# Why is the word "optimistic" always attached to Star Trek: TOS? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [February 2, 2020, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390 "2020-02-02T16:57:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2020, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/41 "2020-02-03T19:48:40Z")
> [@moojja](#): > > First of all, she was in the science department, so not a direct subordinate, or in the chain of command. Obviously he didn’t work with her or write her PPR. You’re using your own special definition of “chain of command.” When you’re the Commanding Officer (Captain in this case) _ **everyone** _ is in your chain of command. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2020, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/42 "2020-02-03T20:42:17Z")
> [@moojja](#): > > First of all, she was in the science department, so not a direct subordinate, or in the chain of command. Obviously he didn’t work with her or write her PPR. And from the eps. she was interested. She was a crew member on his ship. She was his subordinate. He had authority over her. The fact that she was interested doesn’t excuse any behavior by him. > [@](#): > > And in TNG, Picard also dated a science officer, so per the Starfleet Officer’s code, it seems to be fine. One of his own crew? And if it was OK, why was Kirk so embarrassed by it? > [@](#): > > I have more trouble with the Reboot, where Spock dated (on/off) Uhura. As she does seem to be in the chain of command. If she was in Spock’s chain of command (as First Officer) then Noel would be in Kirk’s chain of command. > [@](#): > > Yet again, he was prisoner in both situation. In _Wink of an Eye_, it was obvious he was trying to escape. Given the plot, he was captured to be a sex slave/sperm donor. I wouldn’t consider him to be reprehensible in that case, but he certainly had a big smile on his face afterward. He was not coerced by her into having sex.😃 > [@](#): > > If we go by what was aired alone. He was never shown to have anything to do with the slave Dursilla outside of a smile when she served him. By that time he was already a captive, and was making nice with the Roman master. What? Again, I don’t think you’ve watched the episode recently. In the episode Kirk is ushered into a luxurious room where Drusilla is waiting. She tells him “I am Proconsul’s slave Drusilla. But for this evening I am told I am your slave. Command me.” Kirk thinks it’s a trick, but she says “I’ve never lied to one who owns me.” She serves Kirk food and drink, and tells him “I am ordered to please you.” She then kisses him, and he returns the kiss enthusiastically. The shot then pans up to show an oil lamp burning. It fades out, and when it fades back in the lamp has burned out. The shot pans back down to show Kirk sleeping alone in a bed. This is obvious standard movie/TV code for “they had sex for hours and hours but we’re only allowed to hint at it.” Afterward, the Pronconsul tells Kirk that since he is to die soon “as a man,” he gave him some last hours of pleasure “as a man.” Kirk says “I appreciate it.” In this case, Kirk knew she was a slave, and acting under orders. There’s no indication that he responds to her in order to please his captors, nor as part of plot to escape. And he thanks her master for her services afterward. He simply took advantage of the situation without ever asking Drusilla if she actually wanted to have sex with him. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2020, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/43 "2020-02-03T22:48:02Z")
Now that I’m home I can discuss more coherently (I hope) > [@Colibri](#): > > She was a crew member on his ship. She was his subordinate. He had authority over her. The fact that she was interested doesn’t excuse any behavior by him. Absolutely - regardless of whether Kirk knew she was a member of his crew, he violated regulations by engaging in a social activity with her. If he didn’t know, it’s merely a violation of the spirit of the regulations (but still detrimental to disciple) - if he knew, then he deliberately violated regulations (even if all they did was dance). > [@Colibri](#): > > She doesn’t beam aboard. She’s a crew member and already aboard. > > Kirk has requested an assistant with “psychiatric and penology” experience from McCoy to visit the Tantalus Penal Colony. When McCoy hears this, he smirks and rolls his eyes, evidently aware that his staff member with such experience has a history with Kirk. But Kirk doesn’t recognize her name when McCoy says he’s assigning “Dr. Noel.” > > Kirk is surprised and evidently embarrassed when he goes to the transporter and sees her already there. She introduces herself as “Dr. Helen Noel. We’ve met” in a sultry and meaningful voice. (After that comes the short sequence in the video link I posted). Kirk jumps out of the transporter and furiously tells Spock, “Tell McCoy she better check out as the best assistant I ever had,” evidently thinking McCoy