DesignGal

There is little need to introduce or describe the Star Trek franchise to most people. It is a cornerstone of the science fiction genre, popularized by the original television series in the 1960s, followed by many movies and subsequent series spin-offs. But probably most notable is the imagined alternate future of Earth where humans have evolved beyond destructive and self-serving behaviors to a place where there is diversity, prosperity, and virtually no war or poverty. The imagined society’s ability to rise above human greed and conquest made way for a future beyond the planet, where everyone working together elevated humanity to a higher level of advancement – exploration of space and the United Federation of planets. 

Peace and Prosperity

The utopian society reflected in the Star Trek franchise is incredible because of the imagined peace, not only among all the people of the Earth but also with other species and planets. The series touches on the end of war using references to a devastating World War III scenario, which is a recurring theme through multiple series spin-offs, including the original series and the popular Next Generation. The aftermath of the war even sets the stage for human contact with extraterrestrial beings in the movie First Contact. 

Throughout its history, Star Trek has juxtaposed major conflicts in the real world. The first American troops landed in Vietnam in 1965 to support the war effort, and the original Star Trek series was released the following year. The Next Generation Series was released the same year the Berlin Wall fell and continued its success through the start of the first Gulf War. 

Diversity and Inclusion

From the beginning of the first series, Star Trek broke social norms by including a multicultural cast. While the captain was still a white male, the crew included a variety of ethnicities including african-american, asian and even a russian crew member while the Cold War continued to keep the US and Russia at odds.

This series was also running during the peak of the Civil Rights Era, and in one famous episode (Season 3 Episode 10 – “Plato’s Stepchildren”) there was an on-screen kiss between Captain Kirk and Lieutenant Uhura. Something as simple as a kiss showed the true alternative imagination of the show – where the divisions that were pronounced in the society of the time no longer exist.

Star Trek Tech

We can also see the use of ‘future’ technology and how it is used in the series as a tool for advancing human potential. Replicators for food may be interpreted as a way to eliminate food deserts or create a more sustainable food system. Warp drives and teleports allow Star Fleet to travel faster and fulfill their mission to Explore new worlds and seek out new civilizations. We can see that technology is a tool that has helped them advance, and realize their need for information and enlightenment.

How Far Are We From Starfleet

For any of the changes imagined in the Star Trek series to come to fruition, changes would need to be made on many levels. There would need to be systematic change that would allow people to live better lives through things like food security and health care. By providing basic human needs such as these we could reduce crime and create a healthier society. Also, if we move technology toward education and enterprise as opposed to entertainment we can reduce misinformation and the division it creates and instead use it as a tool for growth and prosperity. We as individuals would need to change too, putting more of a focus on education, critical thinking, and diversity. This would allow us to live in better harmony with one another.

There may be some fantastic things introduced by Star Trek that are already available, for instance, 3D-printed food. When the series first launched in the ’60s, the food replicator likely seemed an impossible tool, but there are now companies that can print food from edible filament. This does not mean that we are close to the utopian society imagined in the work of Star Trek – quite the opposite. In today’s world where we can not even agree on facts, there is still an overwhelming amount of systematic bias, and our children are more anxious and less prepared, we seem to be moving in the opposite direction.

I would describe myself as a self-reliant, independent female. I would also say that, whether naively or luckily, I have had minimal experience with inappropriate comments or advances. But I have felt the lash of insinuation proposing that I am a ‘helpless female’. While I firmly believe that everyone needs help at some point, and you should help people when you can, the idea that I am not capable of doing something for myself simply because I am female has always felt demeaning to me.

One incident I still remember today was when I was a young adult living at home with my dad. I was working two jobs but needed to take my car in for service. My dad worked nights, so he offered to drop off my car while I was at work, and called later in the day to make sure it would be ready to be picked up. When I arrived at the counter, I told the person working that I was there to pick up my car and gave my name. The man behind the person I was talking to snapped his head toward me and said smugly “Oh yes, Daddy called.” 

If I hadn’t been caught so off guard, I probably would have asked to speak to a supervisor to let them know how rude the comment was. Not only did this person interject himself where he wasn’t needed, but he did so to push a misogynistic dig in my direction. As much as I love my father, the implication that I was some type of entitled “Daddy’s girl” left me so indignant that I still remember it 30 years later.

Media Construction

The idea that women are helpless, and in need of constant help or even oversight from their fathers or husbands is likely as old as time itself. There are even laws that exemplify the bias that a woman has no legal individual identity – such as the doctrine of Coverture, where a woman is not seen as having individual rights but is treated as the property of her father until she is married when she would then be absorbed into the identity of her husband.

While the term “Daddy’s girl” may not always be used to demean – referring to special affection between a father and a daughter; it carries with it the notion that the daughter is spoiled, often getting whatever she wants. Movies like the 90’s comedy Clueless epitomize the stereotype of the Daddy’s girl – a spoiled rich girl whose rich father allows her a privileged life of luxury.  

