I’ve had my attention drawn to the Anomaly podcast about hermeneutics and Star Trek. It emphasizes why “It was the 60s” is not a sufficient justification for things like sexism on Star Trek: The Original Series. Here’s a sample:

I tend to think there’s also extra pressure on Star Trek because it has a reputation for being progressive. For the time it was made it, it often was. But not always. And it’s worth noting that, in Letters to Star Trek (compiled by Susan Sackett), you can find several instances of women fans writing in and objecting to the portrayal of women of TOS. In the ’60s. (Some examples can be found here.) So, saying “it was the 60s” obscures and dismisses that history.

Click through for more. The relevance to the hermeneutics of Biblical interpretation should be obvious. “That was the 60s” is no more of an excuse in the original 60s CE than in the 1960s. And in both cases, recognizing that a work is neither wholly progressive nor wholly antiquated and sexist is challenging.


"When we see God as one, it has a beneficial influence upon our minds, our ..."

Can a Muslim Follow Jesus?
"One thing I'm surprised hasn't been raised in the "Do Christians and Muslims worship the ..."

Can a Muslim Follow Jesus?
"“Would be” is right. What human beings manage is infinitesimal in the scope of the ..."

Banished from the Heavenly Boardroom
"Could you elaborate on what you mean, hopefully providing evidence for the claims you make? ..."

How Much of the Bible do ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment