Spectrum (Star Trek: TOS zine published by S.T.A.R. Toledo)

Zine
Title:	Spectrum
Publisher:	the fan club, "S.T.A.R. Toledo"
Editor(s):	possibly Jeff Johnston
Type:	club newsletter
Date(s):	January 1974-June 1975
Frequency:
Medium:	print
Fandom:	Star Trek: TOS
Language:	English
External Links:
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

Spectrum is a Star Trek: TOS club newsletter. It was published as such until issue #17, and then it became Spectrum.

Issue 1

Spectrum 1 was published in January 1974.

Issue 2

Spectrum 2 was published in February 1974.

Issue 3

Spectrum 3 was published in March 1974.

Issue 4

Spectrum 4 was published in April 1974.

Issue 5

Spectrum 5 was published in May 1974.

Issue 6

Spectrum 6 was published in June 1974.

Issue 7

Spectrum 1 was published in July 1974.

Issue 8

Spectrum 1 was published in August 1974.

Issue 9

Spectrum 1 was published in September 1974.

Issue 10

Spectrum 1 was published in October 1974.

Issue 11

Spectrum 1 was published in November 1974.

Issue 12

Spectrum 12 was published in December 1974.

Issue 13

Spectrum 13 was published January 1975.

Issue 14

Spectrum 14 was published in 1975.

Issue 15

Spectrum 15 was published in 1975.

Issue 16

Spectrum 16 was published in 1975.

Issue 17

Spectrum 17 was published June 1975.

This issue contains a science essay by Jeff Johnston called "Birth on the Enterprise." Johnston (using the pseud M.J. Fisher) commented on this essay in Spectrum #18. He wrote that it "represents one of the worst essays I've written for that column. The essay appeared at the end of a run of a five-part essay an the space program and I had no essay for the final issue. I thought of an idea for an essay and quickly sketched out and outline and filled it in as I wrote the newsletter. Admittedly the subject has not been studied by me extensively and it shows appreciably in the essay."

Reactions and Reviews: Issue 17

[Birth on the Enterprise]: [The Enterprise] is a multi-multi-credit starship on a seek and search out mission with a highly-trained, picked-for-efficiency, expensive-to-replace crew. Therefore, I would think that while there would undoubtedly be sex on the Enterprise, there would not be pregnancies. Not with Federation sanction, anyway.

...I will state that it is am impossibility to even think of running a battle cruiser with children and/or pregnant women aboard. The whole question of human emotional traditions and (if you will) taboos relating to the protection and care of pregnant woman and children would preclude placing them in an Enterprise-like situation. That part of it goes without saying, so i won't, even tho the emotional problems, not the physical problems, are the real reasons WHY NOT. However, you also seem to be under the assumption that every woman sails through pregnancy and childbirth without a single unsettling side affect. Some lucky ones do manage very well, but on the whole you are wrong, baby, wrong. Even in the 23rd century I doubt science will have found a way to counteract the enormous changes that a woman's body goes through while manufacturing another human being. Even if she did get through without the space age equivalent of 'morning sickness', her sheer bulk and non-coordination, accompanying her condition would cause and intolerable loss of efficiency in a demanding front line position such as the Enterprise mission.

And also--what kind of people do you think sign up for a five-year, deep space, potentially kamikaze-type mission? It wouldn't be home-and-family types, you can bet a quatloo on that! It's a moot point as to whether these men and women would ever want to settle down and raise a family, but you can be sure they aren't interested in such domestic pursuits right now, or they wouldn't be here on the USS Enterprise! A good lay now and then, you know it—but marriage? No way!

...You assume that morals in the 23rd century would be, well, moral. Are you aware that right now, in this day and age, a growing portion of the population of the world does not see marriage as the end-all and be-all for a man and woman in love? Nor does marriage guaranty fidelity (or lack of marriage vows, infidelity) as you seem to blithely assume is the case on the good ship Enterprise. What about the other third of the guys in the crew? What are they supposed to warm their beds and libidos with if everybody's happily sewed up in connubial bliss? I for one do not see the human race going back to the Puritanical mores of our ancestors who, if the truth be known, weren't any more puritanical than we—just sneakier.

...Why do you assume that everybody (especially every woman) just naturally wants a home and family? Why do you assume that children are so desperately important that the government, no less (in the form of the Federation) would stand still for enormous losses to get them? And this argument doesn't even consider that it is impossible to fly a starship into combat or any kind of potentially dangerous situations while carrying mothers and children. Can you see a female of most any species willing to let her child die on the command of the Captain?

...Nobody in their right mind would want to get pregnant and have a child to rear under these conditions. These Enterprise women are not just technicians. They are military soldiers who must be ready and able to perform military service when needed. When battle stations are called, a pregnant woman would be at a definite disadvantage.

I would hope that by the Enterprise time couples will still be allowed the decision of whether or not to raise a family. This may or may not be the sacs--depending on, I think, what do, here, today. However, I am sure that the question of family will r.till be then, as it is now, subject to considerations such as time, facilities, economics, future prospects, and on and on....Therefore, as I see it, some sort of prophylactic...plan must be mandatory to prevent what would be an intolerable situation. But now I want to know why only for women? Even now, in primitive times relative to birth control, it is safer, easier, and more economical to sterilize the male of the species-- whether temporarily or permanently. Why, why is it always the female who is forced to take high-powered drugs into her system, submit to internal surgery, or cram foreign objects into her womb when it is so simple for the male to slip into a good-quality condom, primitive tho that may sound...

...There seem to be only two rational choices--both rather brutal to some minds -- terminate the pregnancy or terminate the woman's tour of duty. Not that she leave the service, mind you, that's an economic waste, one I don't think the Federation would allow. Whether or not she would be 'penalized' by being forced to take a vacation, a drop in pay, whatever—would be details left to the future. This type of leave-of-absence clause is becoming increasingly available to working women of today. So i would hope it would be mandatory in the future. (Right on sisters!) Since I stand for prevention, not abortion, i would favor the above mentioned action, or, possibly the transplanting of the zygot to an artificial uterus...

...Hopefully by the 23rd century, sex will have ceased to be something to snicker over and sell toothpaste with, and will have been allowed to take its rightful place in society. Sexual encounter between a man and a woman who truly love each other is, or should be, the epitome in giving to one another. To give yourself, to give him/her pleasure, is a beautiful and oft-time rare and wonderful thing which God has made possible for us by creating us differently, yet able to join. I would hope that on the Enterprise the relations which are naturally bound to spring up would be honest, giving, loving relations. I would hope that the need for one-night-stands would be over.