Discovery Season 2

[hamishspence]

And then the Federation went on to invent the Holodeck, which is exactly the same as the Talosians' powers, only technological rather than mental.

Which is probably why, in the late TNG era trek EU, the death penalty thing is gone. That, or the Talosians have finally gone extinct and there is no risk of being being enslaved by them anymore.

https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/General_Order_7

[Legato Endless]

So, yeah, zero regrets.

Eh, Michael is a polarized character in the Fandom, but she doesn't fit the original Ensign Mary Sue archetype. She's not unusually young for her rank (she's 30 at the series start as a commander) or universally loved. Her relationship with her family is far too troubled, and her ruthlessness and bigotry cause her mistakes enough to avoid the over idealized vibe.

Sure, she is highly accomplished, but not unusually so in a franchise where any intellectual star fleet officer is a required polymath, and every main character within that archetype an exemplar surpassing their peers. If you want the closest approximatation to the original Mary Sue, Chris Pine's Kirk is the best canonical example for a persistent lead character.

(Has a genius intellect and finishes the Academy a year faster than normal, it's his destiny to be in command as confirmed by a time traveler, everyone likes him enough after one adventure to jump him from Cadet to Captain, irresistible to the opposite sex, Spock is basically in love with him, he dies heroically to save the crew and then gets resurrected...etc)

I get why Michael's divisive, but a classic Mary Sue wouldn't receive the kind of complaints about whether she's too caustically belligerent to be a likeable protagonist.

[hamishspence]

Sure, she is highly accomplished, but not unusually so in a franchise where any intellectual star fleet officer is a required polymath, and every main character within that archetype an exemplar surpassing their peers. If you want the closest approximatation to the original Mary Sue, Chris Pine's Kirk is the best canonical example for a persistent lead character.

(Has a genius intellect and finishes the Academy a year faster than normal, it's his destiny to be in command as confirmed by a time traveler, everyone likes him enough after one adventure to jump him from Cadet to Captain, irresistible to the opposite sex, Spock is basically in love with him, he dies heroically to save the crew and then gets resurrected...etc)

Yup - even the Shatnerverse (which was really bad about Sue-ifying Kirk) didn't go quite that far, at least with regards to Kirk's time at the Academy. Kirk & Spock's first adventure together in Starfleet Academy: Collision Course, makes Kirk far less "accomplished" - none of this "instant captain" for Shatner.

[Cikomyr]

Eh, Michael is a polarized character in the Fandom, but she doesn't fit the original Ensign Mary Sue archetype. She's not unusually young for her rank (she's 30 at the series start as a commander) or universally loved. Her relationship with her family is far too troubled, and her ruthlessness and bigotry cause her mistakes enough to avoid the over idealized vibe.

Sure, she is highly accomplished, but not unusually so in a franchise where any intellectual star fleet officer is a required polymath, and every main character within that archetype an exemplar surpassing their peers. If you want the closest approximatation to the original Mary Sue, Chris Pine's Kirk is the best canonical example for a persistent lead character.

(Has a genius intellect and finishes the Academy a year faster than normal, it's his destiny to be in command as confirmed by a time traveler, everyone likes him enough after one adventure to jump him from Cadet to Captain, irresistible to the opposite sex, Spock is basically in love with him, he dies heroically to save the crew and then gets resurrected...etc)

I get why Michael's divisive, but a classic Mary Sue wouldn't receive the kind of complaints about whether she's too caustically belligerent to be a likeable protagonist.

But Kirk is a dude. So no one will whine about a superpowers dude character.

I never heard anyone whine that Goku was always OP either. Or Luke Skywalker. Or Anakin. Or Superman.

[Lacuna Caster]

But Kirk is a dude. So no one will whine about a superpowers dude character.

I never heard anyone whine that Goku was always OP either. Or Luke Skywalker. Or Anakin. Or Superman.

Oh, I have had all manner of complaints about Superman's power-levels wrecking the logic of his setting, and one or two with Luke as well. Not really into Dragonball, so can't comment there.

[Rynjin]

But Kirk is a dude. So no one will whine about a superpowers dude character.

I never heard anyone whine that Goku was always OP either. Or Luke Skywalker. Or Anakin. Or Superman.

Wot

Literally the most common complaint about Goku is that he always pulls a new power out of his ass to save the day instead of one of the other cast EVER getting to do something useful.

Superman is always touted as "boring" because he's too powerful for anything to realistically challenge him without breaking the limits of suspension of disbelief.

