In a message dated 97-11-11 12:34:51 EST, David Christenson wrote:
> Seven's costume seems logical to me - she would have little or no clue
> that it's "sexy," and a tight-fitting costume is probably practical for
> crawling through Jeffries tubes. However, this bothers me: why would a
> Borg have breasts? Borg babies are nursed by machines, and the Borg were
> never squeamish about removing unneccessary body parts to make room for
> more machinery.
I agree that a long, flowing outfit would not work for most of the work that
goes on on a starship, but something a bit less tight, and including a few
pockets would seem to me to be far more practical. What, for instance, is
she supposed to do if in the course of working on something she removes the
Star Trek equivalent of a bolt and doesn't want it rolling away?
Anyway, my real reason for replying to this is that I too am bothered by the
idea of a Borg with breasts. My major complaint with the "Generations" movie
was the so-called Borg Queen (why was it the first obviously female Borg we
saw was not only evil, but overtly sexual?). Not only was the face of one of
the original Borg largely untouched, but for some reason was also interested
in using sex to manipulate others!?
(Why is it that in movies in the last few years, the "evil" women are always
trying to use sex to capture the bad guy, or are [within the world of the
movie] sexual deviants? I know it's happened before, but has it really
started up again in the last few years, or has it been going steady all along
and I've just been slow to notice? Wait, that's a rant for another time, so I
guess that's my cue to finish this up.)
Barbara Benesch
BJBenesch@aol.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:07:21 PDT