| Author |
Message |
kevkc
Member
|
# Posted: 16 Aug 2005 16:23
Reply
Hey,
This is an article I found while searching for the number of husbands Guinan has had (turns out it's 23).
I found it interesting, got me thinking, so I thought I'd throw it on here and let people take a think about it too.
The address is http://archive.salon.com/ent/feature/2001/06/30/gay_trek/index.html . I'd post it here, but it's a bit long for forum reading, I'd think.
Note, please dont hold me responsible for any offence which this may cause. I certainly didn't intend to cause any by posting this here. So, if you're easily offended, or perhaps quite right-wing, you may want to give this a miss *nods*
Ta,
KC
P.S. Did it end up with there being a gay character on Enterprise? I wouldnt know having not watched it much 
|
kevkc
Member
|
# Posted: 16 Aug 2005 16:24
Reply
Whoops!
Sorry, just occured to me that this should be in the ST forum!
My bad!
*moves*
KC
|
ohm
Member
|
# Posted: 16 Aug 2005 18:56
Reply
While there possibly hasn’t been any "set," gay characters on Star Trek in a lead or supporting role there have been supplementary characters that have displayed an inclination towards homosexuality (e.g. Kira’s alternate universe character). The issue has also been explored in a more subtle way in a variety of episodes, namely in Deep Space Nine’s "Chimera," Episode where Odo meets another on of the 100 changelings sent out to explore the galaxy. Reading through this article I found it more of a rant, accusing Star Trek producers of not being open enough nor espousing homosexuality freely enough. While some valid points are made episodes like DS9's "The Emperor's New Cloak," and TNG's "The Outcast," are flatly refused by the author as being worthy attempts made by Star Trek to give homosexuality at least some screen time. I think an important point that the author of this article did not attempt to explore was who are the audience? While this is a very clinical and calculated view to look at this question the majority of television viewers are not homosexual, and indeed the target audience for Star Trek would be aimed at this market. At the end of the day Star Trek is a commercial entity of Paramount pictures that needs to make money, and by catering the majority of their episodes to the majority of television viewers they are simply doing "good," business. This may not fit into our idealised view of what Star Trek is but the fact of the matter is that whatever premise it once had it has all but evaporated now.
|
anthony_zuk
Member
|
# Posted: 16 Aug 2005 19:39
Reply
Personally I think that artile ( of which I read all four pages), is just another example of the internet proving ot us that some poeple really have too much time on their hands. I invite any sane person to write four pages about something as irrelevant and prove me wrong but I won't hold my breath.
|
polson
Member
|
# Posted: 16 Aug 2005 20:35
Reply
I'm not so sure Trek NEEDED to show obvious homosexuality. I think the message Trek showed every episode time and time again was that we are people, and that no matter how different a person is, in appearences or beliefs, or whatever, they are still valued as a person. That's why the borg was so offensive, they stripped people of their individuality, of their beliefs, of their everything. Trek was always about upholding the person, about valuing life, no matter how different.
I'd also like to point out I don't have to agree with a person's way of life to appreciate them, understand them, love them, and hold them in high regard.
|
missmaul
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Aug 2005 01:40
Reply
I dunno of Trek needs a gay character. I do know I had a great laugh with a gay star trek/star wars parody. A german film called traumshiff surprise.
|
nicoll
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Aug 2005 01:57
Reply
Why oh why oh why?
Why must you people waste your time reading this article?
Why must Star Trek or any form of entertainment explore gay rights?
Why should any television show pretend to have some high brow inner meaning exploring the human condition?
Why must you people (including me) debate this when everyone seems to agree?
|
kittykat
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Aug 2005 04:49
Reply
Slightly off the main topic a little but I know in the SCE (starfleet core of engineers) books there is an openly gay character. What I like about that is that the fact that he's gay isn't an issue, he just is. This is what Trek should of be aiming for.
|
quincyw
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Aug 2005 18:28
Reply
Lieutenant Hawk from ST: First Contact was gay too.
|
polson
Member
|
# Posted: 17 Aug 2005 19:21
Reply
Q, don't tell my sister that. He's the only reason I can get her to watch First Contact with me.
|
ayanna
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Aug 2005 01:58
Reply
wasn't their an episode or two of Deep Space nine where it showed Jadzia Dax sorta rekindling affairs with past lovers of Curzan(or however it spelt0 dax? If so i don't see how people can say star trek never shows gay or lesbian intentions 
I personnally dn't get what the big deal is. Not every television show should have gay or lesbian characters. Just because they don't show it in the television show doesn't mean the producer/writers or other people working on the scene is Predigsted (spellcheck, because i have no clue how to really spell that word:P) against gay/lesbian.