People have complained about everything coming easy to Anakin, though mostly because he's so whiny.

Luke kind gets a free pass since him being a big cliche was kind of the point of the series' narrative structure.

The criteria are often different but the complaints are usually the same.

It really boils down to "they're too good at what they do with too little effort and too few people question them on their motives or actions even when they really should".

[Darth Ultron]

Do tell what you think is not "Star Trek"?

The show is fa too dark and negative and does not even have a hint of anything positive or light.

So yeah, whenever someone says Discovery is 'not Star Trek,' I can't help but roll my eyes.

Except your comparing the setting details vs the pure evil immoral insanity of the show structure. To say a show is ''not Star Trek" because the space ship is blue is just beyond dumb. To say a show is dark and evil about a ship full of idiotic children murderhobos is not.

Just compare all the other Star Trek shows: good, classically moral characters; a positive view of the future, adult interpersonal relations and much more of a focus on a good story then crappy 'wow' gonzo special effects and stupid ''end of the Universe(again)" arcs.

For instance, DS9 had a pretty potent two-parter where a hawkish admiral orchestrated a secret coup d'etat under his sincere belief that the Federation was in imminent peril from the Dominion. This certainly went against the grain of Roddenberry's edict that such things wouldn't happen in his Star Fleet, but the story in part shows that that very assumption - that it can't happen here - is wishful thinking and people of good conscience have to actively defend their Democracy and basic rights especially in times of peril.

This is a great example. Note that is was NOT a Main Character that turned to the dark side, and the whole episode clearly makes the point that the evil admiral is WRONG. And the Main Characters don't win by fighting the admiral hand to hand (or with a sword) over a cliff and then slaughter him. Sisko used logic, and reason and other such good attributes to save the day. And it's not like ''humans how have lost their way and became evil" is something new....as there were plenty of them in Classic Star Trek(that happened under Roddenberry's watch).

"New Eden"

Spoiler free first reaction. This has to be the Trekkiest episode of Discovery we've gotten so far.

I agree. Too bad they can't make the WHOLE show more like this....

....oh, and come up with a bit of a new idea. The primitive Earth world has been done to death.

[Cikomyr]

The show is fa too dark and negative and does not even have a hint of anything positive or light.

Look, I don't want to put in doubt your judgement, but you hated everything about the series ever since there was the first leaked details about it. I don't see how you can even remotely try to start seeing
something positive about something you have been hard bent on hating for so long.

[Cikomyr]

Wot

Literally the most common complaint about Goku is that he always pulls a new power out of his ass to save the day instead of one of the other cast EVER getting to do something useful.

Superman is always touted as "boring" because he's too powerful for anything to realistically challenge him without breaking the limits of suspension of disbelief.

People have complained about everything coming easy to Anakin, though mostly because he's so whiny.

And yet, their power level or ease of skills/universal in-story charisma has never been the reason anyone would dislike the media in which they are depicted?

Because so many people have historically hated Superman. Right?

[Legato Endless]

Just compare all the other Star Trek shows: good, classically moral characters...adult interpersonal relations...

Ed Mercer, captain of the Orville, is a deliberately schlubby man with boundary issues commanding the crew of a comedy drama whose occasionally the object of jokes by the show. He is still far above last place of the captains in terms of maturity and competence because Archer exists and that is a low floor to clear.

[Rynjin]

And yet, their power level or ease of skills/universal in-story charisma has never been the reason anyone would dislike the media in which they are depicted?

Yes, it has. It's a big reason why post-Cell Saga DBZ and Super get the most flak. Because Goku keeps A.) inserting himself into a story he should by all rights be out of and B.) even when he actively makes things worse (such as by causing a universe annihilating tournament to begin because of his whim to fight strong people) people are just like "Oh, that's Goku for you" in universe.

It's frustrating, and people tend to like DB in spite of Goku rather than because of him, at least in the US.

Because so many people have historically hated Superman. Right?

...Yes. Past a certain point too many writers fan wanked him to the point a lot of people were turned off the character. Same with Batman. There are a thousand discussions on the internet about how boring Superman is and how much they hate him, just do a quick Google search.

The whole "people only dislike Michael because she's female" thing is bunk of the highest order; she's just not a good character, and grasping at the straw of "well it'd be okay if she was a Mary Sue if only she were a guy" is just silly. There are just as many guy characters that get flak for being a Stu as there are female ones, if only by virtue of there being more prominent male characters in media than female ones.

