Star Trek: The Next Generation Rewatch: “Galaxy’s Child”

Agreed. It was more or less fine up until the point where she confronts him with his behavior, but how they handle that is outrageous. LaForge and only LaForge is at fault, and not calling him out on it is reprehensible, taantamount to an endorsement of stalking.

However, at a guess, I would say (pessimistically) that this behavior doesn’t get any official reprimand because it simply can’t be uncommon. If public computer databases contain a level of personal information about celebrities sufficient for the holodeck to create plausible simulations of them… Barclay and Geordi aren’t going to be the only ones in this situation.

Many socially awkward, lonely people would regularly turn to the holodeck for fantasies of sex, romance… even just friendship. Star Trek: Voyager deals more with the ramifications of this (in what is arguably the best facet of Voyager — the way they explore the mental state of the crew through their use of the holodeck is extremely engaging), but what’s lacking, anywhere, is a sign that Starfleet recognizes and addresses the potential for abuse in any systematic way. there ought to be Academy courses on holo-ethics, with an emphasis on marking that line between fantasy and reality and keeping people from displaying this kind of entitled bullshit. Even just a throwaway line indicating some kind of sensitivity training (and signing Geordi up for a remedial course) would have helped a lot.

Grim, just grim. As Krad says, only Stewart’s acting makes this episode even vaguely watchable.

In my head-canon, this episode never happened. Geordie never turned into a creeptacular stalkeriffic 24th-century superdouche, never gave Leah the ultimate Nice Guy speech (“But, but, you OWE ME! I WAS NICE TO YOU!” – *shudder*), and the show/canon never rewarded him for the appalling behaviour.

Y’know what, Christopher@11? What would make the holodeck thing okay is if it didn’t allow you to use real live people as models for stuff, without their express and specific permission. If this were the case, the person the computer would have constructed back in Booby Trap would have looked and acted nothing at all like the real Leah Brahms, but would have been a construct specifically designed to appeal to Geordie’s known likes/dislikes. If, on the other hand, he’d asked her for the right to have a colloquy with her simulacrum, she could have set the permissions (as we do with Creative Commons licencing today, for instance), and he could have had a working partner for the job. What he couldn’t then do is turn it into a sex doll. If he wanted that, then he has to use the image of someone who licenced it for the purpose, rather than just co-opt someone’s life and likeness by main force.

But to essentially create a blow-up doll of someone, then project your hopes and dreams onto it, and then expect the real person to conform to it? That, sir, is seriously creepy.

From this point on, anytime Geordi gets smug with Reg about his holo-issues, I just think of this episode. Pot, meet Kettle.

The funny thing about rewatching is how the same episode can seem so different years later. I haven’t really seen this episode all that much since I first watched it when I was probably 11 or 12. (Most likely because it’s not that good, and when encountered in the word of syndication, it was never one of those eps that I felt the need to linger on.) I have to laugh, because my memory of this episode was largely about the creature. I’m pretty sure I was going through the “I want to be a marine biologist and work with manatees” phase every preteen girl goes through, so the creature and “Junior” were completely in my wheelhouse.

Of course, now, as an adult woman, the creature is a dim afterthought to the utter bizarreness and creepiness of Geordi’s fumblings with Dr. Brahms. What could have been an interesting exploration into fantasy/reality, ethics, relationship, etc., was handled very poorly indeed.

I think the writers here were trying to show how dangerous it would be if a machine that could take momentary fantasies and give them physical form were ever created. Obviously they missed the mark as so many of you are focused on Geordi’s culpability.

Geordi was an idiot and his actions understandably made Leah uncomfortable, but I fail to see the point where he crossed into being the bad guy.

If he stalked her I’m guilty of stalking a football player, a singer, and a bit-part actress I thought I recognized on House (people I’ve googled in the past week). Stalking is repeatedly interjecting yourself unwanted into someone’s actual life. Not researching them or fantasizing about them in your own life in any way.

I’ll even concede that his conduct is creepy, mainly because any socially awkward unwanted advance can be and is considered creepy today. If Leah never wanted to talk to Geordi again I’d understand why and think it a reasonable decision.

