Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek was misogynist, according to Kate Mulgrew, female lead in Star Trek Voyager

[1] Roddenberry was a classic liberal. And classic liberals were heavily meritocratic.

In his universe, command was based on merit, not racial or gender affiliation. Women weren't limited, but they weren't pushed through quotas. It's the old liberal concept of freedom (the very name 'liberal' means that: 'liber' means 'free' in Latin), women or men weren't pushed, they were free to choose their vocation or what they wanted to do with their life.

That meant that you had less women or non-white in command, that's true, but the ones that were there, they were there because of merit, not because of quotas. Uhura wasn't there because she was a black woman, but because she was damn good in her job.

[2] Not to say that portraying it as 'male dominated, female subordinated' is ludicrous, considering that 99% of male crew were in subordinated positions.

[3] In the original series, if somebody would tell you about some character 'there's a character that is (male|woman), whose skin color is (black|asian|white|native american), and the hair is (blond|dark|redhair)', you would know NOTHING.

In Star Trek Discovery, and probably in Picard, you can make a good guess about his personality and behaviour... and probably you will be right. That's true hate.

The original Star Trek series bore the imprint of its time (i.e. the Mad Men era).

I don’t know if this is true but I remember someone telling me that whenever Roddenberry cheated on Majel Barret she would go shopping and run up his bills.

So what. Women cheat on their spouses all the time.

Good find!

'Pretty Maids in a Row' looks like any sexual comedy in the 60s. I didn't know that movie, so thank you for referencing it, gonna watch it :-)

The article is just some standard modern politically correct view. With a couple of references to God, it would make good material for some Christian Cult Magazine like 'The Watchtower'. It already has the references to the amount of skin showed ('The film itself was dubiously marketed as having more skin in it than any mainstream production up to that point and its starlets promoted it with their own Playboy spreads'), and the length of the skirts ('Ponce has never been taught that women are fully formed human beings, so we mostly see the world as a long parade of cleavage and upskirts that can never be embraced and furiously dry-humped'), and the promiscuity of characters ('He exudes a kind of old-fashioned, John Wayne-style manliness, but preaches new age ideas about a liberal future lead by wise and promiscuous young people').

You just need to include a few sentences reminding people to praise God and go to Church, and the article would be ready to be published in 'The Watchtower' LOL

Except none of the female crew members or officers were bimbos. They were highly qualified, professional and skilled, and some happened to be quite attractive. So who's really being misogynistic?

The question is: who's the misogynist?

Back in the 60s you had the conservatives asking for women in the screen to put on more clothes. Back then, the bikini and the miniskirt were milestones in women's freedom. However, conservatives asked for women to be less sexualized, and liberals told them that they hated women.

Now you have modern left telling 60's left that women should be less sexualized and should put on more clothes... which is what the religious right used to say back in the day!!! And now modern left tells 60s left that they hated women. Now mini-skirt and bikini have gone from being a symbol of women's freedom to be a symbol of hating women.

It's a shame that some fans seem to bend themselves into pretzels to 'justify' CLEAR evidence of sexism in TOS. That is almost like saying there was and is no sexism in the entire human experience. One person said Uhuru was in TOS because she was 'good at her job' when there is ZERO evidence of that. Miniskirts were a fashion statement, even though it was not so in the original pilot! A person does NOT have to be right wing, white, male or a Nazi to see when women are relegated to subservient roles. Yes, Picard was not as chauvinistic as Kirk but I think Mulgrew's comment was directed at Roddenberry's ST not Roddenberry himself. Yes, it was a sign of the times BUT the times were really crappy for women and minorities.

It is amazing that these fans now attack ANY attempt to show a different side of humanity as SJW or 'political correctness'. The world is majority female and majority none white. The vast majority of tv and movies have had white male protagonists heroes for the LONGEST time with no complaints. Yet, any attempt to show women or minorities in the SAME heroic roles is greeted with hysteria! Someone is trying to shove something down their collective throats! Michelle Yeoh looks 'too old', yet we can accept a positively geriatric looking Picard and Data!, Sonequa's Burnham is too accomplished ( a Mary Sue) yet we can accept a pot bellied Roger Moore as super-spy James Bond! We simply MUST have a Pike/Spock spin off but DSC is not in the right time; too futuristic; defeats canon but please , please give us Pike and Spock!

In truth ST has changed. The series has attempted to show a greater variety of the human experience. The producers realize that as mankind advances our notions of our place in the world; our relationship with each other, our planet, and the species we share it with IS ALSO CHANGING. By the time depicted in ST our notions of human sexuality, will have changed too. Sadly, some ST fans will never GET THIS!