[zimmerwald1915]

The whole "people only dislike Michael because she's female" thing is bunk of the highest order

Of course! People dislike Michael because she's a black female

[Darth Ultron]

Look, I don't want to put in doubt your judgement, but you hated everything about the series ever since there was the first leaked details about it. I don't see how you can even remotely try to start seeing
something positive about something you have been hard bent on hating for so long.

Well, that is not how people work.

They had their chance with the season 2 reboot...and they are going down the same negative path.

Of course! People dislike Michael because she's a black female

My hate is more the ''wow, sudden sister of Spock with the copy paste Worf backstory" and the parts where she is a ''evil murderhobo".

[ImperiousLeader]

After rewatching, some other thoughts:

• I'm loving the snarky doctor.
• It's weird, but I think I prefer "General Order 1" to the "Prime Directive". Just like hearing it more.
• A lot of the usual primitive planet tropes were dodged. No paranoia, their faith was welcoming and open to discussion. I even like the logic of "well, we're all of different faiths and were rescued by divine intervention, so clearly we're all right?" that lead to their current religion.
• I'm glad we're getting more of the rest of the bridge crew. I enjoy the Michael Burnham show, but getting Owosekun on the away team, Detmer saying more than "Aye sir" ... more please.
• Speaking of Burnham, I am loving her relationship with Pike. She's still having trouble trusting, but her actions in this episode show how much she's grown from the beginning of the show.
• There are some really pretty shots of Discovery over this planet.

So, an odd thought, but one that's sticking with me: Is Discovery the hardest working crew in all the Trek series?

What I mean, is that we don't see a lot of the cast during down time. We've had countless dinners with Archer and Trip bro-ing out on poor T'Pol. Data and the rest of the Enterprise-D having many a concert or play. Worf on holiday. Holodeck antics.

This isn't to say Discovery hasn't had those moments, between the party that framed "Magic to Make the Sanest Man Go Mad", or Burnham and Tilly's morning run ... one of my favourite scenes from the first season, especially with the ship's computer offering commentary on their dietary choices. But we seem to spend much more time with Discovery on mission, and I'm not sure how much is perception or reality.

I agree. Too bad they can't make the WHOLE show more like this....

....oh, and come up with a bit of a new idea. The primitive Earth world has been done to death.

It's too different and why can't it be more original. We get it, Discovery can't win with you.

[Cikomyr]

"New Eden"

Spoiler free first reaction. This has to be the Trekkiest episode of Discovery we've gotten so far.

The episode as a whole was great. Not a bad moment, nothing dragging. No cliché easy bad twist of the locals that is just so tempting for hacks like Braga/Berman to do. They were just... Some people, with faith and doubts.

Saru is growing to be my favourite character.

[Cikomyr]

Well, that is not how people work.

That is exactly how people work

[JadedDM]

Well, it's how Darth Ultron works, anyway. He's made it very, very clear here and in other threads that putting women, people of color, LGBT or any other minority in the spotlight is 'pushing an agenda.' The only way DSC will ever earn his approval is if they replace the majority of the cast with white men.

Anyway, as for the episode, did anyone else get some strong SG-1 vibes from the whole story? The whole 'aliens transporting humans across the galaxy, and the humans then worshiping them as gods' thing, I mean. The main difference is that it was all done for benevolent reasons, not to enslave and subjugate them.

Also, not sure if it was intentional or not, but to piggyback on something ImperiousLeader brought up, the whole idea of the colonists merging their faiths into one religion, and still being openly tolerant toward other beliefs, is such a Federation thing to do. Which is weird, because the Federation did not exist yet when these people were taken from Earth, and in fact, they are from WW3, which is considered the lowest and darkest point of Earth history. It is almost like the writers were trying to say that those tolerant, benevolent leanings of of the 23rd century were always within us, even then. We just needed a chance to let them bloom. There's something quite optimistic about it.

[Cikomyr]

Anyway, as for the episode, did anyone else get some strong SG-1 vibes from the whole story? The whole 'aliens transporting humans across the galaxy, and the humans then worshiping them as gods' thing, I mean. The main difference is that it was all done for benevolent reasons, not to enslave and subjugate them.

Don't say that, you will give one more reason for Darth Ultron to call Discovery unoriginal when he isn't calling it "not Star Trek"

But I kind of see what you see. Except that the worship of the savior is... Accidental? The angel either had a reason to save these people, or it did it on a whim.

What's sure however is that the Light Signals are clearly meant to be a way to draw the Discovery where it is needed to achieve whatever purpose the intelligent design there holds.

