Homosexual Rights in the Star Trek Universe

Andorian sexuality is starting to give me a headache.

 

As long as Paramount thinks Star Trek needs to be a blockbuster action movie franchise, there won't be any risks. Star Trek should be a TV show or smaller movies that can tell better stories.

 

OK but I still don't understand what your conclusion is.

In other words, when you visit the world of Star Trek in your imagination, what explanation do you, for yourself, use?

 

what?

You say yourself it's the equivalent of a human bisexual, so right there that's not 'gay.' It's bisexual.

They're not the same thing. It's bisexual erasure to say they are, and I would have thought a transgender person was against that. Bisexual is not the same as gay, and you even say that yourself, so what the hell are you talking about?

.

 

Which is ironic. Today's 21st century TV now often show openly gay couples, in even a society that may still have problems accepting it.

This is in contrast to T'Girl's (and other fan's) feeling that Trek is suspiciously hiding homosexuality, or at worse it might even still be ostracized in 24th century society.

But that clashes with the image of 24th century society being accepting and open minded and eradicating all prejudices.

But if homophobia is extinct, then homosexuality is not an issue, so we have to assume that it is accepted--

But as the counter argument goes--

Unless you see a normal same sex couple in broad daylight, in a regular basis, the conclusion some fans are going to draw is that it is suppressed.

Is that too far out an idea?

Tt sounds extreme, but maybe not entirely. In TOS, it was said women were barred from becoming Starfleet captains. Even the Romulans were ahead of them.

 

Assuming you're talking about Dr Janice Lester's comment from 'Turnabout Intruder', that was not stated outright. Many have chosen to read it that way, but there are numerous other possible readings that are far more palatable and in line with the general Star Trek ethos.

Here's a brief conversation between myself, Christopher and borgboy in the old "LGBT Characters in TrekLit" thread:

Plus, if we hold all Trek TV equally canonical then that is already contradicted earlier in the chronology by the presence of Erika Hernandez.

My point being, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Why choose the more depressing interpretation when a more optimistic interpretation is available and fits better with the general ethos of the series? That applies to LGBTs just the same as it does to 'minorities' of all other kinds. ('Minorities' in scare quotes because when everybody is equal, the concept of a minority becomes meaningless. Everyone is a minority and no-one is a minority.)

.

 

I think what this comes down to is that there's insufficient data to draw a hard conclusion either way.

 

Actually it is, gay is an umbrella term, male and female homosexuals are gay, male and female bisexuals are gay, transsexuals are gay. There are others who are outside of what I just listed who are also gay.

It's a big umbrella.

I said it was the equilent to bisexual and therefor gay.

Yes they are.

As a transsexual that makes me gay, separately as a bisexual that also make me gay.

I'm talking about what I've learned living as part of the gay community for over a decade.

 

I consider the idea that in Trek earth society, if homosexuals are not seen, then they must be somehow still be ostracized to be pretty extreme.

Just based on what we know what the Federation represents.

At the same time it doesn't surprise me that some fans will draw those types of conclusions. Extreme, maybe, but sometimes ideas like that aren't always far fetched.

That's where Turnabout Intruder comes in. At first I thought the same way too.

The problem is there are other things that the characters say and do in the episode that supports the idea that Starfleet didn't allow women to be captain.

If Janice was simply angry that Kirk couldn't include her in his life, why did she switch bodies with him to take command of the Enterprise?

Taken all together, it does look like pretty daming evidence. Starfleet didn't oppress women, but it did bar them from becoming captains.

So is it possible to have a free and open society that doesn't opress homosexuality, but yet ostrasizes it?

I still think that idea is extreme, but.. hey, there's Turnabout Intruder

 

Which is why I said it is just my opinion If someone comes out and starts name calling then I hope the same thing that was dealt to me would also be dealt to them.

 

If you have a problem with the way you've been treated, feel free to take it up with the admin, T'Bonz. Otherwise, play nice or play elsewhere.

 

But if it makes them a little uncomfortable, they may not come watch it. Paramount would just have to weigh the pros and cons of only a section of the audience watching it or something good for all audiences - or at least make that the goal for a team of writers. The more who watch it, the more money they make thus they may not want to take the risk of establishing a precedent that may affect every Trek film thereafter.

 

Well, you do have me there. Touche'

 

What do Nancy Sinatra and Sammy Davis Jr* have to do with Star Trek?

*Above Kiss occurred on A variety Special Movin' With Nancy on NBC Dec 11, 1967

Plato's Stepchildren is credited as the first Interracial Kiss (Between a White and Black Actor/Actress) on a Network Drama and occurred almost a year later on Nov 22, 1968

I believe there was also an Asian Involved with an Interracial Kiss before Plato's Stepchildren aired, as well, wasn't there?

 

But what of the opposite reaction? If it became known (say through the entertainment press) that CBS considered and then rejected inclusion of a gay character in the lead cast, would a portion of the potential viewing audience deliberately not watch the show, solely because of CBS's decision on that one character?

Which decision would lose the show more viewers?

It isn't just a game of raw numbers, there is also the consideration of the demographics of the audience. Advertisers want the 18 - 35 age group, and will pay more to advertise on shows that draw them.

Increasingly younger viewers expect the inclusion of gay characters in a generally diverse cast.

 

Sorry for the self-quote, but I'd really like to hear T'Girl's response to my question. Don't know if you actually saw it or if it got lost in the shuffle.

 

Don't try to tell me what being gay means. I've been a part of the gay community too - for over 20 years - so don't make this into a contest of 'I'm more gay than you are so I know better.'

No, gay is not the same as bisexual and transgender. If you're trying to lump everyone under one banner title then that's why we have queer or LGBT, and even that isn't sufficient for many, which is why we have things like LGBTQI+ and ever more unwieldy acronyms.

Yes, 'gay' is often used as a generic term for anyone who isn't 150% hetero Kinsey 0, but always with the knowledge that it is generic and inaccurate and nuance-free. And usually by people who don't particularly care about the ways we may or may not define ourselves and just want to throw us all in one pile and forget about us.

Factually and scientifically, homosexual and bisexual and transgender are not the same things, and we only bond together because we suffer similarly from the hetero majority. Label yourself whatever you want, that's your right and privilege, but don't try to say that bisexuals are really just gay.

.

 

In a lot of polls, Seattle often ranks second behind San Francisco as the city in America with the highest percentage of LGBT in the general population. I'm very used to seeing people out in public who are same sex interacting in a "relationship fashion." Everyday stuff. In parks with children. Dancing together in clubs, and not just gay clubs, just regular clubs. In the life I live this is business as usual.

As I stated before I don't have just one explanation for what I'm picking up from the show, but I do perceive a general wrongness about the the future that's depicted in Trek when it comes to the gay segment of the population.

I can only relate what I've learned from the gay society community I'm surrounded by.

I make no claim to being either more or less gay than you.

YMMV.

With respect, it isn't just me.

I would agree that it is a generic term, but not to the rest of your statement.

I do not feel this is a accurate description.

I agree.

Of the people who are gay, some of the them are bisexual.