I don’t see why everyone thinks Leah, whom we really know next to nothing about, could never look beyond this rather awful first impression and then appreciate who Geordi is at a later date. Show me a guy who was never creepy with a girl and I’ll show you . . . actually I can’t imagine such a guy even exists. Maybe Tim Tebow?

I just see this whole episode as a social failing on Geordi’s part not a moral one.

@31 Idran
I don’t buy that analogy. If someone has a physical representation of me, they put a LOT of time and effort into creating it. Geordi more or less did it by accident in a split-second. To me the creepy part would be how much obsession that time and effort represents. In this case that doesn’t apply although she doesn’t know that.

If someone 50 years ago met someone else knowing what college they went to and where they worked it was a lot more worrisome because of the effort it represented. Today most of us aren’t that offended if a business contact or blind date googles us as long as they are up front about it.

@31: “Something like this goes from harmless fantasy to potentially creepy when it leaves the private domain and enters somewhere where others can potentially see it, where it involves some sort of physical presence.”

Yes, that’s entirely in keeping with what I’m saying. I’ve already said that it becomes problematical if the subject of your fantasy becomes aware of it or if it becomes public, and that that should definitely be avoided. But as you say, it remains harmless as long as it doesn’t leave the private domain. If someone creates a holo-double of another person as a sexual or romantic fantasy and leaves that program accessible to anyone who stumbles across it, then yes, definitely, that’s inappropriate. But if they properly password-protect it or delete it when they’re done, if they make sure that nobody but themselves ever experiences it, then I don’t think that’s comparably bad. I think we all have fantasies we’d never want or choose to share with others, but it’s important to have the freedom to explore them in private.

@35: Well, then I would say the fault in that situation lies with the person who hacks the protected file and willfully commits a violation of the fantasist’s right to privacy. If that exposes a fantasy to another person who’s embarrassed or offended by it, the fault lies with the hacker, not the creator of the fantasy. Culpability lies with the person who had mens rea, who made a conscious choice to violate others’ legal rights or inflict mental distress.

By analogy, if Juan Smith crafts throwing knives purely for display or target practice, and Joe Chang steals one of the knives and stabs Jane Terwilliger with it, then the party legally responsible for Jane’s injury is Joe, not Juan. Jane and Juan are both victims of Joe’s criminal act. It would be wrong to say that Juan had no right to create those knives just because other people might steal them and use them for mayhem. If he acts with due diligence to maintain safety and keep his knives out of the wrong hands, it’s not his fault if someone else intentionally defeats his safety precautions, because he acted in good faith.

With regards to “Galaxy’s Child”… I’ve read KRAD’s review of this episode and many of the replies, and something (at least to my reading so far) seems missing. I admit, until now I never fully realized how much there was about Geordi’s heated comeback to Leah during the big blow-up scene that was inappropriate, especially when looking at it through the lens of a character like Leah who doesn’t know Geordi like we do. However, I am going to give Geordi one extra bit of support in spite of how he was written in this episode (and I bet in an alternate universe where Trek is real, the real Geordi might have behaved better than the writers depicted him).

That extra bit is this: from the moment Leah came on board the ship she was hostile, rude, superior, stuck-up and cold. Geordi was not the only character written unkindly in this episode. There, it’s been said.

I remember when the episode first aired, I did think Geordi’s use of his “inside info” on Leah may not have been wise for him to use in his dealings with her, like he was trying too hard, getting blinded (pardon the pun) by his excitement in getting to meet the real her. (I have to give credit to him for at least having good intentions, hell-paving notwithstanding, and for trying to put up with her attitude in various ways to try to make working with her go more smoothly). Let’s face it, we’ve all done some pretty dumb things at times – maybe this, for better or worse, was one of Geordi’s very human “dumb moments.”

However, even if he had done the smart thing and ERASED THE HOLODECK PROGRAM LONG AGO (even back in 1991, when I was a less-perceptive person, I wondered why he still had the program on file!), even if he hadn’t done all the things several folks on this blog have called creepy and stalker-ish, even if he had been at his very best… Leah would still have been a cold, unfriendly and not very cooperative person.