is pranking him. He gets back in the transporter and they beam down, Kirk looking angry and Noel looking coy. Not the reactions you would expect if he thought she was a passenger and had merely shared an innocent dance with her. I admit the fantasy sequence shows they didn’t actually snog (though it also shows they both wanted to), but it seems that they did more than dance (and it was public enough that McCoy was aware of it.) Ah. I am not suggesting that Kirk learned that Noel was a crew member at the moment Noel turned up to beam down to the prison. I’m suggesting that shortly after the dance, Kirk learned that he had inadvertently violated regulations - which Kirk (the man who even under the influence of the Naked Time molecule said that he’s not allowed to notice his yeoman) would regard as highly embarrassing. That’s why he’s mad at McCoy - because (as you said) he thinks McCoy is pranking him, by reminding him of his faux pas. The idea that Kirk violated regulations on purpose completely removes any justification for embarrassment - iff Kirk doesn’t worry about violating regulations by dancing with a subordinate (or anything else), what is there to be embarrassed about? But I’m not defending Kirk against any and all accusations. Your argument that Kirk’s behavior with Drusilla was vile is absolutely correct. Kirk evidently has different standards for how he treats Starfleet personnel and how he treats other women. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2020, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/44 "2020-02-03T22:50:07Z")
What regulations? I don’t recall any mention of regulations. ---
**Author:** ![moojja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e5b9ba/32.png) [@moojja](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/moojja)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2020, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/45 "2020-02-03T22:59:59Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > She was a crew member on his ship. She was his subordinate. He had authority over her. The fact that she was interested doesn’t excuse any behavior by him. > > One of his own crew? And if it was OK, why was Kirk so embarrassed by it? I might not have remember Drusilla correctly. But in TNG, Picard did date a Science officer, and then broke up with her as he felt it compromised his command, (he had trouble putting her in harms way, even through in the end he did), not because it was against regulations. I think the crew even discussed it. Kirk could be embarrassed b/c it’s against his own code that he violated. Also Kirk doesn’t work with Noel on a day to day, while Spock does with Uhura. And in the Reboot, Spock was her instructor, with power over her posting. He initially placed her on USS Yorktown instead of Enterprise because he was afraid to it would show partisan. Frankly if I was her, when he gave that explanation on the posting, I would have dumped him on the spot. ---
**Author:** ![Zyada](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zyada/32/3028_2.png) [@Zyada](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zyada)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/46 "2020-02-04T00:08:58Z")
Y’all are arguing whether Kirk was a horndog, and that’s not where the misogyny lies in Star Trek, especially TOS: [https://screenrant.com/terrible-moments-for-women-in-star-trek/](https://screenrant.com/terrible-moments-for-women-in-star-trek/) The one most memorable for me is that in TOS, women **couldn’t** be captains. Now, that’s how you should realize how misogynistic TOS was. It improved somewhat by TNG, but there are still stories of how the ST franchise was screwing over the female case in TNG ---
**Author:** ![Dale\_Sams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/779978/32.png) [@Dale\_Sams](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dale_Sams)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/47 "2020-02-04T01:43:01Z")
> [@Zyada](#): > > Y’all are arguing whether Kirk was a horndog, and that’s not where the misogyny lies in Star Trek, especially TOS: > > [https://screenrant.com/terrible-moments-for-women-in-star-trek/](https://screenrant.com/terrible-moments-for-women-in-star-trek/) > > The one most memorable for me is that in TOS, women **couldn’t** be captains. Now, that’s how you should realize how misogynistic TOS was. It improved somewhat by TNG, but there are still stories of how the ST franchise was screwing over the female case in TNG 1. Alien society. What happened to that progressive respect for other societies and cultures? 2. Christ…the wonderful empowering DISCO still does this and has every woman on the show weeping at the drop of a hat. (Well…not Georgiou or the Admiral.) I agree with the ones Im not mentioning but really agree with 8) Was that part of the plan??? For Spock to seduce the Romulan Commander? 1. Are we not going to mention that Lester was nuts??? And that after the capitol punishment schenanigans she gets up to…including attempted murder, Kirk just lets her run off with her conspirator. ---
**Author:** ![Dale\_Sams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/779978/32.png) [@Dale\_Sams](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dale_Sams)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/48 "2020-02-04T01:45:36Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > What regulations? I don’t recall any mention of regulations. The Admiral is well aware of the regulations. ---
**Author:** ![Dale\_Sams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/779978/32.png) [@Dale\_Sams](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dale_Sams)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/49 "2020-02-04T01:48:35Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > She was a crew member on his ship. She was his subordinate. He had authority over her. The fact that she was interested doesn’t excuse any behavior by him. > > One of his own crew? And if it was OK, why was Kirk so embarrassed by it? > > If she was in Spock’s chain of command (as First Officer) then Noel would be in Kirk’s chain of command. > > I wouldn’t consider him to be reprehensible in that case, but he certainly had a big smile on his face afterward. He was not coerced by her into having sex.😃 > > What? Again, I don’t think you’ve watched the episode recently. In the episode Kirk is ushered into a luxurious room where Drusilla is waiting. She tells him “I am Proconsul’s slave Drusilla. But for this evening I am told I am your slave. Command me.” Kirk thinks it’s a trick, but she says “I’ve never lied to one who owns me.” She serves Kirk food and drink, and tells him “I am ordered to please you.” She then kisses him, and he returns the kiss enthusiastically. The shot then pans up to show an oil lamp burning. It fades out, and when it fades back in the lamp has burned out. The shot pans back down to show Kirk sleeping alone in a bed. This is obvious standard movie/TV code for “they had sex for hours and hours but we’re only allowed to hint at it.” Afterward, the Pronconsul tells Kirk that since he is to die soon “as a man,” he gave him some last hours of pleasure “as a man.” Kirk says “I appreciate it.” > > In this case, Kirk knew she was a slave, and acting under orders. There’s no indication that he responds to her in order to please his captors, nor as part of plot to escape. And he thanks her master for her services afterward. He simply took advantage of the situation without ever asking Drusilla if she actually wanted to have sex with him. Maybe he thought she’d be punished? I dunno…and i know it won’t matter that much but Kirk did expect to die the next day. Maybe Kirk spent all night discussing 23rd century philosophers. ---
**Author:** ![outlierrn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/outlierrn/32/3005_2.png) [@outlierrn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/outlierrn)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/50 "2020-02-04T02:40:52Z")
> [@moojja](#): > > Re-watching the older series, by our standard of consent, it’s amazing the amt. of times Kirk was raped. Well, that’s easily fodder for a whole thread, IMHO, but I would certainly say The Dohlman of Elas counts. The ST:ENT episode Unexpected is pretty bad as well, IIRC. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/51 "2020-02-04T03:07:38Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > What regulations? I don’t recall any mention of regulations. Sorry - I’m using “regulations” for “whatever rules Starfleet has that are equivalent to the basic rules used in militaries to prevent superior officers from taking advantage of underlings.” This story at “This American Life” talks about the non-fraternization rules on aircraft carriers [https://www.thisamericanlife.org/206/transcript](https://www.thisamericanlife.org/206/transcript) “He explains that when new crew members arrive for duty on the Stennis, he personally gives the speech reiterating Navy policy on male-female relationships, a policy he sums up for them as no dating. A date, he tells them, is as simple as two people walking side by side closely, heads leaning together and talking. A date is when you sit too near each other. You should be a minimum, he tells them, of two butt-widths apart. When he spots crew members sitting closer than that, he’ll ask them if it’s a date, and when of course they say no, he’ll tell them, well then make sure it doesn’t look like a date.” Fraternization means more than romantic interest, by the way - any strong friendship that gives the impression of eroding the distinction between ranks is prohibited [https://www.cpf.navy.mil/employees/fraternization-policy/](https://www.cpf.navy.mil/employees/fraternization-policy/) and I suspect this applies most strongly to a Captain (note that Picard didn’t play poker with the rest of the crew (until the end of the series), and Kirk didn’t hang out in the rec room to sing with Spock and Uhura) (and he is closest to McCoy - someone who is not a line officer). P.S. I meant to mention above that just wearing a Starfleet uniform and being on the Enterprise doesn’t put someone in Kirk’s chain of command - the Enterprise has visitors from time to time who are Star Fleet, but not part of the Enterprise’s crew (Commodore Mendez for example). ---
