I think Star Trek really missed the boat when it came to depicting gays and lesbians. There should have been some gay and lesbian characters on Star Trek. It did not need to be treated as an 'issue' just a part of a character. I really liked the Dax episode with her former wife. The taboo was not about gender preference, but about picking up the relationship again in their next lives. Aside from that, the only other character I've seen depicted is the mirror universe Kira as bisexual.
People who say it's pandering and not needed, can I ask a question? Was having minorities on TOS pandering? Was having a black man and a woman in the leadership roles on two series pandering? Race and gender was never an issue in this utopian future of equality. Why should gender preference be different?
I am not even going to address the 'family values' comments. Star Trek has depicted wars, murder, polygamy and sexual relations outside of marriage - which aren't traditonal family values.
...they should make a Gay Trek film/TV series right after they make STAR TREK: THE HETERO VOYAGES.
STAR TREK: THE HETERO VOYAGES should be about a starship captain that is a total lech and chases skirts across the galaxy.
I mean every film/episode should feature explicit hetero sex and each episode should focus on some aspect of heterosexuality.
Then the sequel series can be about homosexuality. Every episode...some aspect of homosexuality!
After all, isn't this what Star Trek should be about? Sex?
Hell, why don't we just call it Sex Trek and be done with it? Then it can feature alien necrophiliacs, alien pedophiles and alien tri-sexuals, etc. The dangers of alien pornography...aliens who have sex with animals on their world...what other depths can we plumb?
(tongue planted firmly in cheek)
IM
I read Section 31: Rogue, and thought it was okay. Groundbreaking? Not so much. While I admit the character of Hawk in the film was little more than stage dressing, at least he seemed self assured and confident. The character in the novel seemed timid and hesitant to me. It didn't bother me that Hawk was portrayed as gay.
Here's what DID bother me:
1) Rushing to a command staff meeting, Riker and Data meet Keru in the corridor. While Picard and the staff wait, Riker and Data STOP and demonstrate how little they care that Keru and Hawk are gay by discussing their upcoming anniversary, and how the pair met. As soon as Keru wanders off, Riker and Data resume discussing the upcoming meeting. Not once, in twenty years of Trek, did any other pair of characters en route to an important conference stop to congratulate a breeder couple on their anniversary or to discuss how they met.
2) Hawk is entrusted with classified information. Keru gets bitchy when Hawk won't tell him what's going on, and starts complaining that Hawk doe3sn't trust him. At no time in the history of Trek did a breeder couple have an argument over on a spouse's inability to share classified information. What makes this even worse, is that in the Titan series, he's the security chief! Does Keru tell his staff to share classified information with their spouses?
These two scenes marred an otherwise good novel. In fact, except for the powerful closing scene, where Picard tells Hawk's family how he died, I remember nothing else. And it's a perfect example of why you can't add just one gay character. To prove the character is gay, there has to be a partner. And to prove that the breeders are sooo accepting that they're gay, the gay couple's love life must be discussed at length at every opportunity.
--------
"A foolish consistancy is the hobgoblin of tiny minds." Ralph Waldo Emerson
"Emerson!" Isaac Asimov
The Outcast
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/TNG/episode/68540.html
Riker has a relationship with a member of an asexual alien race; gender identification issues abound.
Rules of Acquisition
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/DS9/episode/68136.html
A female Ferengi posing as a male has a crush on Quark; hilarity ensues.
Crossover
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/DS9/episode/68168.html
Through the Looking Glass
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/DS9/episode/68214.html
Alternate-universe Kira is a bisexual character.
Rejoined
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/DS9/episode/68238.html
Deals with Dax, a female, facing the dilemma of continuing a relationship with her former lover, who is also female.
This is the "infamous" lesbian kiss episode.
Profit and Lace
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/DS9/episode/100243.html
Quark undergoes gender reassignment surgery in order to gain equal rights for women.
Chimera
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/DS9/episode/104685.html
Very obvious homosexual overtones between Odo and Laas with parallels to the non-acceptance of homosexual relationships in society.
Whoever says Star Trek hasnt ever dealt with GLBT issues is either retarded or doesnt actually watch the show. Hell, this list is only from TNG and DS9. I havent really seen enough of Voyager or Enterprise to list any episodes from either series, but for all i know there could be even more examples of Star Trek tackling these issues.
Star Trek has been a pioneer in ALL aspects of human acceptance and equality, ever since the original series back in the 60s, and for anyone to deny or overlook this can only be an example of willful ignorance or a lack of sufficient research.
You heard it here first: J.J. Abrams, he of LOST, ALIAS and lately MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 3 fame has been tapped to direct STAR TREK 11, telling the academy days of Kirk and Spock.
Abrams' pals Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman are writing the script. Release projected 2008.
My estimation of a young Kirk/Spock film just went from GOD NO to HEY, THAT MIGHT WORK. Which, if you'd asked me before I learned this (via Variety) I'd have told you was impossible.
--------
'Risk IS our business' - Kirk
This is truly ridiculous subject. I couldn't care less if there was no outright gay people on Star Trek in any version. However, I do recall several scenes of same sex smooching and carrying on. DS9 did it several times. Frankly, I'd be disturbed to know that Kirk and Spock were getting it on with each other. I thought it really adventurous at the time that Kirk was jumping every alien in the galaxy. Riker was known to go after anything that moved. How do we know that some of those aliens that looked like females weren't actually male? And through it all, who cares? Anything that is done for the storyline is great, but to have to blatantly put in homosexuality just for the sake of making a segment of the population happy is absurd. You don't see Romulans complaining about not being able to mate with Cardassians...
The way to approach this issue is through subtlety, not gratuitous man-on-man action. Overt and over-the-top homosexuality need not be included, and in fact may be detrimental to opening the eyes of the viewers.
--------
"I saw the poor people and the suffering, all around me. I didn't have time to hate Castro."
-A Cuban friend of mine on the current state of her country
Quote:
"In the fifth season [of Star Trek: The Next Generation] viewers will see more of shipboard life [including] gay crew members in day-to-day circumstances," Gene Roddenberry is quoted as telling The Advocate in 1991. Roddenberry died later that year, and there hasn't been an identifiably gay character in the movie or television franchise.
Does anyone think that this might have been more Roddenberry pandering to the Advocate more than anything he really intended to do? Didn't David Gerrold leave because of Roddenberry sandbagging a gay or AIDS allegorical story?
I don't think that putting a gay character in the next show or movie is all that hard of a thing-- but I don't see the need to do any type of story about homosexuality. Think about Janeway's boyfriend at home, what if that had been a woman? You have Janeway (or any character on the ship) make it clear that she is committed to someone on Earth. In discussing that person it is made clear it is a homosexual partner. What is important to do is that the person is spoken of in the same way that a heterosexual partner would be. There shouldn't be any questions about the nature of the relationship or homosexuality, because you don't do that with heterosexuals. By dealing with it as just an aside in the same way as you would a heterosexual partner, that establishes the tolerance.
I do think that they missed the chance of making Malcolm, Meriweather, or Hoshi gay by doing that. Even with the folks who strongly oppose a gay character, I cannot believe there would be that many viewers lost if Meriweather spoke in passing about having a parter named Frank living in Des Moines-- he says it at some point, and then it just is not addressed again until there is some releveant story point to do so. Or instead of Trip losing his sister, he could have lost his academy lover Juan who lived in Palm Beach and got cooked by the Xindi.
--------
Honestly, I always approved of the decision not to include homosexuality in Star Trek. I know Star Trek is famous for confronting the big issues and they have done that with homosexuality. They had Dax confront her old lover from another lifetime. They've had Riker and Soren as is depicted in that picture. These things get people thinking. Whatever stants Star Trek takes on gays and gay rights, for or against it's episodes like that that get you thinking.
As soon as they commit and openly gay character to Star Trek, which I find unneccessary, then they risk losing viewers. And I support what he's done, Star Trek is adult but it is also adored by families and I think a lot of families would like it to remain unperverted.
Aren't there bigger things to worry about in the world than the social views of a TV show?
RE: Geez,...
by Trekker121 @ 14:51:09 on Apr 20
RE: Geez,...
by UTrek @ 21:52:57 on Apr 20
RE: Geez,...
by Trekker121 @ 21:58:49 on Apr 20
RE: Geez,...
by Trekker121 @ 21:57:22 on Apr 20
RE: Geez,...
by UTrek @ 10:41:40 on Apr 23
RE: Geez,...
by Kiss My Splintery Wooden Lemmiwinks @ 11:50:50 on Apr 21
RE: Geez,...
by Kiss My Splintery Wooden Lemmiwinks @ 14:50:19 on Apr 20
RE: Geez,...
by Rational Voice @ 08:45:48 on Apr 22
RE: Geez,...
by Kiss My Splintery Wooden Lemmiwinks @ 09:48:24 on Apr 22
RE: Geez,...
by c.p. @ 12:53:32 on Apr 20
RE: Geez,...
by MotherFraker @ 10:40:23 on Apr 20
RE: Geez,...
by Rational Voice @ 08:55:27 on Apr 22
RE: Geez,...
by MotherFraker @ 13:33:25 on Apr 22
Quote:
I shed no tears that he's gone, except that he did his best to ruin the franchise on his way out.
It's a little hard to take Mangels serious when he, personally, has written his most successful novels (the two Titan books and the upcoming Enterprise novel) from material created by Rick Berman during the "ruined" years of the franchise.
I understand that Mr. Mangels has complaints, but that's a stone's throw away from "biting the hand that feeds you". :(
--------
"Any man who is under thirty, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over thirty, and is not a conservative, has no brains."
-Winston Churchill
-----------
"The culture you've come to know isn't the one I helped to create." - Surak to Archer "Awakening"
...I'm not surprised.
--------
In the Harsh Light of Fate
A Tear in the Veil
Just a Simple Country Doctor
Berman's instincts were right on. Because as everyone knows, if you want your show to be critically acclaimed and be a ratings winner like VOY and ENT, you have to stay away from uncomfortable issues and concentrate on girlies with big boobs in tight jumpers. You won't win very many Emmys and you'll disgrace Roddenberry's vision and Star Trek's purpose, but you'll be very popular with drooling 14 year olds.
arrrghh...
Berman was an ass. RIP
--------
"If we can live without Passion maybe we would know some sort of peace but we would be hollow, empty rooms, shuttered and dank. Without Passion, we'd truly be dead" Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Berman was an ass. RIP
--------
"If we can live without Passion maybe we would know some sort of peace but we would be hollow, empty rooms, shuttered and dank. Without Passion, we'd truly be dead" Buffy the Vampire Slayer