Yes, it was bad Geordi still had the program on file. It was bad Leah found it, and found it at a point in the program when something could all too easily be taken out of context. And it was bad – to a certain degree, how much of a degree I won’t get into here, everyone else seems to have very strong opinions about it – that Geordi responded to her feelings of violation with indignation… but pay attention to what he specifically says to Leah in his reply. I admit, I am going by memory here so I cannot quote directly and maybe I am missing some crucial wording detail, but what I remember him throwing back in her face is her attitude that’s he’s had to put up with since she came on board. That attitude did soften a little – slowly – during her time aboard before the holodeck incident, but she came on board making a very bad first impression, both for Geordi, and for myself as a viewer, and it set the tone for several scenes before the holodeck scene.

When she got angry with Geordi… yes, on one hand she had a right be be upset, but on the other hand her view of Geordi was already biased. I don’t think she was in any way capable of really listening to him in that moment, or even willing to conceive of a good explanation for the program’s existence, and she certainly didn’t seem willing to hear any explanations. Part of that is indeed due to her being understandably upset – but that upset is also something of a knee-jerk reaction on her part and fits with her previous hostile attitude towards him. Did she ask Geordi to explain things and listen, even sucpiciously? No, she pretty much just tore him a new one. Geordi’s reaction may have been inapporpriate, but it also was a result of him having been pushed by her too much, and his reaction was a knee-jerk also. May not be the best writing we wanted to see, might be inappropriate behavior… but it was also veyr human, on both their parts. We all know people in real life who make themselves, like Leah, difficult to get along with, and we all know people who when pushed have an explosive temper, even when it’s a wholly or partially inappropriate reaction.

I don’t see Geordi as being a stalker in this episode at all, and I think it’s overly harsh and cynical to condemn him as being that way. I do see the writers, however, not handling the characterization or the character interactions as well as could be expected. If one were to keep this episode as written (as opposed to having it wholly re-written), a couple of extra scenes could have been used, if there’d been time. First, a brief scene with Geordi and Picard (and maybe Troi) about the holodeck program, with Picard chastizing Geordi’s mistake while simulataneously trying to keep him out of further trouble. Second, a scene (or maybe just an extension of the scene when Geordi and Leah next talk after the blow-up happens) where Geordi and Leah have a calmer talk about what happened, with the air being more properly cleared – Geordi apologizing and briefly explaining the events of “Booby Trap”, and Leah apologizing for her unfriendly behavior from the moment she beamed aboard.

Just my two-cents. I still enjoy this episode.

Oh wow, I’m only now reading ‘Indistinguishable From Magic’ and it’s true, whatever’s going on between Leah and Geordi in this novel is so uncomfortable. It just doesn’t feel natural that she would suddenly be into him. Blargh.

As someone who is often accused of being rather cold and unfriendly (some have gone so far as to say “bitchy”), I definitely understand why what Geordi said affected her and made her change her tune. In fact, I like this episode a lot because I identified with her so much. I’ve been in a very similar situation (i.e. someone behaved in a way that was clearly wrong but threw my coldness back in my face–I was suitably chastised because I try very hard not to be that way, so, yes, I forgave his bad behavior). I won’t use the tired old excuse that it’s hard being a woman in a scientific field because that is changing rapidly, although I do remember the Computer Science department at Carnegie Mellon University having a “Dave to Female Ratio”–one female for every male named Dave. Having said that, having a logical mind and being a female is difficult. I don’t want to whine so I’ll just say, I never thought the fact that she let things go and became good friends with Geordi was strange or “creepy”. It might have even been a relief for her. Also, it’s clear by some of her behavior before the “big reveal” that she was receptive to his excessive flirting or, at least, she could have warmed up to him a lot sooner–if she let herself. Which makes the subsequent plots of a romantic relationship between the two understandable and, to me, at least, desirable. Having a warm, caring, friendly, outgoing, and emotionally giving person as a mate for a logical, highly controlled, stick-up-the-bumbum person like me had been a secret desire of mine. Luckily, my husband is all of these things.