**Author:** ![Dale\_Sams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/779978/32.png) [@Dale\_Sams](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dale_Sams)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/52 "2020-02-04T03:15:48Z")
Out of all the lines of discussion of TOS we’ve belabored forever…I don’t think we’ve talked about fraternization (Except Picards)…Im here for it. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/53 "2020-02-04T03:17:40Z")
Starfleet is not the contemporary American military. We have seen so many differences in the way they operate that I don’t think real life U.S. military rules form a valid basis for assumptions about Starfleet. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 7:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/54 "2020-02-04T07:24:30Z")
The steady background of misogyny in TOS is evident in a great many episodes, simply in the fact that the alien females are always dressed in skimpy clothing, much like most of the [female comic-book superheroes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lynda_Carter_Wonder_Woman.JPG). However evil and mean and bad-ass they are, they are almost always portrayed as some kind of sex kittens. ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/55 "2020-02-04T13:05:05Z")
It’s a good point to note that using U. S. military regulations to judge yesterday’s (late 1960s conduct) is problematic at best and certainly fails the presentism test. So by today’s (2020) standard, Kirk would fail one test and probably pass another. If she was indeed part of the crew in any capacity, he’s out of line. It has nothing to do with evaluations, or how often he sees her etc. She’s part of the crew, she’s in his chain of command, she’s off limits. Period. If he’s a senior Officer, out and about town, and he meets a mid grade Officer doctor not on his staff or command, and they hook up (with both being single) it’s not a big deal and nothing will happen if they are discrete. Now how this would have been viewed in 1967, I’m not sure. Part of the problem would have been that there weren’t all that many females in the military then. I’d guess it was still at the very least frowned upon, but I can’t image that he’d be sent packing by any stretch. If she was on his ship, even in 1967, I still think it would have be way out of line and he would have been told to knock it off in no uncertain terms. By the same 1960’s standards, out in town not in the same chain of command? Not an issue. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/56 "2020-02-04T13:14:04Z")
> [@spifflog](#): > > It’s a good point to note that using U. S. military regulations to judge yesterday’s (late 1960s conduct) 1960s regulations don’t apply either. This is a fictional fantasy setting. We can’t make those kinds of assumptions. ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/57 "2020-02-04T14:02:36Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > 1960s regulations don’t apply either. This is a fictional fantasy setting. We can’t make those kinds of assumptions. I’d disagree. You (and Roddenberry) want to have your cake and eat it too. You put the Star Trek universe in a military setting. You have phasers and photon torpedoes, phaser rifles and mortars. Military ranks, military uniforms, military courts and military regulations. You can’t then have a military issue and shout “nope, fantasy!!!” Roddenberry was a product of the military, as were many people in their prime in the mid-1960s. WWII was just 20 years ago, and many of men in their prime, in their mid-40s had been in the military, Roddenberry included. Star Trek worked because they lived in a fantasy world rooted in a world we were still familiar within a context that we could understand. We knew when the characters were right and when they acted wrong. Without that element, Star Trek would have failed. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/58 "2020-02-04T14:23:42Z")
> [@spifflog](#): > > I’d disagree. You (and Roddenberry) want to have your cake and eat it too. You put the Star Trek universe in a military setting. You have phasers and photon torpedoes, phaser rifles and mortars. Military ranks, military uniforms, military courts and military regulations. You can’t then have a military issue and shout “nope, fantasy!!!” > > Roddenberry was a product of the military, as were many people in their prime in the mid-1960s. WWII was just 20 years ago, and many of men in their prime, in their mid-40s had been in the military, Roddenberry included. > > Star Trek worked because they lived in a fantasy world rooted in a world we were still familiar within a context that we could understand. We knew when the characters were right and when they acted wrong. Without that element, Star Trek would have failed. In fact, the Star Trek Writer’s Bible [https://www.bu.edu/clarion/guides/Star\_Trek\_Writers\_Guide.pdf](https://www.bu.edu/clarion/guides/Star_Trek_Writers_Guide.pdf), written by Roddenberry, explicitly says that the behavior of the crew should be comparable to 1960s military behavior. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/59 "2020-02-04T16:55:27Z")
