The Politiconomist

Where Politics and Economics Hang Out

The Woman Problem in JJ Abrams’ Star Trek

with 8 comments

I’ll say this upfront: I like the Star Trek reboot.  It’s shiny and exciting and Chris Pine is oh so dreamy, not to mention pretty smart.  I like that they’ve invented an alternate reality so the events of Star Trek: TOS can still exist and be mined for inspiration without forcing this franchise to be just a remake.  But JJ Abrams and his writing staff have a problem… a pretty glaring woman problem.  They have yet to put a woman on screen who gets to be her own character, instead of just an appendage to a male character.  Oh, if you haven’t seen the movies…


Star Trek (2009) has only one woman in the main cast – Zoe Saldana as Lt. Uhura.  Despite the anemic female population of the film, it does manage to pass the Bechdel test.  For the uninitiated, the Bechdel test is a set of three criteria that measures the presence of women in media.  To pass the test, the medium must have (a) two or more [named] women who (b) talk to each other (c) about something other than a man.  Star Trek squeaks by on the grace of a 90 second conversation between Uhura and her roommate, Gaila, about a strange Klingon transmission the former heard in the Long Range Sensor Lab.  What’s that?  You forgot that conversation?  That’s not too surprising – not only is it really short, but as she’s talking, Uhura strips down to her bra and knickers.  Gaila is already down to her skivvies, since she and Kirk were just about to bang.  And in a classic case of male-gaze camera work, the camera pans up Uhura’s body as she’s undressing, giving us the view Kirk has from under Gaila’s bed.  This brief conversation ends up being critical a mere 20 minutes later, and the movie tries really hard to keep you from noticing it…until it leads to Kirk’s lightbulb moment.

Later in the movie, it’s revealed that Spock and Uhura are romantically involved, which is unique to the reboot.  Sadly, from the moment we first see them kissing in an elevator, Uhura ceases to say or do much of anything useful or substantive.  She’s “Spock’s Girlfriend” now.  In a conversation between all of the main cast members about how to proceed against the villain, Kirk, Spock, Bones, Chekov and Sulu all manage to contribute something, and they each speak at least twice.  Finally, after Spock gives a long explanation about how the villain has created an “entire new chain of incidents,” Uhura chimes in with, “…an alternate reality.”  Ya know, ’cause that wasn’t just explicitly spelled out for us.  The camera even showed her face multiple times as though she was going to say something, but all she says is the eye-role worthy, “for everyone in the audience who’s really stupid or has been asleep, here’s what we just told you,” line.  A woman who speaks countless languages and had been shown to be pretty badass, can only pipe up to reiterate what was just spelled out by her boyfriend.  Pretty pitiful, first movie.

Star Trek: Into Darkness (2013) doesn’t do much better on this score.  It doesn’t even pass the Bechdel test.  Uhura and new-comer Carol Marcus (Alice Eve) don’t speak together once.  However, Marcus does get to join the Gratuitous Underwear Scene Club, in what must be one of the most forced opportunities to see a pretty girl half-naked in a movie ever.  Uhura, despite a kickass scene negotiating with Klingons, spends a great deal of the movie complaining that her Vulcan boyfriend isn’t emotionally expressive enough.  Dr. Marcus’ big scenes involve being clumsily hit on by McCoy and being useful by being an important man’s daughter.  I haven’t yet had the chance to rewatch Into Darkness, so I don’t have more specific examples, but trust me, it’s not doing it’s female cast many favors.

When TOS first aired in 1966, it was imagined as a hopeful look at the future.  It was one of the first popular TV shows to feature a racially diverse cast.  Following iterations have continued in the tradition of socially progressive story-telling, including further race and gender diversity.  Voyager even features Capt. Kathryn Janeway, Star Trek‘s first female captain.  No, it hasn’t been perfect – Uhura was never a main focus character, and she was called upon to use her sexuality as a weapon on at least one occasion; Deanna Troi was mostly useless; Capt. Janeway is still the exception; people of color are the minority in every generation – but it always tried to push  boundaries and question cultural norms.  This new franchise has so much potential, and as I say, I do really like the movies.  So please, JJ, take a cue from Gene Rodddenberry, and try to give us female characters with more than one dimension, okay?

About these ads

Written by Kelly

July 11, 2013 at 12:00 PM

8 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Janeway captained Voyager, not Enterprise (hence the title)

    Aruba Jamaica

    July 12, 2013 at 1:36 AM

    • My mistake. It’s now been fixed.


      July 12, 2013 at 8:56 AM

  2. Enjoyed the article! Sadly the Abrams movies have been glaringly bad at keeping with the franchise’s progressive attitudes.

  3. […] konden actrices kiezen tussen hulpeloos wicht en kille bitch. Star Trek reduceerde vrouwen tot lustobject en wormvormig aanhangsel van een man. The Hangover (deel 1, 2 of 3 maakt niet uit) negeert vrouwen domweg. Alles draait om ‘the […]

  4. […] my last post about the Star Trek reboot, I said I hadn’t had the chance to rewatch Into Darkness, so I […]

  5. […] The Woman Problem in JJ Abrams Star Trek: This piece got the most hits on the blog this year, and by a decent margin. (In fact, Kelly got 3 […]

  6. Thanks for this article. Only 1 pushback, and a very minor one at that. The only 2 officers aboard Picard’s Enterprise with the rank to give order to the Captain were healthcare professionals and women: the counselor and the doctor. Important in the slow rise of female roles in the Star Trek universe. Which, as you have described so well, Mr. Abrams has been smashing 1 space-bra at a time.
    Where do we post and send angry letters to beg for substantial female roles in the upcoming Star Wars film?


    April 29, 2014 at 2:50 PM

    • That’s a really good point (that I wish I had thought of)! Thanks for mentioning that. As for the angry letters, would that I knew…but should I ever become privy to such info, I’ll be sure to post it, in bold, 24-point, and red, on this blog.


      April 29, 2014 at 6:35 PM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 744 other followers

%d bloggers like this: