Refresh For The Memory: Series VIII Byte 1

[Ian Symes]

You asked for it. Ahead of the forthcoming 35th anniversary poll, the G&T community is embarking on a big old rewatch, tackling half a series (or one feature length special) per week. This is your designated thread to make notes, share observations and start pondering your rankings.

This week, we’re watching BACK IN THE RED (PART ONE), BACK IN THE RED (PART TWO), BACK IN THE RED (PART THREE) and CASSANDRA. Have at it!

Previous threads:

Series 1 Byte 1
Series 1 Byte 2
Series 2 Byte 1
Series 2 Byte 2
Series III Byte 1
Series III Byte 2
Series IV Byte 1
Series IV Byte 2
Series V Byte 1
Series V Byte 2
Series VI Byte 1
Series VI Byte 2
Series VII Byte 1
Series VII Byte 2

Topic

[Quinn: Clochebusters World Champion]

I think “she only sees pictures” can marry up fairly well with what happens if you take a leap and say Cassandra actually isn’t as capable of knowing the future as is made out.

If she’s a little more like Pree and able to predict futures, based on possibilities, she’s able to basically guide events. 

The crew take it as red that she knows exactly what’s goi g to happen. So they don’t question it or really try and do anything else. They’re told their future is predetermined so end up acting out those events.

Nothing that happens happens without her saying it will, which sort of leads the characters to just work on that assumption and make it happen to a certain extent.

The conversation prediction is pretty Darren Brown level of trickery at best. Everything else she plants the seeds of events that leads the crew to follow through on. 

It all does come back to she knew Lister would inadvertently kill her, so she’s having some fun along the way really. 

If she really wanted to prevent her own death or change the future in anyway she could have just switched herself off and not had a conversation with them. Maybe she welcomed death after millennia stuck at the bottom of an ocean. 

[Dave]

So she can see the future with perfect accuracy, but what she actually says might just be any old BS. It makes my head hurt.

But yeah, it’s very clear that’s not what Doug intended.

Well, we already know she can lie because she chooses to lie about Rimmer and Kochanski. But she only does that to stop her death from happening. Even though she should know that the lie ultimately makes it happen. So she should tell the truth to stop the truth from happening.

[Warbodog]

Why are they basing their knowledge of how the timeline works on Future Echoes, when all subsequent experiences showed them that the future can be changed after all and they were just being overly fatalistic that first time?

[Unrumble]

A mention of Dwayne Dibbley in the Coral Canvass Livestream randomly reminded me of this line, and its utterly, aggressively abhorrent shitness.  

[Rushy]

 it’s offensive to cis men to suggest that their masculinity is only defined by their penis

Depends who you are

Maybe I’m just a simpleton, but I never really thought about it harder than “I’ve got a dangly bit, I guess I’m a man”. All masculinity/femininity just seems to me like personality traits that get baked into you over time through personal life choices and cultural osmosis. 

I respect people have their identities, but I’ve never been one of them and I don’t really understand the point. 

[Dave]

[Warbodog]

I never really thought about it harder than “I’ve got a dangly bit, I guess I’m a man”.       

I like how the wording suggests you didn’t notice until you were already an adult.

Speaking as a simpleton, kids aren’t fixated on their differences in genitalia (well, maybe some are), there’s a lot that makes up our idea of gender growing up.

Anyway, “depends who you are” can obviously be taken as read from whoever you were replying to, who probably didn’t mean it would offend every single cis man out there.

[Rushy]

I like how the wording suggests you didn’t notice until you were already an adult. 

True. But the point I was trying to make is that I don’t really understand why anyone would care about identifying as something or other beyond the social pressure to conform to the cultural stereotypes that accompany your your physical sex. 

I mean, from my limited perspective, if you’re a man who feels like a woman (i.e. a man who associates with what society regards as feminine traits and values), then wouldn’t you just be a really feminine man? Why’s it gotta be more complicated than that? 

Isn’t the whole reason why we still have man/woman labels is just to tell us which body parts we have? This isn’t the Middle Ages where men and women were isolated from the lifestyles granted to the opposite sex. Men and women can do and behave in every-which-way that women and men do. So why bother tampering with the labels in this day and age? 

I’m not trying to be offensive, I’m just genuinely confused by this. 

[Warbodog]

People on this forum shared their perspective on how it matters to them in their own lives the last time you asked for clarification, but I guess that wasn’t enough.

[Flap Jack]

I’m not trying to be offensive, I’m just genuinely confused by this. 

Your confusion may be genuine, but it doesn’t sound like you want to become un-confused or to learn about the rich tapestry that is the human experience of gender, it sounds like you just want to be validated. Well, denied, sorry. You’re entitled to have these opinions, but we’re not obliged to pretend that they’re borne of anything other than ignorance.

But I’d be curious to know if your “I don’t have a gender, I just know what bits I’ve got” perspective would hold if put under any kind of pressure. E.g. if you’d be unbothered by being persistently misgendered on sight.

[Rushy]

People on this forum shared their perspective on how it matters to them in their own lives the last time you asked for clarification, but I guess that wasn’t enough.

No, I’m asking for it in more detail please. I’m curious. 

I’m not trying to be offensive, I’m just genuinely confused by this. 
Your confusion may be genuine, but it doesn’t sound like you want to become un-confused or to learn about the rich tapestry that is the human experience of gender, it sounds like you just want to be validated. Well, denied, sorry. You’re entitled to have these opinions, but we’re not obliged to pretend that they’re borne of anything other than ignorance.
But I’d be curious to know if your “I don’t have a gender, I just know what bits I’ve got” perspective would hold if put under any kind of pressure. E.g. if you’d be unbothered by being persistently misgendered on sight.

I’m not sure how validation is even relevant here. Validation would imply I was looking for supporters or followers in something. All I did was ask for clarification, and I made it clear that I am not even confident in the statement that I made. You can say “your ideas are dead wrong and here’s why-” and I’d be fine with that. 

I would be curious to see how I respond in pressure. The Estonian language is not gendered. I guess it would depend on why people would be misgendering me. If it was a derogatory thing (for example “you’ve got the muscles of a girl”), I’d be annoyed, but more so for the insult than the actual misgendering. But if it was just because, I don’t think I would care too much. 

[Flap Jack]

All I did was ask for clarification, and I made it clear that I am not
even confident in the statement that I made. You can say “your ideas are
dead wrong and here’s why-” and I’d be fine with that. 

Well, if you’re genuinely curious then that’s good, but there are a couple of reasons why it comes across otherwise.

The first is that you frame your perspective as being the straightforward and logical one, which means it reads less as “if I’m wrong, tell me why” and more as “how is it that other people end up being so wrong about it?”.

The other is that Gender Studies is an entire field of education, and the internet is full of people who have written about if free of charge, trans people especially. So if you are fascinated by this topic then it would be natural to look up this information and not use the “hope to be corrected on a Red Dwarf forum” method.

I would be curious to see how I respond in pressure. The Estonian
language is not gendered. I guess it would depend on why people would be
misgendering me. If it was a derogatory thing (for example “you’ve got
the muscles of a girl”), I’d be annoyed, but more so for the insult than
the actual misgendering. But if it was just because, I don’t think I
would care too much. 

If it really wouldn’t bother you at all, then it’s at least possible you’re nonbinary in some way… ? But the important thing to know is just that your feelings about your own gender are valid, but a lot of other people – cis and trans alike – feel much more strongly aligned with their gender identities, and it’s no less valid.

[Rushy]

  The first is that you frame your perspective as being the straightforward and logical one

Well, yes… otherwise it wouldn’t be my perspective. I think we all believe ourselves to be straightforward and logical, even the ones who like Emohawk. But we’re also open to the possibility of being wrong, which is why we keep our minds open to other ways of thinking. 

The other is that Gender Studies is an entire field of education, and the internet is full of people who have written about if free of charge, trans people especially. So if you are fascinated by this topic then it would be natural to look up this information and not use the “hope to be corrected on a Red Dwarf forum” method.

I fully see your point, but there is value in seeking out info from the general public in a casual setting to see how they feel about something. An organic response can often provide key information that a scientific breakdown would miss. 

But the important thing to know is just that your feelings about your own gender are valid, but a lot of other people – cis and trans alike – feel much more strongly aligned with their gender identities, and it’s no less valid.

Yeah, as I said, I respect that people have their gender identities and I won’t argue them on it because it’s important to them. It’s just the purpose that eludes me. I don’t see my status as a man as part of my identity, but simply a default physical condition I was born with. My identity is isolated to my name, my vocation, my interests. 

