One reason I like Star Trek is that it had some aspects of sci-fi in the social realm. Like the fact that people had culturally evolved a little bit. TNG episode "The Neutral Zone" underlines the cultural differences between Star Trek utopia and the real world.
Too much sci-fi in TV is just projecting current cultural zeitgeist into the future or space. It becomes interesting only afterwards as bottled representation of the past. For example, BSG 2004-2009 stores forever the mental landscape of United States after 9/11.
--CBS wants to present a modern crew (modern to today's standards).
--CBS wants to have a female captain (showing diversity)
--CBS wants to have a black captain (also showing diversity)
But here's the rub. CBS now wants to show that it's leaders are more human than perfect, and show them in a negative light (not all the time obviously).
Pu that together, and you get that CBS is presenting a black female captain who is not as strong as the white males, black males, and white women before her.
I don't get it. Diversity is obviously a good thing, as Gene had a beautiful dream about racism being eliminated. Showing people as more human is understandable, even though Gene thought differently (I have no position on the topic). However, if you really want to promote diversity, why is the first time you decide to show leaders in a negative light also the first time you have a black female captain.
Am I being too sensitive, or do you think this will cause issues, too?
And, I would hope we're past the point where casting a black or female lead is still seen as an attempt at "diversity" points.
That being said bigger fans than me have sane claims that Star trek has been about American political counter points (peace and noninterference in cold war, and similar). So if characters are constantly compromising, and actually working on hard problems it might be able to keep those themes (opposed to political deadlock, separation, and short-term gains in reality).
