Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 31
02-14-2012, 09:09 AM
Starwolf, no they are not mammals, only terrestrial creatures can be mammals. They might be mammalian, but not mammals, its a scientific difference. Vulcans have copper rather than iron based blood (not sure if based is correct word), and so on and so forth. Gorn might have mammeries, 1- 100 for all we know. I for one would love Females in more of the alien species, of course i would like if some of the alien women did not conform the the humanocentric standards we keep getting in Star Trek.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 32
02-14-2012, 09:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_dee
Last time I checked mammary glands are one of the defining aspects of mammals so putting those on another genus and saying it doesn't turn them into mammals is like saying when you remove the hair from the top of someone's head you don't make him bald.

That holograms have them is for the simple reason that they are supposed to be a simulation that contains familiar characteristics.
And in that case we know the Doctor on Voyager got only those characteristics that were visible (he was a "Ken-Doll") while anything else was a later addition.

With regards to the Saurians there's the same question as there is with the Cardassians: how non-humanoid are they given they're appearently evolved from something other than mammals yet have mammalian features like giving birth to live children?

In case of the Gorn it's clear that's not the case.
And to be blunt: are so unimaingative that you can't think of any other way to differentiate male from female that grafting humanoid characterics on them?
There are other ways of achieving that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism

For example in many species females are a lot bigger than males.
So why not use that as a starting point?

Or like in other cases, the males have a larger head while the females have a larger body (relatively speaking)

http://www.jstor.org/pss/3545893

Or like in case of the Grass Snake the heads have drastically different shapes:

http://www.surrey-arg.org.uk/SARG/08...es=Grass_Snake
If you have played Star Trek Online, then you would know that it states Saurians as a reptialian race. It can not be explained away by stating that they evolved from some mamel race. They are reptiles and yet the females have a chest. I know there are alot of true blue Star Trek fans playing this game and I do not mean to offend them. But why not simply put bo.obs on a gorn women if they decided to make them. I say why not. And if anyone remebers the Star Trek animated series, M'Ress had cat like feet, paws, but had hair yet none of the caitians have such features.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 33
02-14-2012, 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanNewBoy View Post
Starwolf, no they are not mammals, only terrestrial creatures can be mammals. They might be mammalian, but not mammals, its a scientific difference. Vulcans have copper rather than iron based blood (not sure if based is correct word), and so on and so forth. Gorn might have mammeries, 1- 100 for all we know. I for one would love Females in more of the alien species, of course i would like if some of the alien women did not conform the the humanocentric standards we keep getting in Star Trek.
True, it does seem that, even in the series, everything is given a human like form. This may be a hypethical disscuaion but if it were some other race designing this game with a different form then that probaly would be reflected in the character desigen. On another track, what about some new races that are humanoid but do not entierly reflect the human form, only gender distiction. That may make for some interesesting races.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 34
02-14-2012, 09:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_dee
Bajorans are not mammals?
Vulcans are not mammals?
Klingons are not mammals?
Betazoids are not mammals?
Do you actually know Star Trek?
They're not mammals, no. Mammalia is a monophyletic clade encompassing the most-recent common ancestor of Ornithorhynchus anatinus (the platypus) and Homo sapiens (humans) and all of the descendants of that ancestor. This isn't about knowing Star Trek, it's about knowing evolutionary biology.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 35
02-14-2012, 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by starwolf77 View Post
All this talk about gorn women, why not have gorn women with mammery glands (b.o.o.b.s). In my opinion, there should be male and female's of all races, not some cast system.
because (b.o.o.b.s) are only located on mammels, to give milk to their young. reptiles don't have (b.o.o.b.s), they have no need for them on the evolutionary scale. and as it stands, there were never any gorn females shown on screen. cryptic would need the go ahead from cbs to create a model for female gorn, and that costs money.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 36
02-15-2012, 12:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by troodon311 View Post
They're not mammals, no. Mammalia is a monophyletic clade encompassing the most-recent common ancestor of Ornithorhynchus anatinus (the platypus) and Homo sapiens (humans) and all of the descendants of that ancestor. This isn't about knowing Star Trek, it's about knowing evolutionary biology.
And here we have a problem:
when you go by such a definition, meaning it encompasses only (real and fictional) creatures on earth,
Gorn are also not reptilians since such a definition would only apply to (real and fictional) creatures on earth as well.
Thus we're stuck with "they are something" but they are not from earth thus none fo the definitions can be used.

*EDIT: Here's a fedinition on the term humanoid as it's used in Star Trek:

http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Humanoid

*
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 37
02-15-2012, 01:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by starwolf77 View Post
If you have played Star Trek Online, then you would know that it states Saurians as a reptialian race. It can not be explained away by stating that they evolved from some mamel race. They are reptiles and yet the females have a chest. I know there are alot of true blue Star Trek fans playing this game and I do not mean to offend them. But why not simply put bo.obs on a gorn women if they decided to make them. I say why not. And if anyone remebers the Star Trek animated series, M'Ress had cat like feet, paws, but had hair yet none of the caitians have such features.
I'm not trying to explain that away, but I tried to give another example with the Cardassians.
As I have failed last time I hope you don't mind I'll try again to explain what I mean:
the licensed materials (which I think are okay to use in this instance as they are already used for the Gorn background) state the Cardassians are reptiles.
To be precise they are "reptiles with mammalian features".
I'm not trying to say they didn'evolved from mammals but they evolved into something that'svery close to them.
They have breasts and they give birth to live childern (they don't lay eggs) and they are even compatible with at least some non-reptilian races.
There's not enough material about the Saurians available indicate one or the other but it seems Cryptic decided to take a similar route with them as well: reptiles with mammalian features.
In case of the Gorn we know they lay eggs thus they don't fall into the same category of reptillians as the Cardassians and appearently the Gorn.

And from what I've been readon M'Ress-style hair is going to become available in the future.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 38
02-15-2012, 02:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by starwolf77 View Post
All this talk about gorn women, why not have gorn women with mammery glands (b.o.o.b.s). In my opinion, there should be male and female's of all races, not some cast system.
There are technically female gorn in-game already. The only real difference between male and female reptiles are patterns, sizes and their genders which are not to my knowledge very observable without looking at their "nether regions". To my study of reptiles they do not feed their young milk or have mammary glands Q.E.D. We do not need "Gorn Females".

I say "Gorn Females" as reference to the push by the Furry/Scalie community to have boxum babes of the scaled variety with the horrendously put together backstory and canon breaking that would make Good Old Gene Roddenberry turn over in his grave.


EDIT:

Just to add here i roleplay a female gorn in STO. I have made the character distinctive enough to not be male or atleast overly masculine in terms of gorn or reptilian standards.

EDIT EDIT:

WOOO HIGHFIVE RIVY! *Highfives*
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 39
02-15-2012, 01:38 PM
I'm really disappointed that in this whole thread, the only concern has been shown with Gorn and Lethean females. Don't Nausicaan women get any love? :p
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 40
02-15-2012, 04:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_dee
In case of the Gorn, I'd prefer if they went another route:

According to the kind soft canon that the STO novel follows, there are different subtypes of Gorn.
They have a caste system that goes well beyond social differences, Gorn from different castes are
actually physically different.
Why not get rid of the designation "Gorn Male" (we know they can do that with the Andorians) and make those Gorn of one of the castes and use the "Female" slot for another caste.
Leave sexual demorphism out of it and just give us two different castes even of they'll be identical statwise it would add some variety that goes beyond the regular character editor.
yea a 'warrior' cast and a 'tech' cast one a tank/dps one a support
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:35 AM.