[Technopeasant]

The Estonian language is not gendered.

Point of fact, neither is English.

My identity is isolated to my name, my vocation, my interests.

[Ian Symes]

How about we don’t resurrect threads from two and a half years ago in order to serve up lukewarm takes on divisive, emotive topics that have barely anything to do with the conversation that finished thirty odd months ago? I respect that some people do that, but I’ve never been one of them and I don’t really understand the point. 

[Ian Symes]

Although, I’ve just discovered that the person Rushy is quoting from two and a half years ago is me, and the take is now even more nonsensical.

We were talking about how Series VIII defines gender by the presence or otherwise of a penis. Say you had a terrible accident, and your dangly bit was severed. Are you no longer a man? According to Series VIII logic (which is the only thing that was being discussed in the first place) you would in fact become a woman overnight. Would you be happy with that? Or is gender identity actually more nuanced than that after all?

[Dave]

According to Series VIII logic (which is the only thing that was being discussed in the first place) you would in fact become a woman overnight. Would you be happy with that? Or is gender identity actually more nuanced than that after all?

The silly thing is that even if you completely ignore the gender aspect and focus solely on sex, it’s a nonsensical classification – because (no matter what Nursie from Blackadder II would have you believe), a boy without a winkle isn’t a girl by default, and women as a sex aren’t defined by what they don’t have, they would have to have girl-bits or boy-bits to qualify either way (otherwise you could equally qualify Kryten as a man for not having female physical attributes).

Ultimately, Kryten is a mechanoid and having the resurrected crew attempt to define him by either biological sex or gender is a nonsense idea (and only exists so he can be paired with Kochanski). Even if he’s more advanced a robot than they’re used to from their era, they can still understand the robot concept as they have skutters and vending machines and toilets that wouldn’t be assigned a sex or gender.

[Nick R]

Ultimately, Kryten is a mechanoid and having the resurrected crew attempt to define him by either biological sex or gender is a nonsense idea

Wait… are you saying that something in series VIII wasn’t very well thought out?

[Flap Jack]

Yeah, as I said, I respect that people have their gender identities and I
won’t argue them on it because it’s important to them. It’s just the
purpose that eludes me.

OK, I think this is the nub of why your take comes across as more declarative than curious. Because you set it up so that an explanation isn’t sufficient unless it involves some kind of logical purpose. Well, there isn’t really a logical purpose to gender. But regardless society is divided down these lines, and people innately feel which group they best belong to.

The fact is that many aspects of the human personality lack a “purpose” without their validity being doubted like this. What’s the purpose of having a favourite colour? Of course there are plenty of people who don’t have any colour preferences at all and make their clothing choices purely based on comfort and price, but you don’t tend to hear these people being baffled by the very concept.

[Dave]

Well, there isn’t really a logical purpose to gender. But regardless society is divided down these lines, and people innately feel which group they best belong to.

I do understand people feeling genuinely confused about this, because while for a long time sex and gender were used somewhat interchangeably they’ve now become largely treated as more separate things, with added confusion generated when the ideas converge again – for example in conversations about whether gender should determine rights of access to spaces that have historically been defined on the basis of sex (to bring it back to the Kryten example).

Maybe they should have actually asked Kryten’s opinion on this rather than trying to determine such a complicated matter purely externally.

The fact is that many aspects of the human personality lack a “purpose” without their validity being doubted like this. What’s the purpose of having a favourite colour? Of course there are plenty of people who don’t have any colour preferences at all and make their clothing choices purely based on comfort and price, but you don’t tend to hear these people being baffled by the very concept.

This maybe muddies the water by making gender seem like an active choice, though, rather than something that is inherently felt as part of your identity – as opposed to just choosing a colour because you have a preference for it.

[Warbodog]

I’ve always been huefluid between blue and purple, I don’t limit myself.

[Dave]

I’ve always been huefluid between blue and purple, I don’t limit myself.

[Flap Jack]

This maybe muddies the water by making
gender seem like an active choice, though, rather than something that is
inherently felt as part of your identity – as opposed to just choosing a
colour because you have a preference for it.

You choose a favourite colour, but you don’t choose your preferences, you just have them.

