• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

If Mariner was a man, we’d all hate her.

Status
Not open for further replies.
People keep invoking Tom and Harry as a comparison to Mariner and Boimler. I really think there is a key distinction: Tom and Harry were legit buddies. I think the writers are just keeping Mariner at arm’s length from Boimler because they actually don’t know how to write a good platonic relationship for them. So instead, they try to squeeze comedy out of a hyper-masculine woman pushing around a squishy man, and I just don’t think this subversion works.
 
Last edited:
People keep invoking Tom and Harry as a comparison to Mariner and Boimler. I really think there is a key distinction: Tom and Harry were legit buddies. I think the writers are just keeping Mariner at arm’s length from Boimler because they actually don’t know how to write a good platonic relationship for them. So instead, they try to squeeze comedy out of a hyper-masculine woman pushing around a squishy man, and I just don’t think this subversion works.
And if it doesn't work then that's fine. That doesn't make Mariner "hated" even as a man, that doesn't make the relationship bad, just that it doesn't work for you. It works for me, mostly because I think Mariner is an interesting character, and has been since Episode 1.
 
People keep invoking Tom and Harry as a comparison to Mariner and Boimler. I really think there is a key distinction: Tom and Harry were legit buddies. I think the writers are just keeping Mariner at arm’s length from Boimler because they actually don’t know how to write a good platonic relationship for them. So instead, they try to squeeze comedy out of a hyper-masculine woman pushing around a squishy man, and I just don’t think this subversion works.

This position only holds water if we accept that Mariner is "hyper-masculine" and that Boimler is "squishy".

These tropes/characterisations fit a 90s era show - it is effectively Buffy and Xander but the reality is that society has moved on from such rigid definitions of what men and women should be like.

Your contention may be that TV relies upon these tropes to make characters instantly recognisable but things have changed in terms of what is "normal" for people.

You could even argue that early seasons DS9 had this with Kira (or even Dax) as Mariner and Bashir to an extent being the Boimler analogue.

If you think the writing of such characters is poor and want to detail that then by all means there is a conversation to be had.

If your beef is simply that the woman isn't womanly enough and isn't the romantic pairing with the male lead (as would have been done in the past) and hasn't sexed it up then there isn't much of a discussion to be had as the need for this in a story died out a long time ago
 
If your beef is simply that the woman isn't womanly enough and isn't the romantic pairing with the male lead (as would have been done in the past) and hasn't sexed it up then there isn't much of a discussion to be had as the need for this in a story died out a long time ago

It’s not that this show fails for not follow cliches, but that it isn’t blazing new trails.

Not all cartoons or comedies require romance. (There is no “love” in Family Guy or South Park, or Seinfeld or It’s Always Sunny), but LD goes out of its way to create a very specific dynamic between Mariner and Boimler which, I think, is playing a game of sexual politics in its own right which has me scratching my head.

Remember: there are four people in the friend group, and Mariner and Boimler are clearly a dyad just as Rutherford and Tendi are. But Rutherford and Tendi are mirror images of each other. Both are chipper as chipmunks and love their work. They don’t have strong personalities of their own like Mariner and Boimler, and are really there just to give M and B two other people to exchange dialogue with.

So it’s pretty much the Mariner and Boimler show. But as many have pointed out, Mariner gets on people’s nerves. Well, why is that? I think it is exactly because she isn’t “womanly”, because a lot of modern TV writers think that if you don’t write your female lead as unnaturally agro, the only thing left to do will be to focus on her dating life as she rotates through one man after another.

The show wants her to be interacting with a guy, however, and so Boimler becomes our show’s male lead. But once again, the writers don’t know how to write a subordinate male who still has something approaching his dignity , and so Mariner is always pulling Boimler’s underwear over his head, which is why I began by saying that were Mariner a guy, she’d be as likable as Biff Tannen.

I really think that the proper dynamic between our leads would have been to make them partners in crime, with Mariner instigating reckless hijinks and Boimler reluctantly being dragged along for the ride. As it is, I more often get the sense that Mariner wants to scrape Boimler off her shoe.

(Also, am I the only one who thinks it was a missed opportunity not to make Boimler a Vulcan? A fidgety Vulcan who is always losing his cool thanks to the wild n’ free Mariner would be a much better premise.)
 
I wasn't aware it was supposed to.

Well, now you do. If the writing is not going to be formulaic, then it needs to be fresh. I think this show falls victim to another, more modern formula, which is that females have to behave like males to be taken seriously, and the males, in turn, have to be effeminate in some way to not compete with the female for dominance.

Formula wise, there are a few different relationships Mariner and Boimler could have.