> [@Andy\_L](#): > > P.S. I meant to mention above that just wearing a Starfleet uniform and being on the Enterprise doesn’t put someone in Kirk’s chain of command - the Enterprise has visitors from time to time who are Star Fleet, but not part of the Enterprise’s crew (Commodore Mendez for example). Actually, as Commanding Officer of the vessel, Kirk would have authority over _anyone_ on the _Enterprise_, whether they were part of the crew or not, or even whether they were military or civilian (with the possible exception of flag officers who outranked him, such as admirals). (This is based on[US Navy regulations\*.)](https://www.secnav.navy.mil/doni/US%20Navy%20Regulations/Chapter%2010%20-%20Precedence,%20Authority%20and%20Command.pdf) It’s actually entirely irrelevant whether Noel was on board as a passenger or a member of the crew; as enlisted personnel in uniform she was clearly under his authority as Commanding Officer and thus should have been off limits. The issue of whether she was a passenger or not is a red herring. (Even aside from that, it makes no sense that Kirk would assume that some random woman he met on board was a passenger. The _Enterprise_ did not routinely transport passengers. When it did, they were small parties on some particular mission or assignment. It would be likely that Kirk would have been introduced to any such passengers. Even if he hadn’t, if he met someone who he thought might be part of that contingent he would no doubt find out their status just in the course of small talk. Surely he would say something like “How do you like the ship?,” or “How do you feel about your mission?” Even if Starfleet Regulations are different from modern navy ones, he would have been negligent if he didn’t determine that she _wasn’t_ in his chain of command. The default assumption for uniformed personnel aboard his ship should have been that she was.) > [@](#): > > \*1004. Precedence of an Officer in Command. > **An officer,** either of the line or of a staff corps, detailed to command by competent authority or who has succeeded to command, **has precedence over all officers or other persons attached to the command of whatever rank and whether they are of the line or of a staff corps.** > > 1. Authority of Officers Embarked as Passengers. > 2. The commanding officer of a ship or aircraft, not a flagship, with a flag officer eligible for command at sea embarked as a passenger, shall be subject to the orders of such flag officer. **Other officers embarked as passengers, senior to the commanding officer, shall have no authority over the commanding officer.** Bolding mine. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2020, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390/60 "2020-02-04T17:27:06Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > Actually, as Commanding Officer of the vessel, Kirk would have authority over _anyone_ on the _Enterprise_, whether they were part of the crew or not, or even whether they were military or civilian (with the possible exception of flag officers who outranked him, such as admirals). (This is based on[US Navy regulations\*.)](https://www.secnav.navy.mil/doni/US%20Navy%20Regulations/Chapter%2010%20-%20Precedence,%20Authority%20and%20Command.pdf) It’s actually entirely irrelevant whether Noel was on board as a passenger or a member of the crew; as enlisted personnel in uniform she was clearly under his authority as Commanding Officer and thus should have been off limits. The issue of whether she was a passenger or not is a red herring. > > (Even aside from that, it makes no sense that Kirk would assume that some random woman he met on board was a passenger. The _Enterprise_ did not routinely transport passengers. When it did, they were small parties on some particular mission or assignment. It would be likely that Kirk would have been introduced to any such passengers. Even if he hadn’t, if he met someone who he thought might be part of that contingent he would no doubt find out their status just in the course of small talk. Surely he would say something like “How do you like the ship?,” or “How do you feel about your mission?” Even if Starfleet Regulations are different from modern navy ones, he would have been negligent if he didn’t determine that she _wasn’t_ in his chain of command. The default assumption for uniformed personnel aboard his ship should have been that she was.) > > Bolding mine. Thank you. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-word-optimistic-always-attached-to-star-trek-tos/847390.md?page=4)