It’s far from a 1:1 with gender, but it is an example of an aspect of one’s personality which is both self-determined and not based on some kind of universal logic. People don’t just say “my favourite colour is whichever one the colour experts say matches best with the natural colour of my hair and eyes, I’ll look it up later”.

I do understand people feeling genuinely confused about this, because
while for a long time sex and gender were used somewhat interchangeably
they’ve now become largely treated as more separate things, with added
confusion generated when the ideas converge again – for example in
conversations about whether gender should determine rights of access to
spaces that have historically been defined on the basis of sex (to bring
it back to the Kryten example).

The thing is that if gender and sex were used interchangeably, then rights to access to spaces weren’t specifically determined on the basis of sex. And even by the “sex is physiological, gender is mental” definition, they were absolutely determined based on gender. As much as the current government are trying to make it happen, at no point in the past were leisure centres sex-testing you to decide which changing room you should use.

The irony is that the divergence of sex and gender in language is being driven largely by transphobes, because they want to force a way for trans women to be “technically male” and trans men to be “technically female”. Even though in practice they use these categorisations in the social, gender sense, they pretend they don’t.

The reality is that sex is defined by a wide variety of physical characteristics, characteristics which can and do change. And a not insignificant part of transition is changing your sex! People will swap out a majority of their sex characteristics, but the gender criticals will still insist that their “true” sex is what those characteristics were in the past, or what they “ought” to be, or what they would have otherwise been. This could well be the most widely believed pseudoscience out there.

I’ve always been huefluid between blue and purple, I don’t limit myself.

Fun fact: there’s a webcomic by a trans artist which legitimately uses colour as analogy for gender. Just in case folks get the impression I’m being uniquely weird with this.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Webcomic/PillsThatMakeYouGreen

[sleepey]

According to Series VIII logic (which is the only thing that was being discussed in the first place) you would in fact become a woman overnight.

Is that actually series VIII logic though, or is it the in-fiction bureaucratic logic that’s clearly understood by the characters & audience to be so farcical that it doesn’t even merit much discussion? Like at what point does literally anyone endorse it or take it seriously as an idea?

Sure it comes off a bit crass to joke about now because it’s become such a specific line of attack, but when Kryten says “I’ve been classified as a woman because I don’t have a penis”, & Kochanski looks baffled & the audience laughs, to me that’s a heartening reminder that when people weren’t actively having their minds poisoned with that kind of thinking, they saw it for the nonsense it is.

[International Debris]

No, I’m asking for it in more detail please. I’m curious. 

I’m not trying to be offensive, I’m just genuinely confused by this.         

I mean I gave a pretty detailed and personal response last time you made this exact point, as did someone else, and you didn’t respond then and haven’t taken on board anything that was said, so it is a little hard to see this as curiosity. 

But again, in short: there’s no choice involved, there’s no decision to make one’s life more complicated – I’d rather be cis than trans because it was make my life a fuckload easier, but that’s not how it is. I’m a trans woman because deep down I know I’m a woman. I lived as a feminine man and as non-binary and they didn’t do anything to change the gnawing discomfort and disgust inside me. The thought of having to do that again fills me with despair. Living as a woman gives me a sense of confidence and inner peace that I’d never had before I came out – even though it puts me at personal danger in an increasingly hostile world.

So while there are countless studies and papers and everything out there that would back up my experiences and give reasoning, I’m not too fussed, as my own personal feelings are so strong that they do all the work for me.

And the reason you don’t understand is because you’re cis. You can’t possibly understand what gender dysphoria feels like, any more than I can comprehend how it must feel to actually be comfortable being a man. 

[Ian Symes]

I’m very glad about your newfound confidence and inner peace, ID, and sorry for what you’ve been through in order to find it. I’m also very happy that G&T is the type of place where people are comfortable sharing their experiences like this, knowing that they’ll get nothing but love and support from the community.

So Rushy, I can’t be sure what your intentions are so I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt here, but if ID’s response doesn’t answer your questions, I’d suggest that you’re not going to get the answers you’re after here, so best to have those discussions elsewhere in future.

[Warbodog]

[Flap Jack]

Is that actually series VIII logic though, or is it the in-fiction
bureaucratic logic that’s clearly understood by the characters &
audience to be so farcical that it doesn’t even merit much discussion?
Like at what point does literally anyone endorse it or take it seriously
as an idea?