There are also many examples of celebrities in the media that could be deemed daddy’s girls due to the privilege, notoriety, or influence that was inherited from father to daughter. One such example is Kim Kardashian, a self-described Daddy’s girl, who even has her own line of dad-themed merchandise. The actress Zoë Kravitz, daughter of famous musician Lenny Kravitz, also reportedly has a very close relationship with her dad.

When we see examples of famous or well-to-do daughters who inherited money or notoriety from their fathers, it’s easy to expect they have an advantage over those who don’t have famous or rich fathers. Likewise, any girl who is doted on by her father will have her father’s support when it’s needed.

Information, Context, and Bias

Whether it’s the celebrity daughter who gains some fame from her famous father, the rich daughter who starts a company with the resources available to her because of her dad, or the girl whose dad offers to drop her car off at the auto shop while she is at work; daddy’s girls do exist. But is the archetype of the daddy’s girl accurate or inaccurate? I would say both. 

While no doubt someone who’s rich, or famous, or has a good father has an advantage over someone who may not, though those advantages are not specific to only fathers and daughters. Anyone who has the means would likely offer support to someone they care about whether they are a daughter, son, brother, or close friend. But this does not mean that the person receiving the support is helpless or incapable. 

As in the case of my experience, the fact that I am a girl and my dad helped me doesn’t mean I am incapable. If I had been a boy would that person at the auto shop still have made the comment? I don’t believe the term daddy’s girl itself is derogatory, but when the insinuation plays into the misogynistic point of view that girls are less competent, as this person’s comment conveyed, that’s when it can be damaging.

Climate Change Explained

Climate change can be described as changes in temperature, weather patterns, and other atmospheric conditions over time. While it’s true that the Earth’s climate has changed over long periods throughout our planet’s history, it is the current rate of change that should be of great concern to us. The rate is rapidly increasing due to human activities such as burning fossil fuels, intense farming practices, pollution and more.

What do Most People Believe

While both the proof of a changing climate, as well as the human contributions to the problem are widely accepted in the scientific community, several controversies surround the topic of climate change; the most significant being the denial of the crisis, either partially or completely.

According to a 2023 article by the PEW research center over a quarter (26%) of Americans do not believe that human activities directly impact the climate, and 14% deny that there is even sufficient evidence to show that climate change even exists.

Climate Change Controversy 

Even with a large amount of supporting data, there are several reasons that people may still deny that climate change is an issue – distrust of the media/experts, political ideology, and even religious beliefs. This PEW research article from 2022 cites that 23% of Americans don’t believe climate change is a problem because “god is in control of the climate”. Perhaps even worse, some deny this threat to humanity for personal gain, self-interest, and unwillingness to do anything about it.

Climate Change Denial

With very little effort, one can easily do a quick search online to get numerous results contradicting the legitimacy of climate change, such as this pdf displaying the name of the U.S Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works denouncing the “false” claims asserted by climate scientists. In the pdf, you can see a point-by-point with a counterpoint “Fact” underneath refuting the initial claim. The article was released by the office of U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe, who was chairman of the committee for seven years. This document provides the authority of a government agency within the domain of environmental protections, lending itself to this being a credible source, but when you read through the document you see that no sources are cited for any of the claims. Beyond citations, the article includes headlines and quotes, in some cases from people that are not even worth mentioning by name. For example, the use of a quote by ‘A prominent IPCC Physicist’. 

When spending a bit more time looking into Mr. Inhofe’s background, you can see that he is a senator for the state of Oklahoma, which is a large producer of oil in the United States. Inhofe also received hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign funds from oil and gas companies.

In this case, it is likely easy to see both the incentive for denying the facts of climate change – personal gain and corporate interest, while also understanding that many people may see this type of media and grant it credibility because of the author’s and committee’s credentials.

Some claim that climate change is part of a larger political agenda, such as Vivek Ramaswamy, an entrepreneur and one-time GOP presidential candidate. While he doesn’t deny that climate change is real, he doesn’t support climate policy; suggesting that we should just adapt to the changing environment instead of changing things that affect it. Interestingly enough Mr. Ramaswamy’s firm Strive has an Exchange-Traded Fund (ETF) Called DRLL which is a fund that includes a combination of energy companies including oil, petroleum, coal, and nuclear energy.

Resolution

There are individuals, organizations and even countries that view climate change as a priority by making changes that positively affect the environment and implementing climate education. But there are still many people that, not only deny the science but try to persuade others that climate change is a “hoax” or at best an overreaction by alarmists with an underlying political agenda. While the majority of people do believe climate change is real, and two-thirds of Americans support moving to energy renewable energy sources; having the stone of so many climate deniers around our necks makes our climb out of the crisis that much more difficult. But hopefully, we can make a difference before we seal our doom irrevocably.