1) Will They/Won’t They- Overt sexual tension. Nope
2) BFF’s- Good friends who vibe off each other. Nope
3) Partner’s in Crime- A mischief maker drags the other along for the ride (think Rick and Morty). Nope.
4) Big Sister/Little Brother- The “sister” has to frequently come to the rescue of the hapless “brother”. They seemed to be setting this up at the beginning, but… nope.
5) Frenemies- Close, but still nope. Mariner does not seem to really want to be in Boimler’s bizz.

And finally:

6) It’s Mary Sue’s World and You’re Just Living In It.

I think we have a winner!
 
Last edited:
When has something stale or off-putting been entertaining?
Well, I believe this is something called personal opinion, and the idea of diversity within these entertainment choices. So, since I find it entertaining it must not be stale or off putting for me. Mileage will vary.

a majority of people who visit this subforum find it entertaining based off poll numbers.
We all know they are paid off by CBS.
 
When has something stale or off-putting been entertaining?

Lots of times. Entertaining doesn't have to be new or fresh nor even particularly inventive. Just entertaining.

Plenty of jokes are stale as a rice cake from the 1980s but they're still funny and we laugh at them. I'm not asking for my streaming Trek to be David Lynch from his Blue Velvet period. I just want it to be good.
 
Lots of times. Entertaining doesn't have to be new or fresh nor even particularly inventive. Just entertaining.

Plenty of jokes are stale as a rice cake from the 1980s but they're still funny and we laugh at them. I'm not asking for my streaming Trek to be David Lynch from his Blue Velvet period. I just want it to be good.
My favorite jokes were stale over 20 years ago. I still laugh.

My favorite shows are older comedies like MASH, or Christmas Vacation, or Undercover Blues, Emperor's New Groove, etc. I don't go to Trek for new stuff. I go for the space adventure.
 
Lots of times. Entertaining doesn't have to be new or fresh nor even particularly inventive. Just entertaining.

Plenty of jokes are stale as a rice cake from the 1980s but they're still funny and we laugh at them. I'm not asking for my streaming Trek to be David Lynch from his Blue Velvet period. I just want it to be good.

My favorite jokes were stale over 20 years ago. I still laugh.

My favorite shows are older comedies like MASH, or Christmas Vacation, or Undercover Blues, Emperor's New Groove, etc. I don't go to Trek for new stuff. I go for the space adventure.
I guess that's a difference in philosophy, then. Trek became Trek by being fresh and inspirational and challenging. I guess the franchise dies by fans being satisfied with the cold oatmeal of "entertainment".
 
Not putting unreasonable expectations on all science fiction to be the next 2001: A Space Odyssey or Star Wars? Good and "challenging" entertainment are usually relative experiences. What someone calls smart sci-fi might be seen as boring and unwatchable and what's labeled mediocre might have a high audience rating and a large fan following.

Trek has rarely been cutting edge since TOS. I don't expect excellence, just hope for greatness and if it falls short I adjust my viewing expectations to accomodate the quality.
 
I guess that's a difference in philosophy, then. Trek became Trek by being fresh and inspirational and challenging. I guess the franchise dies by fans being satisfied with the cold oatmeal of "entertainment".
The last time I felt inspired by Trek was in 2009. Trek is no longer inspiring to me. It's just fun. Which is what entertainment should be, first and foremost. It's in the TOS writer's bible. The fact that people have built in to a deep philosophy has no bearing on what it actually was initially.

Not putting unreasonable expectations on all science fiction to be the next 2001: A Space Odyssey or Star Wars?
How about treating entertainment like it holds the meaning of life. It's entertainment, not philosophy.
 
DS9 is my second-favorte Trek series of all. It also contains the episodes "Let He Who Is Without Sin..." and "Profit and Lace." Quality and entertainment aren't necessarily one and the same, even in the same series or franchise. :shrug:
 
DS9 is my second-favorte Trek series of all. It also contains the episodes "Let He Who Is Without Sin..." and "Profit and Lace." Quality and entertainment aren't necessarily one and the same, even in the same series or franchise. :shrug:
Yeesh! Trek has put out a lot of shit in the past ten years, but I didn't realize fan standards were so low! I mean... you can get mere "entertainment" anywhere. Why even tune in to something like LD if you could just as easily be watching Daily Dose of Internet?

Anyway, I think this only confirms that most people recognize that LD is basically slop.
 
(Also, am I the only one who thinks it was a missed opportunity not to make Boimler a Vulcan? A fidgety Vulcan who is always losing his cool thanks to the wild n’ free Mariner would be a much better premise.)
Can't say I have ever thought of it before, but I love this premise.
 
Yeesh! Trek has put out a lot of shit in the past ten years, but I didn't realize fan standards were so low! I mean... you can get mere "entertainment" anywhere. Why even tune in to something like LD if you could just as easily be watching Daily Dose of Internet?

Anyway, I think this only confirms that most people recognize that LD is basically slop.
Or maybe people just disagree with you about its quality.:shrug:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top