It is open to interpretation, but in my opinion, yes it is the Series VIII logic.

Because the joke isn’t that it’s absurd to define someone’s gender by the presence or absence of a penis in general, the joke is that it’s absurd to apply this logic to a robot. It’s that the JMC are too stupid / rigidly bureaucratic to adjust their systems for androids, not that the systems also don’t make sense for humans.

The plot point does set up a more progressive implication – if we and the regular characters can plainly understand that Kryten is a man regardless of his lack of genitals, then why would the genitals be important for recognising the gender of human characters? – but to me that doesn’t feel intentional.

[Moonlight]

[sleepey]

It is open to interpretation, but in my opinion, yes it is the Series VIII logic.

But if the joke is about robots & doesn’t say anything about humans either way

And if extrapolating the concept to humans leads you to an implication that’s good & correct

Then at what point did series VIII actually take a dodgy position on it?

[Ridley]

Remember the old bent woman? That was Ian.

The inherent ridiculousness of Kryten being classified as a woman by lack of an Archie is typical Red Dwarf thumbing its nose at bureaucracy even if the handling is typical Red Dwarf VIII thumbing its nose at decency.

[International Debris]

I’m very glad about your newfound confidence and inner peace, ID, and sorry for what you’ve been through in order to find it. I’m also very happy that G&T is the type of place where people are comfortable sharing their experiences like this, knowing that they’ll get nothing but love and support from the community. 

Thank you, and yes, this always feels like a very safe and welcoming community, the very occasional trollish member aside – and the mod team always deal with them effectively. Honestly, I wouldn’t even be here if I didn’t feel like it was that kind of place.

[Flap Jack]

But if the joke is about robots & doesn’t say anything about humans either way

And if extrapolating the concept to humans leads you to an implication that’s good & correct

Then at what point did series VIII actually take a dodgy position on it?

But it does say something about humans, that’s my point. It says “this penis based system of gender classification works perfectly when applied to humans”.

Remember that Kryten being classified as a woman is just the punchline to him being made to do a series of medical tests which only apply to human biology. The joke isn’t that giving urine samples is silly, it’s that specifically trying to get a robot to give a urine sample is silly.

[Dave]

Yeah, it’s just “what would it be like to treat Kryten like a human prisoner”.

Of course, if he’d had his groinal attachment with him the story would have been totally different. In fact, given that it’s Series VIII, I’m surprised that wasn’t the punchline. 

[Jedi Comedian]

I wonder if there was a more practical reason for Kryten to be classified as a woman in Series VIII – they needed someone for Kochanski to have scenes with in prison, and he was the only one of the existing main characters where any argument at all (no matter how silly) could made for him being placed in the women’s section.

Doesn’t mean they don’t try to wring a lot of tired humour out of the premise, but I do think there’s a good chance it started from a place of story mechanics rather than “let’s do jokes about how silly it is for a man to do stereotypically feminine things”.

[Ridley]

The practical reason is that Naylor thought he could mine some humour from it, no?
From an in-universe perspective, it’s grim that the JMC and or Space Corps has went “Oh no, the android has become a person, if we reset it that’ll solve the paperwork.”

[Warbodog]

There are other droids in the prison who originated in Lister and Rimmer’s time. I was going to speculate about whether or not they had genitalia, but then realised the ramification that there might have been other robots aboard all along, if they survived the radiation leak like the Skutters. Unless the Skutters didn’t and Holly made more.

[Warbodog]

Sorry, I forgot Skutters are born, not made. And that’s not even VIII logic.

[Nick R]

The practical reason is that Naylor thought he could mine some humour from it, no?
From an in-universe perspective, it’s grim that the JMC and or Space Corps has went “Oh no, the android has become a person, if we reset it that’ll solve the paperwork.”

VIII never explains why the resurrected crew cancels the plan to factory reset Kryten, does it?

Lucas McLaren’s original recommendation to reset Kryten to factory settings happens in reality. Then the Data Doctor scene and Kryten’s recovery take place in the simulation. Then after they come back to the real world, the episode forgets about resetting Kryten, and instead sentences him to be thrown in prison with the others.