By the way, Clark's Revised Third Law was a fantastic touch.

My Girlfriend and I have taken note of the Fortune Cookie message Pike saw in the first episode:

"Not every cage is a prison,
not every loss eternal"

Now, Jess first thought that this was a potential clue about the overall plot of the story. But..

"Not every cage is a prison"

That is so reminiscent of Pike's eventual fate, it almost made me uncomfortable.

Maybe the whole plot is about the Organians?

[Darth Ultron]

Thoughts on Episode One, Season Two:

*The Enterprise! Pike! Spock(soon)! Sigh...this just is the wrong way to go. Bad enough season one was all mentions of real Star Trek things to say ''nan nan, look our space show is real Star Trek". But to throw in all classic stuff...geee...why not just make Star Trek Ye Old Enterprise? How will Discovery ever find her footing with all this baggage? They way to do the show right is to keep all the other stuff in the background.

*Oh, so only Discovery can save the galaxy once again? Sigh, what lazy writing for a dumb plot. Why can't the crew just do 'normal' stuff? Why must it always be so huge and dramatic?

*Gee, the Roll Call was nice....but, you know that should have been in the first episode of season one. And maybe explain why the crew of the ship is all half Borg?

*Red Angels? Ok...sigh. Well...maybe might be something interesting. The Preservers maybe? Of course..sigh...Starfleet will ''classify" the season so it does not utterly ruin all the real Star Trek shows.

*Er, so the Enterprise blows a fuse for no reason? Wow...talk about lazy writing just to get rid of the ship. Why not just say ''the ship was baddy damaged at the battle of Vok by the klingons"? you know...use the shows history? But then....

*Ok...so...er....the Enterprise (and we'd guess all the other Constitution class ships, right?) were on Five Year Missions when the Super Awesome Klingon War starts. And Starfleet is just like ''oh, stay away...if you don't hear from us we are all dead and Earth is gone...good luck". What?

*So...Discovery just so happens to have ''space fighters" that can zip and zoom out of the ship (and are launched like Vipers). Yep, you got some heavy Star Wars here....but guess you gotta make your non-trek space show cool for the kidz.

*And....ok...near the end, Mikey is all immature and like ''I needs to go to the Enterprise''(for no reason). Idiot Pike is like ''ok-day, go look at the ship"(for no reason). So then Mikey goes over to the Enterprise...and BREAKS INTO SPOCKS PRIVATE QUARTERS!?! Why? He is only on leave from the ship. So why does Mikey break into his quarters and/or somehow get permission from Pike? Is this really a Starfleet rule: non-sort of-family members can come onto a ship and just go through anothers things? Sure, sure Mikey finds the super special to the plot data pad....BUT she did not know it was there BEFORE she went all creepy into Spock's quarters.

Episode 2:

*Wow I hate Engineer guy...wish he would transfer away...or die. And here he is ON DUTY playing with his memory dodad and being all lovey dovey over his lost guy. So, what he could not wait until he was off duty...like alone in his quarters? To have your love virtual fantasy while on duty is just asking to hurt or kill yourself...not to mention others or the ship.

*So yea, to make the show un Star Trek like they bring back the dumb mushroom drive!

*Yeea, we get to see...er Crew-member Three do something other then push a button and say 'yes captain". To bad season one could not take like...oh...five minutes to introduce the character. But then she is not important enough to be in the opening credits, right?

*So dumb Tilly takes a sample of the Plot Asteroid by herself? Sure the episode does point out this is dumb, but it's really really dumb. And did no one in the Main Shuttle Bay notice?

*The planet people merged all faiths into one? Hahahahahaha....

*This episode has the odd message that faith is more important then science. Er...what? That is an odd view for Star Trek and Hollywood.

*Ok....big plot point. So the planet of people IS covered by the Prime Directive. So....THAT would mean that if an Evil Asteroid shows up and will ''kill everyone on the planet in minutes"(and kill the away team too) THEN the Starfeet just sits back and DOES NOTHING. They don't zoom to the rescue.

[hamishspence]

The TOS (and before) era Prime Directive is a bit different in it's interpretation, from the TNG Prime Directive. It exists to protect pre-warp societies from exploitation by the Federation.

It is not an excuse for standing by and allowing sapient species to be reduced to extinction purely because "it was their destiny".

Indeed, the very first episode of Season One showed the protagonists intervening to prevent a village from dying from lack of water - while still doing their best to conceal their presence.

