Embracing the Winds: "Star Trek" Takes a Look at Gender Bias

Note 1: This is the first in a 3-part series examining various aspects of "Star Trek." Past blog entries have also addressed Star Trek, but this is the first time in which back-to-back entries will be intentionally devoted to the franchise.

Note 2: This blog entry contains spoilers for the Star Trek Continues episode "Embracing the Winds." I consider them minor spoilers, but if you'd like to watch the episode first, the link is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMasSzFXaKQ

Recently, I've been re-watching Star Trek Continues, Vic Mignogna's highly entertaining web series which chronicles further adventures of the original Star Trek characters. In my opinion, every episode is a winner.

Just like the original series, some episodes of Star Trek Continues deals with social issues, treating its science fiction setting as an allegory for our current era. The most explicitly "this is a social issue!" episode is "Embracing the Winds," in which Captain Kirk is appointed to a tribunal of Starfleet officers to determine who is best suited for a new vacancy in the captainship: his own friend and first officer, Commander Spock, or guest character Commander Diana Garrett. The twist: Com. Garrett has formally accused Starfleet of gender bias, and declares that the only reason she hasn't been appointed as captain of the U.S.S. Hood is because she's a woman.

Such an accusation would warrant serious discussion even in today's actual society. But in Star Trek's 23rd Century Federation, which has been explicitly described as an enlightened and even utopian society, Garrett's accusation isn't just remarkable, it's astounding. Does Garrett have a valid point? Or is she just paranoid when it comes to how she is perceived in the context of her gender?

In this particular case, the answer to both questions turns out to be "yes." An "only on paper" examination of Garrett's record indicates that she is a strong candidate for a captaincy, and seems to indicate there is some validity in her claim that she's been unfairly overlooked for promotion. And the fact that, in its long history, Starfleet has never appointed a woman as captain of a Constitution-class starship, certainly lends credence to Garrett's claim of gender bias.

But when first Kirk and then the tribunal interview Garrett, she comes across as defensive, borderline insubordinate (Starfleet is, after all, the military, even if it has an exploratory/ scientific component), and incapable of admitting, either to herself or anyone else, any fault in her actions or character. Both Kirk and the head of the tribunal, Commodore Gray, point out that that last flaw alone should make her ineligible for the captaincy.

One could argue that Garrett's actual unworthiness to captain a starship too cleverly side-steps the issue at hand: The writers have safely given themselves a reason why Garrett shouldn't be a starship captain, so they can deny her the promotion, say it was fair, and not bother to provide any answers to the questions of gender bias that they themselves have raised.

But the lack of answers is sort of the point. It would be far too pat to raise these issues and then provide straight-forward solutions. "Nope! No gender bias here, it turns out!" Or "yeah, there was gender bias, but don't worry, we've solved the problem within the 40 minutes of the episode, you're welcome!" Instead, even despite Garrett's own ineligibility to captain a starship, her accusations leave Gray and Kirk shaken to their core. They've both been blind to even the possibility of gender bias. Gray, a woman who has risen high within the ranks of Starfleet, openly wonders if her career path has been hindered by a gender bias so ingrained into the culture of the Federation that she may have not even noticed.

In contrast to Gray, ships counselor Doctor McKennah is more aware of gender bias. Her subtle, un-bitter acknowledgement of this aspect of society is both insightful and sad, and speaks volumes about how women have to deal with gender bias as a fact of life. Note how I said "deal with," not "accept."

The episode's treatment of the central issue is not without its flaws. The third member of the tribunal, Vice Admiral Stomm from the Starfleet Diplomatic Corps, turns out to harbor a racial prejudice toward Spock due to Spock's mixed racial heritage, and the conversation between Dr. McKennah and Spock explicitly compares the two different forms of prejudice -- but so little screen-time is devoted to this parallel that one almost wonders why the writers bothered to bring it up.

More problematic is the overly convenient "blame the others for our own social problems" attitude the script presents. Garrett's most compelling argument that gender bias exists is that no woman has yet served as captain of a Constitution-class starship. Gray freely admits this, but blames it on the sexist attitudes of the Tellarites, one of the four most powerful members of the United Federation of Planets. Without outright admitting that Starfleet is gender biased, Gray comes right out and argues that even if they are prejudiced, it's not their fault, it's the fault of those silly Tellarites, whom Starfleet must appease due to political reality. Uncomfortably, both in terms of realistic characterization / dialogue, and also in terms of dealing with the central issue, even the Tellarite ambassador admits that his people's views are hopelessly outdated. The attitude of "yes, we have a serious social problem, but it's their fault, not ours!" is too convenient and self-forgiving for an otherwise sensitive and intelligent examination of a serious issue.

Still, some of the seeming drawbacks to how the script deals with the issue are in fact strengths. Skip to the next paragraph if you want to avoid this review's one major spoiler, but when it comes down to Captain Kirk having to choose who gets the promotion, and he's interrupted before he is able to give his answer, the script neatly avoids both who would have received the promotion, and whether Kirk's answer would have acknowledged or condoned the issues of gender and racial prejudice that have been raised. But the timing of that interruption is so blatant that it's not like the writers are trying to hide their avoidance of providing answers. Indeed, as earlier observed, this "there are no clear answers on how to solve this issue" attitude is much of the point of the episode. Garrett had proven herself unworthy of the promotion. Had Kirk, under pressure to condemn gender bias, cast his deciding vote in favor of Garrett despite his legitimate reservations, she would have become a token symbol of Kirk's disapproval of bias. Garrett's fight for gender equality would only be rightly served if a qualified female candidate be appointed to the position. Don't skip a woman for promotion just because she's a woman -- but don't promote her just because she's a woman, either, if your only motivation is to prove your own liberal attitude.

When Spock asks Kirk who he would have voted for if he'd had a chance to announce his decision, Kirk avoids the question with a joke, so deftly that even Spock doesn't notice. "There are no easy answers," the writers are once again saying. Do you agree?