This is just my view points and if i don't make sense, don't feel bad i made no sense out of it either after i read it but then again it's 4 am in the morning and i can't fall asleep:P
|
kittykat
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Aug 2005 02:06
Reply
That was once....in 5 series and however many hundred episodes - of course even with that there was a bit of an outcry
|
brady
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Aug 2005 05:56
Reply
Mmn, interesting topic. Good points made here, too. I think the show has been conveniently skirting around the issue for too long now though. There is always subtext and implications, but it'd be good, as KK said to put it out there and get it over with and show it as a non-issue.
That said, however, the 'mainstream sci-fi' audience probably isn't (or wasn't) ready for an openly gay character. Maybe in the next series..
|
polson
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Aug 2005 07:46
Reply
My parents didn't really watch DS9, but that one episode they did see and after that I wasn't allowed to watch it anymore. 'course, a few years later they lightened up and realized I could decide for myself what to watch.
Anyway, I hold to my earlier comment. Trek was always about the value of the person regardless of who they were. They don't need to put every single type of person, personality, or anything on the show in order to prove it.
|
kevkc
Member
|
# Posted: 18 Aug 2005 10:28
Reply
*points* I'm with Brady & KK on this one.
|
deanna
Member
|
# Posted: 24 Aug 2005 12:34
Reply
Doesn't it matter more who you are then who you sleep with??
Just wondering.....
|
anth
Member
|
# Posted: 24 Aug 2005 14:46
Reply
It could be taken as a true sign of progress that, in that era there's been no need to have an episode or character focus on this issue. I'm thinking being gay or bi wouldnt really raise an eyebrow in such advanced way of life, hence no reason to make a big deal of it.
As for the shows we've seen, they amount to 5 crews? i've worked in four work places, and never worked along side an openly gay person. So, i don't think 5 groups of people featured in Trek, and no gay person as yet is stretching reality too far.
Although, it's quite obvious that its the TV networks that are unwilling to feature this kind of stuff. Not so with the new Dr Who of course. Captain Jack is quite obviously bi. But, the shows creators are gay, so maybe thats the difference.
|
polson
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Aug 2005 09:06
Reply
I have one RL friend who is gay, and he happens to be one of my dearest friends. He'd actually like TV shows to lay off with the openly bi and gay characters.
Secondly i'd like to say...there are no Christians on Star Trek. They must not value me. I demand they put a Christian on the next crew to prove that I am also a person of worth and value. 
See what I mean? It's not nessesary.
|
kevkc
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Aug 2005 10:32
Reply
While that may be true, I would like to point out the frequent usage of things like "My God!" and "Good God, Jim!".
Even by Kira. Who was a Bajoran.
So, even if religion didn't survive to the 24th Century, the phraseology did 
K
|
kittykat
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Aug 2005 10:38
Reply
There might be christians on star trek - they generally tend to avoid earth religions which is fair enough, but which particular brand? there's a lot of variations of christianity and why should it get preference over all the other earth religions?
I should also point out that Gene Roddenberry was an atheist.
KK
|
nicoll
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Aug 2005 15:18
Reply
I think I agree with Polson. Eww, how do you wash it off?
I don't think any of this matters. It's television, it's not made to make social points or present an accurate reflection of society.
It is purely a form of entertainment. Television shows have no obligation to show people of different sexualities or religions. The whole point of TV is so that you can sit there and not have to think too hard. Nothing on network TV is particularly complicated and none of it is designed to make you think.
Maybe people should accept this or find something more productive to do with their time than arguing the social makeup of a fictional society in the 24th century.
However, speaking as a devout pagan, I feel there should be more goats being sacrificed for Aru, the Sumerian sky god. If this error in current television programming is not quickly corrected I will be forced to sit and whine about it and post my moaning to the internet. This is a particularly good option since it was recently pointed out to me that I am a whiner. 
|
kevkc
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Aug 2005 16:50
Reply
<!--QuoteBegin--nicoll+Aug. 25 2005,15:18--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td><b>Quote</b> (nicoll @ Aug. 25 2005,15:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><!--QuoteEBegin-->The whole point of TV is so that you can sit there and not have to think too hard. Nothing on network TV is particularly complicated and none of it is designed to make you think.<br><br>Maybe people should accept this or find something more productive to do with their time than arguing the social makeup of a fictional society in the 24th century.<br><br>I feel there should be more goats being sacrificed for Aru, the Sumerian sky god.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--><br>On point one... perhaps US TV is. Irish and UK TV has quite a large amount of thought-provoking and mainly unbiased programming. It's why I'd rather watch the UK's channel four over Fox any day. On Channel 4, incidentally, you have an interesting mix of documentaries, reality TV, comedy, sci-fi, drama, news, sport, gameshow, travel and cartoon (eg. the simpsons/futurama etc.). I'm not working for them or anything, I just find it to be a very interesting and entertaining channel *nods* Moreso than the BBC and RTE. Though TG4, the irish-language station is good.<br><br>On the second point. We love you too. Though, do try to understand, when one is in a minority, one would always prefer to feel accepted. Except if one is an anarchist. In which case, I suppose the opposite is true... A gay/bi character on trek would be a sign that one of our favourite programs knows we're there and accepts and/or cherishes us. Which would be cool.<br><br>And on the third point, I agree. As long as it's not... distasteful in some way <!--emo&:)--><img src="http://www.outpost10f.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smi.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'><!--endemo--><br><br>KC<br>'n' proud.
