Saturday 22 July 2017

Objectification in fandoms - On the AOS Starfleet minidress uniform and why I hate it

I will be referencing this post multiple times in my AOS Star Trek comic feminist reviews (AOS: Alternate Original Series, the Trek movies from 2009 onwards). Here focusing on the AOS miniskirt female uniform, although I also reference the TOS (The Original Series) version as comparison.

I also note that AOS Star Trek is one of my favourite fandoms, I'm officially obsessed about it and it holds a special place in my heart. But as a feminist, I also find problematic flaws in it, and this is the main one.

-On the Starfleet female miniskirt uniform and why I hate it:

One should definitely not judge a woman for wearing miniskirts or shorter skirts, and I'm firmly against patriarchal modesty mindsets. I firmly think women are entitled to wear whatever they like and feel well in (so long as they're not making an unfeminist 'choice' and 'choosing' to wear a burka or a similarly misogynistic gendered covering, of course). However, the context should also be taken into consideration in order to ascertain if the character is being sexualized or not when wearing a more revealing skirt/dress/outfit. For example, female Starfleet officers shown wearing miniskirts (and sleeveless dresses) is both unrealistic and ridiculous - and thus, objectifying - because the logical thing would be to wear protective and practical clothing in the context of an actual job in outer space with bonus potential accidents and planet away missions! 
So comfortable and realistic for an action-packed mission!
Weather (exposed skin will be more prone to cold or heat), risk of injury to the exposed and very poorly protected legs and/or arms (no explanation needed here), lack of mobility (when one's underwear is showing so easily one has a limited set of posture choices :/ 'I remember always being exposed', Uhura's Zoë Saldana says. Sounds comfy for (such) a job, right?!),...These are all important factors which make the choice of a (sleeveless) minidress (in the case of AOS without even thin tights beneath -not that those did any protection either!-, even though it's a little bit less ridiculously short as TOS' version) clearly thought for the aims of sexualization and male gaze, as well as promoting the narrow-minded idea of gendered uniforms where women, for the sake of being women, too often automatically have to wear skirts/dresses and more uncomfortable and/or revealing clothing.  
The sexism of this is also of course anachronistic as hell (that in the 23rd Century such gendered uniforms would still exist). Then again, we know that in (male-dominated) science fiction obsolete sexism always ends up making an appearance. This gendered uniform is also particularly infuriating because in real life women have been forced to wear skirts for practically everything, including many jobs where it is impractical and hazardous to do so, and thanks to stupid gender roles, they were also actually forbidden to wear the 'male uniform' (aka actual practical pants) in many cases - Female forest rangers in USA, for example, were not allowed to wear the pant uniform until freaking 1973!! Meanwhile, policewomen had to wear skirt and pumps combos because logical thinking ("Some women wore skirts with a gun belt, pumps, and pantyhose — they really couldn’t do anything.”), or had to make do with the overlarge men-size pants. So yay, liberal feminists, please tell me how this is about 'choice', and especially about 'appreciating femininity' and 'allowing women to be feminine' (like, are women allowed to be anything else??).
The most logical outfit for an away-mission! Obviously. 
And real life example of the exact same situation - This skirt+bare legs combo is so practical and logical when it comes to being a forest ranger!
And if you need more proof (even though I think it's already pretty obvious), just read Zoë Saldana's comments on how uncomfortable her minidress 'uniform' made her, how she couldn't sit in any way without her underwear showing and her male colleagues calling her on it ("I kept being reminded by all my male cast members that I was flashing, I would sit down and it would be like, 'Oh, Zoe, cross those legs.' And I would say, 'They are crossed.' [They would say], 'Well, then put something over that because I'm just seeing everything.'"), and how the costume designer responded to her complaints with male gaze justifications, which win against every discomfort a female lead might have, apparently: "I just remember always being exposed no matter how hard I would try," Saldana said. "I would tell Michael that we had to work on this and [he would say], 'But it looks so cute.'".
 Women's sexualization wins and no surprises there :/, but it bugs me so much that so many female fans actually defend this shit and even call it 'empowering' (f* you liberal 'feminism' >_<)! Or that Beyond's costume designer, who is a woman, decided to keep on using the unrealistic and uncomfortable minidress - even though she added long sleeves and the dress is slightly longer - that caused so much discomfort to the actresses, never mind the characters (and this is the only issue I have with the awesomeness that is Beyond).
Just the kind of thing you'd wear in order to work in outer space, RIGHT?
This is a TOS female uniform as a comparison - Very similar regarding ridiculousness and sexualization aims :/ The TOS 'uniform' has an even shorter skirt (which however acts as a bathing suit of sorts - uncomfortable and unnecessary af, but at least the underwear wouldn't be as exposed, I guess), and generally includes very thin tights, which add like 1% protection, so no big deal either.
Another essential point to consider about this issue is to see if, by contrast, all male characters are always wearing pants and generally comfy and practical clothing while the women are generally wearing more revealing clothing just because they're women (double standard) and they must be seen as adequately attractive for the male gaze. And yes, this is what's happening regarding Starfleet gendered uniforms: All men wear actual realistic and comfortable uniforms with pants (and reinforced biker-style pants at that!) and, regarding the two first Trek movies where many minidresses are also sleeveless, the male uniforms always sport long sleeves, of course. Men are allowed to be protected! Male leads in movies and male characters in general are also allowed to be handsome and stuff while being protected!
What male privilege looks like
These are some of Michael Kaplan's costume sketches for Star Trek's Academy and duty uniforms. As you can see, the double standards are strong with this one. Men have realistic, reasonably comfy and non-objectified uniforms (they are also depicted in non-sexualized postures), while women are extremely sexualized (regarding both the outfit and the poses) in an illogical, unrealistic and ridiculous way.


