Kirk

Well, the main criticism is probably too few Kelpians...

I certainly won't disagree with that

Jay-Den and Darem's recent scene together illustrates it well, I think. And the negative reaction to it from people online who described it with terms like "woke" and "cringe" illustrates that many people are so uncomfortable and so afraid of the concept of being vulnerable that they dismiss it out of hand.

But to be clear, I actually went out of my way not to describe this as "new or groundbreaking". If anything the messaging I highlighted in my OP has been the consistent through line for the past decade in DSC, SWW, and SFC (and to a lesser extent Picard). But I do think it's spot-on for our current cultural climate. I (and many others who thought the new series have been too timid with their politics) have been missing the forest for the trees.

We can laugh now at TOS preaching the "illogicality of racism" to be self-evident, but during the time of scientific racism and Jim Crow laws, stating that self-evidence was considered radical. TOS never had an episode about Uhura earning her right to be on the bridge. She was just there. Discovery never had a plot line about Adira coming out as non-binary, they just did.

"Vulnerability is strength" is the radical idea of our modern era where things like emotional insecurity and ability to tolerate loneliness are held up as examples of strength, and not the reality, which is that they are the beliefs of a fearful person.

Labeling someone's expression as "cringey" is dismissive in any context. It takes real strength to listen.

I believe that dismissing something or someone because you personally find them uncomfortable (ie "cringe") is ultimately a sign of weakness, and that's what the writers are trying to tell us. It takes a very strong person to stand up and simply accept without judgement.

The most recent SFA episode was brilliant with that

Ah I see, you definitely misinterpreted. I was indeed describing them as two different groups.

Group A (myself and I assume most here) have been looking for more specific and obvious political/cultural messaging from the writers, and in focusing in on the details, we were missing perhaps the single most consistent messaging of all.

Group B (The angry Twitter users) are an example of what happens when society isn't recognizing the real strength that is showing (and being receptive to) vulnerability. They (falsely) believe strength comes from hiding vulnerability.

The writers have been telling us this very apt concept all along, but myself (and many others based on posts here) haven't yet fully noticed how radical an idea it actually is. The more obvious messaging flows from this idea.

Thank goodness, the fan has a mind of it's own sometimes.

Thanks for the thoughtful response. I think Discovery walked so SNW and SFA could run. TOS/TNG showed us a future where people wouldn't be ostracized for their race/gender. The newer series are showing us a future where people won't be ostracized for being their authentic selves.

That is a small thing.

I extremely disagree but I'd be curious to know your thought process behind saying it. To me, it seems like the biggest thing and that every social issue ever addressed in every Star Trek series has this at it's core.

Do you believe Discovery had a story arc about gender identity? I would encourage you to watch the show again because it absolutely did not exist.

Hah! Sign me up for a unionizing episode too. And thanks for reading!