|
polson
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Aug 2005 19:23
Reply
KK, that's my point! They can't show every single variation of lifestyle and belief system and value system on Star Trek! it's just not plausible. So why can one group put up a stink when they're not mentioned but another group can't? Roddenberry didn't need to protray everything because the main message was there. All people are valuable regardless of race, creed, religion, way of life.
And as a devout Christian, I demand that Nicoll be tried for witchcraft.* And he is a whiner.
*for those not tuned into our program, that was a dig on both media sterotypes and Christians who don't know what they believe.
|
kittykat
Member
|
# Posted: 25 Aug 2005 23:27
Reply
You do realise your arguement could be used to defend not having any "non white" characters in the show?
But Lets see....people are either straight, gay or bi and there are hundreds of religions - yes...it would be a monumental effort to have an out gay character.....all the other sexuality options would be *so* left out
The only reason it wasn't done was because some small minded idiots would of had a hissy fit
|
soran
Member
|
# Posted: 26 Aug 2005 07:07
Reply
It seems to me like this is turning into a trek-bashing thread. All I have to say about trek not meaning anything and just being another brain boiling TV show is total BS! Trek has covered many issues over it's almost 40 years, Look at one episode of enterprise, a group of religious radicals steals enterprise to use it againt the so called infedels, and look what the end of the show proved, if you fight over religion, it will eventually destroy the planet and everything we care about! And so many other topics that were aprroached in the show(s).. Willam shatner and Nichel nochols had the first interracial kiss on telivision ever! c'mon people, get real and drop this issue
|
polson
Member
|
# Posted: 26 Aug 2005 07:43
Reply
KK, if they had created Star Trek with no whites on it, I'd never have complained, probably wouldn't have even noticed. If they had a show with all whites I still wouldn't have noticed. And my point is, they don't NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED to show it! They didn't NEED to put a Russian on the Enterprise or a black woman, or whatever, because the show would still have pushed the idea that no matter who you are you're a PERSON!
And frankly, anyone with half a brain knows that even if your sexual orientation is different (regardless of one's personal beliefs on it), that person is still a human being! And putting gays or bis on Star Trek is never going to force anyone to see that, nor have the same effect that having a black woman on the Enterprise ever did.
|
nicoll
Member
|
# Posted: 26 Aug 2005 08:30
Reply
OK, first Star Trek has never proved anything other than "the script writers wrote this". It is not a reflection of reality and has no impact on the real world.
|
kevkc
Member
|
# Posted: 26 Aug 2005 11:06
Reply
Yes. Putting a black woman on TV in the sixties proved nothing.
It had no impact on TV.
And no impact on the real world.
As we say here in Cork... "Off wit' cha".
|
soran
Member
|
# Posted: 26 Aug 2005 11:43
Reply
Well you can say it has no impact, but I think it does and did.. And if you guys really think it's a show that means nothing (which is what you are saying) then focus on something else, not this!
KMFA
Soran :-D
|
monny
Member
|
# Posted: 27 Aug 2005 05:19
Reply
<!--QuoteBegin--kevkc+Aug. 26 2005,11:06--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td><b>Quote</b> (kevkc @ Aug. 26 2005,11:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><!--QuoteEBegin-->Yes. Putting a black woman on TV in the sixties proved nothing.<br><br>It had no impact on TV.<br><br>And no impact on the real world.<br><br>As we say here in Cork... "Off wit' cha".<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--><br>On the contrary...it changed a lot of things.<br><br>Seeing Uhura encouraged many young people of African decent to explore other possibilites. Dr Mae Jemison, who happened to be the first "black" woman in space, mentioned that the character of Uhura was an inspiration to her. Dr Jemison later made a guest appearance on STNG as a transporter operator.<br><br>My qustion is this: Why is it that when there is an issue regarding homosexuality, race is brought up?<br>They are not the same..hello!<br><br>I have to agree with a few others on this topic.<br>Start Trek was about accepting EVERYONE.<br>What does who you sleep with have to do with anything?<br><br><br><br>(btw... Sarcasm was noted but I found it a good oppurtunity to add my 2 cents. <!--emo&:P--><img src="http://www.outpost10f.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/ton.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':P'><!--endemo--> )
<br><br><!--EDIT|monny|Aug. 27 2005,05:29-->
|