One thing that nobody has yet mentioned, either in the OP or any of the comments, is that our reactions to this episode (and to “Booby Trap” as well) illustrate 20 years’ worth of social attitude evolution. At the time that episode first aired, very few people would have seen anything wrong at all either with Geordi’s original involvement with the hologram OR with his angry, defensive reaction to the real Leah Brahams finding out about it and being pissed off. The most common response would have been theme and variations on, “Well, she was a bitch and had it coming to her,” and you can still see echoes of that in some of the comments above. Congratulations, fandom — you’ve had your collective consciousness raised.

I remember re-watching some episodes of ClassicTrek during the period when NextGen was on the air (most notably “Shore Leave”) and cringing… and then wondering what I’d be cringing at about this new show 20 years down the road, that felt perfectly acceptable at the time. Well, here’s one of those things. And I find it a very hopeful sign that people *are* recognizing the cringeworthiness of what used to be unremarkable social attitudes.

Heh. The captcha just gave me “anforge” as one of the words. You’d almost think it had a sentient sense of humor.

I just did a word count, and as of 28 December 2012 the word “creepy” and its variations appear 46 times on this page.

I find that very, very creepy. You folks have some serious issues.

I laughed loud at this episode. This was like the classic Carlos Saura “Peppermint Frappé”, where a man tries to dress a woman like another woman he feels attracted to just to satisfy his sexual frustration, but gone bad. Which would be fine as a separate movie, not as a part of an episode: this is one of the many moments that I wondered in TNG “why do they keep on making us dislike the characters?”. But then they put the Picard and the alien subplot, where he makes mistakes, he accepts those mistakes, and somehow he resolves the situation not entirely in a successful way, but strengthened by it. Then… why is Picard the only character allowed to learn from his mistakes? What were The Powers That Be thinking?

@12

I’m with you on this, Christopher. Geordi’s behavior would be quite common in a universe wherein such holographic technology exists and is probably not all that dissimilar to how many fantasize about celebrities and the like today. It’s a 24th century projection of existing attitudes and technology.

I did not have an issue with either eppisode in fact I disagree with how many of you are spinning things. Geordi never once nor was it ever implied that he did have any sexual intent, he may have been infatuated with her but it was Dr. Leah Brahms who took his intent beyond what was actually the truth. She is the one who implied someting was going on more than what actually was…..she was wrong. As are many of your comments on this.

I have no problem with people doing whatever the hell they want in their minds or a simulation. The only thing I care about is how they actually behave. There’s nothing unusual about romantic feelings leading to embarrassing situations. Only comment I agree with is that on a public holodeck you should be careful about what you program.

It is apparent to me, that no holds barred sex with fantasy playmates is condoned on Starfeet holodecks. If it wasn’t, they would simply have the computer programmed to only generate holodeck characters that are not anatomically correct, and Leah would not have wondered how far Geordi went with Holo-Leah. This restriction would hardly get in the way of any clean minded simulation one might require. Of course, if the holodeck safety protocols can occasionally be overridden, I suppose the chief engineer would be capable of overriding the holodeck genital protocols. Unless you need authorisation of 2 senior staff, like when Picard and Riker were drooling over Minuet, in the Bynars 11001001 episode. PICARD: Computer, remove genital safety protocols.
COMPUTER: Riker, William T. Do you concur?
RIKER: Yes! Absolutely! I do indeed concur wholeheartedly!

I’m obviously a latecomer to this thread, but what I find fascinating are the unrecognized jumble of moral perspectives here.

First there is the traditional Judeo-Christian moral universe that holds that morality and moral law are fixed and binding because there is a Lawgiver. Second is the 21st century Western/American ethic (which grew to full strength in the 1960s), which says I can pretty do whatever I want as long as it doesn’t “hurt” anyone, and there are no absolutes except the absolute that there are no absolutes. Third is the later Roddenberryverse which uncritically adopts a rather Marxist anthropology, namely that humans are perfectible if only the right desire to be good and a good environment are created, but has all the sexual permissiveness and lack of shame of the 1960s–almost as if both the idealism and the insistence on sexual liberty of Roddenberry and/or his peers were projected into the future.

Don’t you folks recognize that if you can make up your own morality, someone else can make theirs? News flash: it might be different than yours. How can you condemn someone else for a moral transgression when you excuse your own? If there is no external moral law, who’s to say that cruelty is wrong, for example? Without a transcendent moral law, might makes right, and almost all the discussion above is the philosophal equivalent of building a house on a sandbank in a river. Good luck with that!