In the Trek EU, Enterprise-era fiction, the Prime Directive is being formulated, and when one character points out that later generations might use it as an excuse to stand by and let sapient species be destroyed, Archer, the main backer of the Prime Directive, says "But that would be sick".

[Cikomyr]

The TOS (and before) era Prime Directive is a bit different in it's interpretation, from the TNG Prime Directive. It exists to protect pre-warp societies from exploitation by the Federation.

It is not an excuse for standing by and allowing sapient species to be reduced to extinction purely because "it was their destiny".

Indeed, the very first episode of Season One showed the protagonists intervening to prevent a village from dying from lack of water - while still doing their best to conceal their presence.

In the Trek EU, Enterprise-era fiction, the Prime Directive is being formulated, and when one character points out that later generations might use it as an excuse to stand by and let sapient species be destroyed, Archer, the main backer of the Prime Directive, says "But that would be sick".

Fans of the original series would remember that Kirk violated many times to help cultures. Most notably argued that the PD was not a favorable outcome over the destruction of an entire civilization in "For the World is Hollow..."

I really don't see how Darth Ultron's comments is meant to be a demonstration that he gives a fair shake to Discovery. Seems he just invents more excuses to hate it.

[Maelstrom]

Thoughts on Episode One, Season Two:

*The Enterprise! Pike! Spock(soon)! Sigh...this just is the wrong way to go. Bad enough season one was all mentions of real Star Trek things to say ''nan nan, look our space show is real Star Trek". But to throw in all classic stuff...geee...why not just make Star Trek Ye Old Enterprise? How will Discovery ever find her footing with all this baggage? They way to do the show right is to keep all the other stuff in the background.

*Oh, so only Discovery can save the galaxy once again? Sigh, what lazy writing for a dumb plot. Why can't the crew just do 'normal' stuff? Why must it always be so huge and dramatic?

*Gee, the Roll Call was nice....but, you know that should have been in the first episode of season one. And maybe explain why the crew of the ship is all half Borg?

*Red Angels? Ok...sigh. Well...maybe might be something interesting. The Preservers maybe? Of course..sigh...Starfleet will ''classify" the season so it does not utterly ruin all the real Star Trek shows.

*Er, so the Enterprise blows a fuse for no reason? Wow...talk about lazy writing just to get rid of the ship. Why not just say ''the ship was baddy damaged at the battle of Vok by the klingons"? you know...use the shows history? But then....

*Ok...so...er....the Enterprise (and we'd guess all the other Constitution class ships, right?) were on Five Year Missions when the Super Awesome Klingon War starts. And Starfleet is just like ''oh, stay away...if you don't hear from us we are all dead and Earth is gone...good luck". What?

*So...Discovery just so happens to have ''space fighters" that can zip and zoom out of the ship (and are launched like Vipers). Yep, you got some heavy Star Wars here....but guess you gotta make your non-trek space show cool for the kidz.

*And....ok...near the end, Mikey is all immature and like ''I needs to go to the Enterprise''(for no reason). Idiot Pike is like ''ok-day, go look at the ship"(for no reason). So then Mikey goes over to the Enterprise...and BREAKS INTO SPOCKS PRIVATE QUARTERS!?! Why? He is only on leave from the ship. So why does Mikey break into his quarters and/or somehow get permission from Pike? Is this really a Starfleet rule: non-sort of-family members can come onto a ship and just go through anothers things? Sure, sure Mikey finds the super special to the plot data pad....BUT she did not know it was there BEFORE she went all creepy into Spock's quarters.

Episode 2:

*Wow I hate Engineer guy...wish he would transfer away...or die. And here he is ON DUTY playing with his memory dodad and being all lovey dovey over his lost guy. So, what he could not wait until he was off duty...like alone in his quarters? To have your love virtual fantasy while on duty is just asking to hurt or kill yourself...not to mention others or the ship.

*So yea, to make the show un Star Trek like they bring back the dumb mushroom drive!

*Yeea, we get to see...er Crew-member Three do something other then push a button and say 'yes captain". To bad season one could not take like...oh...five minutes to introduce the character. But then she is not important enough to be in the opening credits, right?

*So dumb Tilly takes a sample of the Plot Asteroid by herself? Sure the episode does point out this is dumb, but it's really really dumb. And did no one in the Main Shuttle Bay notice?

*The planet people merged all faiths into one? Hahahahahaha....

*This episode has the odd message that faith is more important then science. Er...what? That is an odd view for Star Trek and Hollywood.

