Star Trek Producer Laments Lack of Gays
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
Basically this. Saying it's a problem there were no gays in Star Trek is like saying it's a problem there were no gays in Star Wars.TU4AR said:
Also it must be a bad joke that Digikid got put on probation and a sign that a mod must be intolerant of people who disagree with him.
I'm not sure whether or not it has been alluded to, but alternate universe Kira basically asserted that she had sex with other ladies. Of course she's the bad guy too (bad guys can be gay because gay is evil, at least according to hack writers). There are a few other borderline cases, but even granted that DS9 is the most homosexual-friendly of the Star Treks the examples are few and far between.
That being said, in the movies or in the show a gay character should not be an issue unless Starfleet canonically eradicated the gay gene or something else stupid like that. Of course a regular character who was openly gay and whose gayness didn't bug anybody would have been/be awesome. Or even a regular who was normally heterosexual, had gay sex and didn't have to dedicate an episode to being transgressive would have been a big step. There is no reason this would have been out of place in the universe for any reason except for the outraged reactions of ignorant fans making TV/movie execs feel uncomfortable.
That being said, in the movies or in the show a gay character should not be an issue unless Starfleet canonically eradicated the gay gene or something else stupid like that. Of course a regular character who was openly gay and whose gayness didn't bug anybody would have been/be awesome. Or even a regular who was normally heterosexual, had gay sex and didn't have to dedicate an episode to being transgressive would have been a big step. There is no reason this would have been out of place in the universe for any reason except for the outraged reactions of ignorant fans making TV/movie execs feel uncomfortable.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,039
- 3,059
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
that doesnt count, anyone who wouldnt fuck or by fucked by Takei isnt a real americanthethingthatlurks said:Yes, no homosexuality to discuss here...
No, not at all. All of the characters are perfectly straight...
(let's not take this out of context, shall we? I know George Takei is gay, and that doesn't make him any less of an actor, or this particular scene any less gay).
Less on topic, but I'm sure that a lack of sexuality diversity is one of the least of Brannon Braga's regrets about his handling of the Star Trek franchise.
Look at the career trajectories of two of Trek's top writers, Ronald D. Moore and Braga. Braga milked each franchise he continued to it's ill plotted demise (Voyager/Enterprise).
Moore, fed up with the b.s. of Trek mythology, jumped (space)ship and reinvented Battlestar Gallactica. It had more realistic portrayals of sexuality and even openly gay/bi main characters. The best Braga could pull off was to put his ex-girlfriend in a tight star fleet suit and call it a day.
But 5 years later "lament" the lack of gay characters. Heaven forbid doing something controversial or even politically topical. He played it safe and put out a milquetoast product fewer people care about.
BSG won a Peabody.
Look at the career trajectories of two of Trek's top writers, Ronald D. Moore and Braga. Braga milked each franchise he continued to it's ill plotted demise (Voyager/Enterprise).
Moore, fed up with the b.s. of Trek mythology, jumped (space)ship and reinvented Battlestar Gallactica. It had more realistic portrayals of sexuality and even openly gay/bi main characters. The best Braga could pull off was to put his ex-girlfriend in a tight star fleet suit and call it a day.
But 5 years later "lament" the lack of gay characters. Heaven forbid doing something controversial or even politically topical. He played it safe and put out a milquetoast product fewer people care about.
BSG won a Peabody.
That makes no sense... Would adding a homosexual, open or not, added anything from the show?
If the answer is no, which is is, than why ***** about it.
Even without a homosexual character, it was still an amazing show that gathered an occult following.
I suppose it may have added more realism, seeing how when we are that far in the future, we would (ideally accept all people regardless or race, gender or sexuality, but just because there could have been a homosexual, who was accepted by other people, it doesn't particularly mean they would meet someone who was, or someone who found it necessary to express the fact that he, or she, was openly.
I found the portrayal of future interaction between people and there disposition towards a specific gender or sexual preference to be perfectly reasonable.
If the answer is no, which is is, than why ***** about it.
Even without a homosexual character, it was still an amazing show that gathered an occult following.
I suppose it may have added more realism, seeing how when we are that far in the future, we would (ideally accept all people regardless or race, gender or sexuality, but just because there could have been a homosexual, who was accepted by other people, it doesn't particularly mean they would meet someone who was, or someone who found it necessary to express the fact that he, or she, was openly.
I found the portrayal of future interaction between people and there disposition towards a specific gender or sexual preference to be perfectly reasonable.
Tolerance and everything is important, but does the lack of gays make show autonatically worse?
Oh boy, political correctness at its finest.
But okay, still a better idea than black hobbits, because it would at least fit into the series' universe.
Also, this:
Oh boy, political correctness at its finest.
But okay, still a better idea than black hobbits, because it would at least fit into the series' universe.
Also, this:
WilliamRLBaker said:
This is the most ridicules "news" story ever.
When Patrick Steward was presented as the Captain of the Enterprise a reporter asked Gene Roddenberry, "Surely by the 24th century they would have found a cure for male pattern baldness?"
Gene said, "No by the 24th century no one will care"
In the Star Trek universe, someone being gay is as exciting as walking in Zero Gravity
When Patrick Steward was presented as the Captain of the Enterprise a reporter asked Gene Roddenberry, "Surely by the 24th century they would have found a cure for male pattern baldness?"
Gene said, "No by the 24th century no one will care"
In the Star Trek universe, someone being gay is as exciting as walking in Zero Gravity
Lieutenant Hawk (Neal McDonough in First Contact) was gay. Admittedly, it was in one of the novels, was never mentioned in the movie, was denied by the actor and the movie's producers, and the book came out after First Contact as a resolver to any loose threads.
Also, they never confirmed that character's first name.
So, maybe?
Also, they never confirmed that character's first name.
So, maybe?
Eh, adding homosexual characters in it almost certainly wouldn't have affected anything.
But the total abscence of any throughout the shows 5 series over many years with hundreds of characters is a bit suspicious, yes.
But the total abscence of any throughout the shows 5 series over many years with hundreds of characters is a bit suspicious, yes.
Sorry, I'm no Trek scholar either. But I loves me some BSG. RDM left Trek (from what he's said on BSG DVD commentaries) because of plot resolutions based on fake technology; pages of dialog about how "rerouting the warp drive's power conductor would recalibrate a rift in the space time continuum....etc".dalek sec said:
The Enterprise (RDM bitches about this one alot) always was fixed in perfect condition the following week, no matter what damage it sustained the previous episode.
There's a general lack of human fallacy. "Realism" is hard to discuss about a show that is 100% fantasy, but RDM wanted BSG to have more realistic human interaction than Trek did.
To get back on topic: people trapped in metal boxes floating in the middle of nowhere are gonna get intoxicated and horny. That may or may not affect how they perform their duties in a militaristic/scientific organization.