You’re arguing that the anthropology (one’s understanding of what humans really are) represented by how the LaForge and Brahms characters are written here doesn’t match reality; people like these two don’t really resolve such deep issues so quickly in real life. But you don’t seem to realize that the free sex that goes on and on in the Enterprise doesn’t seem to have any consequences in the Roddenberryverse either.

It’s a lot like the feminists saying back in the 1980s that young men and women should serve together in combat because they could control themselves, while also arguing in other venues that birth control must be taught and provided to young men and women throughout society because they couldn’t control themselves.

Ironically, a sexual free-for-all is now being implemented in the U.S. Armed Forces. In 10-20 years, we’ll see even better how well the Roddenberryverse works in real life.

I’ve just discovered this blog and can’t get enough of it.

I can’t say how much I hate, Hate, HATE this episode! I know I should say something thought provoking and philosophical but, honestly, I’ve always watched television for the entertainment value and haven’t really given the same analyses to the episodes than many of the commentors have (although I’m looking at them in a different light now). But I just need to say that I hate everything about this episode.

Is it just coincidence that when Dr Brahms is aboard, the Enterprise has power loss, radiation levels and flies through asteroid belts?

Throughout watching this, I obviously found elements that came over as creepy, but must admit I put them down to Geordi’s general dorkiness. That said, I was almost shouting at the TV every time he threw in one of those cringing references to information he shouldn’t know about Dr Brahms ‘JUST TELL HER THE TRUTH’. The reasons why he didn’t come down to personal interpretation, and I don’t think anyone is right or wrong on imposing their own moral compass onto fictional characters (I say dork, you say pervert). 

I didn’t see anything particularly morally reprehensible (not as much as say, the RIker rape last episode, I can see the whole ‘But he’s a man and men always want sex’ argument being used to justify her behaviour in that one and I don’t like it e.g. “But Riker, you must admit you have a history of sexual relations with other species” if it ever came up in criminal proceedings), aside from the whole not telling the truth, and yes I was disappointed when Geordi responded the way he did to being called out on the holodeck. However, reading through the comments, I understand a bit more why he might have reacted the way he did. One thing not seemingly mentioned is that (whether what LaForge did by not deleting the holo-sim after “Booby-Trap” was wrong or otherwise) he was called out on something that, to him as well as Dr Brahms, was particularly embarrassing. If someone I happened to fancy (hypothetically) happened to come across a collection of pictures I had of them that was taken from Facebook or where ever (all SFW), I’d feel guilt, shame, embarrassment, and I don’t know how I would react to that initially. Not everyone when they feel confronted and guilty reacts calmly. And really, no one else has mentioned they laughed out loud at Geordi’s rediculous ‘Oh my I’ve been caught in the act’ freeze as he came through the holodeck door? Maybe I appreciated it more since I wasn’t already physically sickened and/or morally enraged by that point. 

Reading the comments I was surprised quite how far people took the whole ‘Geordi as virtual rapist’ thing, since that wasn’t really the vibe I got from the episode (again, possibly pre-conceived notions of Geordi the character). I particularly thought that our humble re-watcher (excellent job by the way Keith) was somewhat harsh in his dismissal of the commenter in #40, I don’t actually think the original comment was intended or came across as ‘justifying’ the behaviour, and even if it was, it does annoy me to compare such to something as horrific as attempting to justify rape, sexual abuse or sexual harrassment, for which there can be no justification. 

That being said, I read the last 2 comments above, #69 and #70, which to Keith’s great credit he explains his reasoning a little more clearly and now I totally understand where he is coming from in his assessment, and even agree with it (but not with the comparing it to justifying rapists earlier). I strongly believe fantasy is fantasy (everyone has them, some are nice, some…not so), and there’s nothing unhealthy about that, as long as it remains private. Keith’s post in #70 really helped clarify why this was indeed not classed as maintaining privacy and helped clarify my thoughts on the matter.

