Since the series in question has concluded over a decade ago, is it reasonable criticize its allegedly sexist portrayal when all other Trek(and most sci-fi) display the same presentations?
Yes, because second-wave feminism had already happened by 2001.
Oh you twenty-first century Earthicans with your stuffy, backward attitudes about sex. The body, it is nothing to be ashamed of, no?
This is a non sequitur. Nobody is arguing that sexuality is a bad thing. We are arguing that female sexuality should not be depicted in ways that objectify the women, that are there for hetero male viewing pleasure.
T'Pol wears skin tight clothes because, maybe personal preference,
Which would be inconsistent with her emotionally reserved personality and Vulcan culture.
but crew of Enterprise do not treat her as object of much sexual desire.
Do you understand the difference between a metatextual analysis and an in-universe analysis?
For instance: A horror film that depicts the last humans on Earth as two white guys, a black guy, and a white woman may be anti-racist
in-universe if those white folk view that black character as their friend and equal, but the film may still be racist
metatextually if it upholds the trope of Black Guy Dies First.
They hardly notice, no? She is treated as professional peer in utmost respect.
"I'm doing the breast that I can!" - Archer, "A Night in Sickbay"
Oh yeah. No objectification here.
As fact, hear me out, all crew should be wearing skin tight uniforms, is quicker to get into spacesuit in emergency, yes? It is, how you say, long john underwear. So T'Pol, as logical Vulcan, is better prepared for emergency.
No.
Mr Laser Beam. I know that. Been around a while. I first gazed upon Jolene Blalock in the pages of Maxim before she was cast. Not like she didn't know what she was getting into. Compare that to Lena Durham in Girls. Seems like when chubby girls get naked, it's heralded as empowerment again the patriarchy. Athletic woman in tight garments, sexism.
You do realize that there are other women on
Girls who also regularly do nude scenes or sex scenes, such as Allison Williams, who are conventionally Hollywood-thin?
There's an important difference in how the nudity and sexuality on shows like
Girls is treated compared to, say, shows like
Entourage or
Game of Thrones -- or
Star Trek: Enterprise. On
Girls, female sexuality is not depicted on terms dictated by hetero men. The intent of the depiction is not to titillate hetero men, it is to express something about the female characters being depicted.
That's the difference. Is the sexuality being depicted a sexuality-for-others, or a sexuality-for-self? Is the woman being displayed for male pleasure, or is the woman asserting her sexual agency?
Sexxx $ales in both cases, we are just choosing which to be more indignant.
No. There is an important metatextual difference whether or not you are capable of understanding it.
Starfleet pre-dates the Federation,
While the Federation Starfleet undoubtedly inherited a lot of its personnel and assets, I see no reason to presume that the United Earth Starfleet was the same organization from a legal standpoint. That would be like arguing that the Massachusetts Naval Militia is the same organization as the United States Navy.
it pre-dates United Earth too, possibly it pre-dates the "New United Nations" as well.
Evidence?
