I don't know why, but I just saw episode 4.
RANT (from a pseudo-objective writer's perspective) WITH SPOILERS in three...two...one...
That episode actually felt more like what Star trek comedy should be. There was a few moments that made me actually laugh, but seeing Mariner "fail up" for an episode was kind of funny. Of course it was all a plot by her mother to try and get her to transfer or flat out resign as usual, but seeing her in her own personal hell was kind of nice. Then seeing Boimler try to do fail up on purpose in response and just get ignored was actually funny.
I get that Starfleet is supposed to be the best and brightest, but Mariner is actually a WORSE Mary Sue than Wesley Crusher. BUT at least Mariner has character flaws that she could work through if she was either forced or coerced into doing it. We know the reason why she is so immature and insubordinate, but she doesn't have to be good at everything. Everything. Having served on all of those (and forgive the use of this word) "uppity" starships, I can see how that molded her already rebellious personality, not to mention having her mother as the Captain and her father as an Admiral.
I get that Lower Decks is supposed to be satire, and with that in mind I can get past the fact that Mariner is a...palatable version of Rick Sanchez (Lower Decks is just Rick and Morty with Star Trek paint), But Rick Sanchez actually lets people fail after they say "No! You don't know everything!" and then hurries to catch them at the last second just to prove a point because he's a jerk, Mariner isn't like that.
At least Rick himself fails from time to time. Does he learn anything from his failures? Well, that's probably why he's such a prolific scientist. I don't want to use the word good since Rick is basically a chaotic good character, where as Mariner is chaotic neutral meaning she shirks traditions and likes to break the rules. Mariner learned throughout her "career" when, where, and how to break them.
That being said, Mariner has the potential to be a more likable Mary Sue-ish character than Wesley Crusher and Michael Burnham. Mariner - again from a writer's perspective - is a more "honest" character because she never pretends like she doesn't have all the answers, where as Burnham is written to always be the one to come up with the solutions. The story revolves around Michael Burnham.
I call Mariner a Mary Sue-ish character because 1. even though she's an insufferable know-it-all, nobody reveres her(most likely by Mariner's design), and 2. she clearly has experience to draw from even though we haven't seen it yet.
==End of Rant==
With that out of the way, I still stand by my first critique that Lower Decks (and all New Trek under CBS) is filled with left-wing SJW identity politics and virtue signaling Marxist propaganda that strive to subvert our culture and force their degenerate "principles" on us fans whom they constantly degrade and demonize for not "bending the knee" to them and instead call them out on their uninspired "talking points".
Unless you've been beaten over the head with it your whole life or have otherwise become desensitized to it (Or just flat don't care that "Cancel Culture" has practically ruined our beloved franchises), no one with a soul wants that tripe.
And I'll say it AGAIN. I've got no problems with strong, female characters, minority leads, et cetera. Hell, the Orville (Which is what a Star Trek comedy should aspire to) has a male gay couple and one of them is Second Officer. But do they virtue signal them? No. They have flaws like everyone else. They have good, interesting, sometimes cringey (holodeck gay porn episode, remember?) story arcs that make you care about them.
Edited by Ens Xenara Xardeen, Star Date 22008.27 @ 11:01 (11:01 AM).