Onto the actual episode itself, I really loved the sci-fi they wedged into there, for me that is what Trek should be about, exploration and encountering the unknown, and thought it was done really well. I thought the CFX stood up surprisingly well for the time, but then I’m watching the remastered blu-rays so maybe thats why? I don’t get at all the ‘pro-life’ comment someone above made, this has nothing to do with abortion and women’s rights, it’s clearly a C-section. What about it is pro- or anti- life? In a similar situation where the mother dies in childbirth, any medical doctor would do whatever they could to save the child, whether they agree with abortion or not. Surprised with all the moralising on these threads (not complaining, debate and understanding why people think the way they do is part of the reason I read all of the comments), that that wasn’t called out by at least one other person.

Overall, I’d give this a 5 because I really enjoyed the sci-fi, and because personally I feel morally comfortable in my own beliefs in giving Geordi a pass in this one as the whole thing was spectacularly ill-judged and poorly written. I also don’t find the EU implications (or otherwise?) that Geordi and Brahms end up together particularly creepy, many people get off on the wrong foot as we say here in the UK (do you guys have that saying in the US? I think it comes from cricket) and can then move past that and realise that they have a ton in common. Let’s be fair, Geordi didnt try to assault her, he was merely overly creepy. To some, that may be unforgivable, but to me I give benefit of the doubt in this instance, and assume that adult humans know that there are complexities and misunderstandings in any relationship and that these can be worked through or ‘laughed off’ later once the two people know each other a lot better. Both had a lesson to learn about preconceived notions of the other. 

Please, please, don’t try and turn the last half of that last paragraph into claiming I’m justifying rape or harrassment, I think I clearly stated earlier how reprehensible those actions are.  

I stumbled across this episode on BBC America tonight for the first time in a long time (possibly since it aired originally).   I immediately went out and found this Rewatch and the comments because I knew people would have smart and interesting things to say about how badly the episode fails on the LaForge – Brahms “relationship.”   I am not disappointed.

Just wanted to say that I generally agree with Christopher, trlkly and moogle343. Given the circumstances, I personally think that it’s extremely over-the-top to call Holo-Leah a “holographic blow-up sex doll” and Geordi an “unrepentant virtual rapist”. Particularly the latter is tactless and disrespectful towards actual rape victims. It’s trivializing.

He may not have reacted perfectly (especially since he lied to her), and I understand how people can think about his behaviour as somewhat uncomfortable, but I find it elusive how much is interpreted into the whole story and how much some get upset about it. I thought the point was that Geordi and Leah both had a problem with heavy bias and prejudice and overcame it. Leah hated him in the beginning just based on reports of La Forge improving messing with “her” machinery. She wouldn’t listen to his perspective. And no, given their characters and preferences, that is far more than strictly on a professional level or concerning only the job. Her conduct wasn’t only cold, it was vile (she didn’t even greet him coming aboard). Sure, Geordi was building sand castles in the sky and having pipe dreams about Leah, but he was interested in her as a real person, not her sketchy simulation, and acknowledged that there could be a divergence to the holo-projection. He just hugely underestimated how big the difference would be (there are other examples in Star Trek where it was far more accurate).

I did not like the episode much because of the terrible liar reveal trope which was obvious from the start. Not so much because of how it depicted Geordi. When Leah discovered his embarrassing secret on the holodeck, she especially despised a part of dialogue from Holo-Leah which made it seem like Geordi programmed her that way – he didn’t and it wasn’t his fault (it was even the computer who came up with creating her, Geordi actually only thought about an audio representation).

Her initial reaction is comprehensible, yet also Geordi has a point in calling out on her, even more so in the heat of the moment, after he tried to begin calmly and she didn’t want to hear a reasonable explanation, again interrupting him. He wasn’t only saying “I was nice to you and you treated me badly“, he notably says something like “If you had watched the whole program you would understand how it really played out, we worked together to solve the crisis“. And that is true, despite his weak moment with the kiss in that grave danger life-or-death situation in “Booby Trap”. The real Leah already made up her mind about what was going on when she saw the program, and Geordi had to energetically say something against it to rectify her overly excessive accusations. Had he “thrown himself on Brahms’s mercy”, as was suggested by the reviewer, it would have amounted to a complete guilty plea by him in her eyes, which would not have solved anything.

I believe it is perfectly possible to get behind both sides of the argument and that the episode was deliberately written that way.