[Nick R]

There are other droids in the prison who originated in Lister and Rimmer’s time. I was going to speculate about whether or not they had genitalia, but then realised the ramification that there might have been other robots aboard all along, if they survived the radiation leak like the Skutters. Unless the Skutters didn’t and Holly made more.

Do Talkie Toaster and the vending machines count as droids that survived?

[Ridley]

Then the Data Doctor scene and Kryten’s recovery take place in the simulation. Then after they come back to the real world, the episode forgets about resetting Kryten, and instead sentences him to be thrown in prison with the others.

Which is lovely, isn’t it?

Maybe Floor 13 is where they shoved Crawford after Lister got bored. And Snacky.

[sleepey]

But it does say something about humans, that’s my point. It says “this penis based system of gender classification works perfectly when applied to humans”.

Does it?

Not just that it’s the standard applied by the JMC, but that it works? Perfectly?

[Flap Jack]

Does it?

Not just that it’s the standard applied by the JMC, but that it works? Perfectly?

… yes? If the text is “the JMC does things this way”, but there’s no commentary or jokes undercutting the idea actually in the show, then ultimately it’s just presenting it as something completely neutral and normal. As I mentioned, it’s just like all the other medical tests Kryten goes through. Just because the JMC are the ones testing urine samples, it doesn’t mean the show is subtly criticising the general practice of testing urine samples. I’d go as far as to say the show isn’t criticising prisoners wearing lilac and sleeping in bunk beds either.

[Technopeasant]

Just in case folks get the impression I’m being uniquely weird with this.

The amazing thing about the Internet was learning that no one is ever uniquely weird about anything. In some cases, it is also the horrifying thing about the Internet, but that is another story.

Of course, if he’d had his groinal attachment with him the story
would have been totally different. In fact, given that it’s Series VIII,
I’m surprised that wasn’t the punchline.

Lister refused to give it back to Kryten after Tikka.

I’d go as far as to say the show isn’t criticising prisoners wearing lilac and sleeping in bunk beds either.

Although it should.

[sleepey]

… yes? If the text is “the JMC does things this way”, but there’s no commentary or jokes undercutting the idea actually in the show, then ultimately it’s just presenting it as something completely neutral and normal.

No, if the text says “the JMC does things this way”, & there’s nothing modifying that, then that’s all it’s said. You’ve conjured “works perfectly” out of thin air.

There is plenty modifying it of course, like that whole Kryten subplot it exists to serve in the first place. But then we’re just back at the first thing I said. Dickless man encounters flaw in dick-based policy. No one else interacts with the concept at all, it does one thing & it’s stupid & bad. Where is the ambiguity here.

[sleepey]

Sorry, I didn’t want to start an argument… I’ll shut up

[Flap Jack]

No, if the text says “the JMC does things this way”, & there’s
nothing modifying that, then that’s all it’s said. You’ve conjured
“works perfectly” out of thin air.

I think where we’re having issues is that you see the show not commenting on something as meaning that it’s saying “it could be good, it could be bad, who knows”, while I see it as saying “this is unremarkable because it’s normal, and normal is good”. You’ve maybe heard the adage about how taking a neutral stance is in fact siding with the status quo? That.

But the context makes it clearer in my opinion. The whole joke is that the JMC are applying human standards to a mechanoid (which doesn’t fully make sense given that “RESET TO FACTORY SETTINGS” is not an option for humans, but anyway). If Doug understood that segregating people based on their genitals was also oppressive and unscientific for humans, then he either wouldn’t have included this because it undermines the gag, or he would have explicitly worked that angle in.

Just to cite another similar example, in Krytie TV Kryten is made to shower, and the joke is once again that this is nonsensical because he’s a robot. Do you take it that this is the show taking a fully neutral stance on whether showering is good or not? That because it’s the incompetent and corrupt JMC orchestrating these shower sessions, that it’s open to interpretation whether or not washing yourself with soap and water is unscientific and dangerous? Is Doug actively distancing himself from revealing whether he’s pro germ theory or anti?

[Ben Saunders]

Guys… it’s Krytie TV. It’s Series VIII. It’s shit.

[Flap Jack]

Of course. Like 50% of the discourse on this site is about exactly how and why Series VIII is shit. Why mess with tradition?

[Moonlight]

Instead we should talk about why Back in the Red doesn’t make sense.

[Author]

Replies