![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEijWpijFZzaZ7hH2OfH0mXOw2FylvoN9CCY7PGSIFzE-9C0P40Pdnu-AWyFg2rQOLGOnMH2MWuKr1icaFT2PMC6_vROJ8-hcerhnn3YNFNkjV-bLClyxjd1PR5s1RRIdr-09_GTRA1faHU/s200/Alice+Eve+pix+1.jpg)
There really is not much else to be said here, because Alice
succinctly laid out the truth. This
culture of ours equates beauty with stupidity.
The flip side, with which I am more intimately familiar, is that
intelligence might be the only redeeming quality of a woman who is not
traditionally beautiful. Both
assumptions are insulting and misogynistic.
Truth is much, much more complicated.
When I went searching for pix of Alice on Google for this post, it took quite a while to find a few that I considered adequate – though there were plenty of pictures from the gratuitous underwear scene. Now, don’t get me wrong. Alice is beautiful and should rightly enjoy it, and she can do whatever the hell she wants to do. Much has been made of this scene. Defenders of this scene then site the Kirk underwear scene as equal opportunity nudity. But in comparing the two scenes, what did they bring to the table? Kirk’s scene said something about his character, it built on something established in the last film, that Kirk likes women of all kinds, and it actually stands in contrast to the later beginnings of a relationship with Carol Marcus. What did the Marcus underwear scene bring to the table? It did not clarify anything or present any new information; it didn't make sense that the character would need to undress right then. Just to set things straight - I am no prude and nudity is just fine, but use it to move the story forward, shall we? I know that the writers learned their lesson from the flack they have received...Damon Lindelof went on Twitter and set things straight, which I appreciate (and will post). Let's hope it holds true.
Star Trek Into Darkness had wonderful acting by an incredibly talented cast, a decent story line, incredible special effects, beautiful music. However, I was hoping this film would get back to Classic Trek’s roots – showing diversity, equality, in treating crewmen as crewmen, regardless of gender. I find it rather sad that a show created in the 1960’s portrayed more diversity and sexual equality than a movie made in 2011. When I initially saw Aisha Hinds in the Navigator’s Chair sitting in for Chekov, I had momentary hopes that she was transgender. For a few days I thought maybe JJ Abrams had really gone where no one had gone before in Star Trek and created a queer character as part of the bridge crew. Since I do not watch television, I had no idea initially that she is “just” a big, beautiful black woman, as I had never seen her other television work. (More on Aisha Hinds in another post dedicated only to this actress; I discovered many interesting things while investigating her). My hopes were dashed...to a degree, because just having her there as an additional Navigator is fantastic.
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhshtjQdZZ5886JZaM0Ty-yz7baVx9gLcR7x2YHjB4il7u8Vysd67rEIoOwNUTaOv6gCpSzPsCSJZQRNZIS5tbfocW4RsKzWGWzhkzxpbHbvWWGfVNT9UwsVxjhKQUPE5az7geqrGQ_sUI/s1600/Kirk,+Marcus,+Spock.jpg)
Thank you to Alice Eve for this wonderful quote and having
the courage to stick up for your character, and by extension, yourself. It sounds like you were much more gracious
than I would have been! My only wish is
that I had been able to find the interview that this quote came from, and I
failed to find it.
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimNYaPXDprJXetADcoNAj6pwqjVgte2M8OFN4Z3KWWbVYIlX7fnfdRpyJo8msuBxIZAh0S4d16Y-7pWJ7sE2_HO8VMOn2GnFblX8oGjAcG5FyiNIJ4wv-RoOXNvHBx7gDsVgQFS6HioH0/s1600/screen+shot+alice+eve.jpg)