the only certain way to avoid spoilers.

6. Stay on-topic.

Threads must discuss Star Trek. Comments must discuss the topic raised in the original post.

Episode Guides

The /r/DaystromInstitute wiki held a number of popular Star Trek watch guides. We have rehosted them here:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This is the Daystrom Institute Episode Analysis thread for Strange New Worlds 2x02 Ad Astra Per Aspera.

Now that we’ve had a few days to digest the content of the latest episode, this thread is a place to dig a little deeper.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Absolutely. The prosecution wasn't given any opportunity to justify the laws whatsoever. It's hard to imagine such a black & white stance on the issue being believable, but they just completely sidestepped it, again.

I enjoy science fiction as a way to critique the social issues of our day through recontextualisation. Because this episode didn't get into the technical details of eugenics, it served far more obviously as an allegory for our present day discrimination - which probably makes it difficult to write compelling opposition that then doesn't just read as racist/transphobic apologetics or whatever.

I mean, I still think it would be possible to do. But I can see the constraints the writers are working with and why they chose to not get into the weeds. It's a shame.