Yes, the real Brahms was an ass the way she greeted La Forge, but it would have been better if he didn’t try to suck it up to her but to flat out admit he recreated her on the Holodeck. Just something like ‘we where in a crisis, I needed someone to talk to, I created an image of you on the Holodeck. I went to far with that, I am sorry.”

Would have saved him a lot of embarresment. 

Another thing I didn’t get was when he said’ I hoped we could become friends’ she replies ‘I am married’. So, she can’t have any friends because of that?! Also, I really hoped she would say ‘I’m a lesbian’. I mean, she hesitated quite a bit there… But oh well. The show was written in the 90’s, a homosexual character would be asking too much. 

Sorry I’m unlurking for this, ans so many years down the line too, but having been in a position to marathon these rereads and having read this entire duscussion, I noticed something that bugs me a lot.

What happens in this episode is extremely creepy. That being said, I am surprised at how people react here in contrast with Barclay’s episode, where many people were very lenient,-if-not-positively-identifying-with the latter. People cut him a lot if slack for being a socially awkward nerdy dude. Yet, you can’t tell me *his* Dr Crusher and Counsellor Troi were not in the same skeevy “blow-up doll” category as Leah Brahms – worse even, since it definitely doesn’t seems like there is any excuse that they were created for work reasons and he accidentally got too engrossed in them or whatever. 

I have a feeling that maybe some people have some uncouncious biases here that make them judge what looks to me like very similar behaviour much more harshly when it comes from Geordi rather than someone who is a little easier to identify with, or recognize aspects of themselves in… please have a honest look at why you would justify/mostly forgive one but not the other.

So yeah. By all means, tear this awful plot and bit of character assassination a new one, but don’t go giving me the ol’ boys-will-be-awkward-geeks with Barclay when he pulls the same creeponess, please.

I think Jeordi’s real crime here is trying to get Brahms to accept and understand him. Just as he’s entitled to his feelings, Brahms is entitled to hers.

I agree with you that Geordi’s behaviour in this episode is deeply creepy and that it’s very disturbing for the episode to treat him as being (partially) right.

It’s not just the creation of the holo version of Brahms and the previous romantic interactions with her (which I would find deeply, deeply creepy and violating if someone did that with my image). It’s that he projects this fantasy-being onto Brahms, hits on her as a result of that, and uses information from the holodeck to hit on her, which is deeply manipulative.

I would say that even with regard to present-day technology. Telling someone you know and like “Hey, I saw on Facebook that you’re interested in X, I’m interested in X too,” is one thing; “guessing” that they’re interested in X and playing it up as a sign of how well you know them, without mentioning that you saw it on their Facebook, would be creepy and manipulative and dishonest.

And flirting with someone is qualitatively different from “being friendly”; Geordi was doing the former.

In light of all this, Brahms being an abrasive person is completely irrelevant.

It seems to me a lot of the problems here could’ve been avoided if they’d gone in a different (and more practical) direction in the scene where Geordi is caught. Rather than go on about offering friendship and Brahms being rude like he’s a disgruntled teenager, all he had to do was play for her the life or death situation from Booby Trap. The computer must’ve recorded what happened there. An easy fix.

Sorry, just remembered this — Reginald Barclay actually beat up both LeForge and Riker in a holodeck Ten-Forward brawl;  he also made some very leering advances on an extremely pliant and willing Holo-Troi in several of his fantasies. Insubordination, criminal assault and holo-“rape” (again)?   I don’t seem to remember something like this even being suggested in the comments about that episode.  

Yes, Princessroxana, that I can see 100%.  In fact, thinking about it, it’s actually rather insulting to LaForge’s character to portray him as basically an overgrown 14-year-old who doesn’t understand the difference between reality and fantasy — almost as if the writers took that “socially inept geek/nerd” stereotype past its limits and made it into a satire.   I was responding more to the folks who took offense at the original holodeck episode, calling it “rape” etc.  And I also stand by my suggestion that if what happened between Geordi and Leah was “rape,” then what happened between Barclay and his superior officers was criminal assault and insubordination.  If holodeck fantasy behavior translates into “real-world’ criminal accusations, then it has to be across the board.