*Ok....big plot point. So the planet of people IS covered by the Prime Directive. So....THAT would mean that if an Evil Asteroid shows up and will ''kill everyone on the planet in minutes"(and kill the away team too) THEN the Starfeet just sits back and DOES NOTHING. They don't zoom to the rescue.

All of that and you're OK with TOS? TNG? DS9? ENT? Take out the names and a few biased adjectives and you could be describing any of those, or pretty much any Sci-Fi/Fantasy show/movie out there

[zimmerwald1915]

In the Trek EU, Enterprise-era fiction, the Prime Directive is being formulated, and when one character points out that later generations might use it as an excuse to stand by and let sapient species be destroyed, Archer, the main backer of the Prime Directive, says "But that would be sick".

Bit on the nose there, Archer

[Legato Endless]

The Prime Directive has always wobbled depending on the writer from one episode to another. At its best it's an attempt to question colonialism, imperialism, and the pitfalls of well intentioned interventionism.

On the other side, you have examples like Phlox inventing but refusing to share a cure for a species faced with an extinction event, because the 'divine will/truth' of evolution means they have to figure it out for themselves. If they all die that's okay because that will leave a gap for another 'less evolved' species to maybe grow and take over.

[Lacuna Caster]

Of course! People dislike Michael because she's a black female

Oh, to be clear, it's entirely possible that some portion of the backlash against Discovery was and is grounded in simple racism/misogyny- I don't personally remember that Sisko and Janeway got similar blowback, but the internet was less of a thing back then, so maybe I just missed the commotion. But making Michael herself an insistently shrill and ragingly murderous specieist bigot right out the gate is certainly an... oddly specific way of giving her relatable flaws.

[hamishspence]

making Michael herself an insistently shrill and ragingly murderous specieist bigot right out the gate is certainly an... oddly specific way of giving her relatable flaws.

Her family were murdered, it must be said.

Now that I've watched the whole season one on DVD - I think it does a good job of showing Burnham growing into being a better person.

[Cikomyr]

Her family were murdered, it must be said.

Now that I've watched the whole season one on DVD - I think it does a good job of showing Burnham growing into being a better person.

I just don't understand why people say she is. Bigotted/specieist. She didn't jumped at the first chance to kill some Klingons. She sought advice, and followed these advices.

Now, I can understand that the advice in question was against Starfleet ethics, and many believe it strange that Vulcans would adopt that behavior (although I think it's in character for the Enterprise era Vulcans).

If anything, Kirk has shown WAY more biggotted sentiments against Klingons than. Michael ever has. Nobody is saying he is a bad character for it.

Hey look, he's a dude.

[GloatingSwine]

I just don't understand why people say she is. Bigotted/specieist. She didn't jumped at the first chance to kill some Klingons. She sought advice, and followed these advices.

And she explained what the expected outcome was. Have a fight, earn respect, and then you can have a peaceful relationship as equals.

The point wasn't "Klingons bad" it was "here is how to make Klingons respect you".

[hamishspence]

I just don't understand why people say she is. Bigotted/specieist. She didn't jumped at the first chance to kill some Klingons. She sought advice, and followed these advices.

Now, I can understand that the advice in question was against Starfleet ethics, and many believe it strange that Vulcans would adopt that behavior (although I think it's in character for the Enterprise era Vulcans).

Indeed. Not to mention that the Klingons did end up "shooting first" at the Battle of the Binary Stars. Which makes her somewhat less responsible for it than the Federation seemed to think - yes, she mutinied, but she didn't strictly start the war.

[Cikomyr]

Indeed. Not to mention that the Klingons did end up "shooting first" at the Battle of the Binary Stars. Which makes her somewhat less responsible for it than the Federation seemed to think - yes, she mutinied, but she didn't strictly start the war.

The one and only thing Michael is responsible for when it comes to the war is: she killed T'Kuvma in a moment of rage and emotion instead of capturing him.

Anything else was either out of her hands (Klingons shot first, she never ended up actually doing what she intended to achieve through her mutiny), or was actually reasonable behavior for any Starfleet Officer (like killing the torch bearer).

I am telling you; people are way quicker to jump the gun and dismiss female characters that doesn't conform to the traditional female roles and behaviors in fiction, for reasons they are more than willing to ignore in a male character.

I can understand not liking Michael's story, and that being a deal breaker about the series since the series focus on her at the start. But let's not pretend there is an objective reason for not liking her.

Objectively, Star Trek discovery season 1 makes or breaks on how much you are engaged by Michael. That was an objective, structural weakness of Star Trek DIS. But there is nothing objectively bad about her.