Also featuring hypocrisy from the designer's part: "The women had lots of different options for the cadet uniforms: They could wear pants, skirt and a sweater, a skirt and jacket, or a jumper - an over-sweater like a little dress" Where are the 'lots of different options'? They're basically lots of options for wearing miniskirts and dresses, because I literally didn't see one female cadet with pants in the movies or in any production design. If you state that women can wear pants, why aren'y any women wearing them in the Academy? Or do I have to squint more at the screencaps? At least be sexist in an honest way, I don't know :/

Let me stress that gendered uniforms of this kind are inherently sexist and misogynistic af, not to mention narrow-minded in their gender-role glory. Because they're telling you: You're a woman, so your role in life is to wear a uniform that's more uncomfortable, protects you less and limits your mobility, because you must look 'sexy' and attractive at all costs. They brainwash women into thinking this actually is logical and makes sense. And those women who don't get brainwashed effectively usually have to accept it anyway, or lose their job/not go to (a uniform) school/lose their acting job. It's one thing to like miniskirts/dresses, it's another thing entirely to have to wear them as a uniform in the wrong context just because of your gender and because a male designer/male somebody in power said so (Michael Kaplan again: "We loved the idea of sticking to the homage of the 1960s and putting the girls into mini-skirts [he forgot about the 'lots of different options here!]. Zoë Saldana is adorable - it was so much fun to dress her. She has such a great figure for short skirts and the costume - she was the main prototype for the costumes").
 I myself wear miniskirt-and-leggins combos on a regular basis because I like the aesthetic, but I sure as hell wouldn't wear them to work in outer space, or as your standard female uniform to go to uni, and not only because contextually it doesn't make any sense, but also because I resent being sexualized because of my gender, thank you very much. 

In the AOS Trek movies we have a handful of female crew also wearing the long-sleeved pant uniform (in Beyond all female uniforms have long sleeves, but the pant version sports a tunic-like top and most female characters still wear the minidress version :/). Apparently, women in Starfleet can wear the pant version of both the Academy and duty uniforms (why thank you, 23rd Century so full of anachronistic 60s sexism in that respect), but oh surprise!, I haven't seen any female Academy cadet in the movies wearing the pant version, and all women in pant duty uniforms are extras (you can see a handful in all three Trek movies), or secondary characters at most (like Ensign Syl in Beyond).
(click on pics or open in a new tab for larger images)

Both pant uniforms, and dresses with long sleeves (which is something - like in Beyond - but still impractical)  

 

Let us also remember the brief glory of pant uniforms for women in TOS
 
Needless to say, this is the kind of uniform Starfleet women should be wearing, for practicality, comfort, protection, mobility and general equality (why can only men wear pants when it comes to uniforms, when it's the most logical option?). It's high time we taught society that women are not here to decorate men's world and thus should not look sexualized in every freaking situation, and also high time we taught people that not only should women be allowed to wear pants in these situations (it's so surreal to have to say this in the 21s Century, never mind the 23rd) but also- if appearance should even factor - that women and actresses can look just as good as men and male actors in freaking pants. No need to put them in ridiculous miniskirts in order to boost the attractiveness Hollywood selling factor.

Of course, we can't have the (limited) main female characters non-sexualized for our dear male audience (because we also know that female sexualization sells), and also for brainwashed neoliberal feminists! Neoliberal 'feminists' who claim - much to men's comfort, of course - that these women who are depicted with the minidress versions are empowered and not sexualized at all because they have the pants option available and didn't choose it (oh choice 'feminism', you always make so much sense).  How fitting for the male audience that no one main female character and less than 50% (being generous in some cases) of the secondary characters and extras chose the pant version! How fitting that so many women use the word 'choose' for fictional characters whose outfits are generally chosen by (male or brainwashed female) designers and crew!  Bonus points to that other argument they favour - That it's not objectification or sexism because women should be able to be both strong and 'look feminine' at the same time! That a sexualized heroine is actually subversive and empowering! Because by 'look feminine', of course, they usually mean justifying the gratuitous and blatant sexualization of so many female characters for the male gaze (comic characters such as Wonder Woman especially come to mind in this case). Not to mention that as non-binary and as a radfem I'm 100% against 2D simplistic gender constructs of  'femininity' that state that a woman 1) Must always look 'feminine' and that 2) The onlyway to achieve it is through skirts and dresses and other limited gendered options.
 Neoliberal and choice 'feminism' is truly poison and Patriarchy's pawn. They also make like 0% sense, my gods.

The newest Boldly Go Trek comics, as well as some Ongoing issues such as the genderbent 'Paralell Lives' one and some other random cases, made me hope for a change in this respect, seeing as 99% of the women portrayed in the first issues actually wore pants, even Uhura a couple of time :D, so we'll see, although I'm not that hopeful because the media does still rely on objectifying their female characters too much.  But THIS is what we deserve to see everywhere:





In short, I find it so infuriating and ridiculous that I'm here vindicating the right of women to wear comfortable, realistic uniforms in a job that requires lots of mobility and protection (minidresses are all fine and cool but in other contexts thank you), and that it's actually an 'unpopular opinion' *facepalm*