There are always exceptions. The first Wonder Woman is one of them. Likewise, someone born in 1981 who enjoys Starfleet Academy is something of an outlier. The show reportedly had a maximum global viewership of around 40,000 per episode and ran for only two seasons, not because it earned longevity as a meaningful exploration of resilience, perseverance, or sacrifice, but because it appears to have been designed that way from the outset.

The core issue is that Starfleet Academy does not feel like a true Star Trek series. Instead, it comes across as a teen, identity-focused, coming of age high school drama with a Star Trek aesthetic layered on top. That approach clashes with what Star Trek has traditionally represented: a merit based society where individuals are defined by competence, discipline, and their ability to confront morally complex and ambiguous situations.

In that context, many of the characters in Academy seem fundamentally out of place. Within the established Star Trek universe, it is difficult to imagine them being accepted into Starfleet at all. The franchise has never centred on unresolved identity struggles as a primary qualification or narrative driver, largely because it operates in a setting already built on diversity through alien species, cultures, and perspectives. The assumption has always been that Starfleet officers possess a strong sense of self, allowing them to prioritise exploration, duty, and collective purpose over personal validation.

Someone might point to representation and inclusion as its strengths. However, for most viewers, those elements are not compelling on their own if they are not supported by substance, competence, or meaningful contribution. The broader audience tends to value characters who bring skill, insight, or depth, rather than those who frame identity as their defining or most important trait.

More specifically, Starfleet Academy often exhibits patterns that traditional science fiction audiences find frustrating:

• Engagement tends to remain at a surface level rather than exploring ideas in depth
• Identity markers are emphasised over capability or substance
• Opposing viewpoints are not meaningfully explored or understood
• Arguments are dismissed rather than properly examined
• Characters attempt to control or dictate language rather than engage with ideas

These tendencies run counter to the intellectual and philosophical tradition that has defined Star Trek for decades hence its low viewership.

That said, I am genuinely interested in understanding your perspective, what is it about these elements that you find appealing?

( Im huge science fiction fan also)