Homosexual Rights in the Star Trek Universe

It's true we've never seen direct evidence of homosexuality on the show but we have seen other information, which when combined with our present day knowledge allows us to deduce that there is homosexuality.

Same with female presidents. The lack of female presidents would contradict other information established in the show. And the reason we have not seen any is more the lack of imagination of the writers to always reach into the male bucket when they need a character to be harsh and authoritative.

And I think of your story takes place in 1961 in the US, Kennedy is president by default unless established otherwise, again applying our real world knowledge to the information given to us in the story.

 

Just as a side note, a woman named Nanietta Bacco is President of the Federation in the current TrekLit continuity, and while I'll admit that isn't screen canon, I accept it as "true", anyway, because I think TrekLit is now the primary source for events in the Primeverse. (And with rare exception, they're doing a damned fine job, too.)

 

Spoiler: Novelverse

Nope, she's dead now. And likely to have a male successor. Or maybe they'll surprise us and go intersex/androgyne.

 

Spoiler: Novelverse

Her successor is an Andorian.

 

^Boy, girl, gay, straight, none of the above?

(That last one would be interesting)

 

^^^

Spoiler: Novelverse

Well, considering it's an Andorian, 'none of the above' is right since all Andorians are tri-sexual by default. Her name is Kellessar zh'Tarash, and she is a zhen (one of the 'female' sexes). She is mildly controversial in that her primary relationship is only with the shen in her bond (that is, the other 'female' sex) although considering that her th'se and ch'te were both killed in the Borg Invasion that controversy seems a bit mean-spirited).

 

Spoiler: Wait-a-minute

I thought the Andorians had four genders (quad-sexual), not three.

 

^ That's right. Although it would seem that there's still a male/female organization on that world, there's just two different kinds of each.

And this is entirely an invention of the novels, BTW. The only times it was ever said onscreen, it was only regarding a typical marriage requiring groups of four people. Gender was never specified, it could have simply been a group marriage.

@DonIago: You forgot Ishan Anjar. Although this may have been intentional, amirite?

 

Again, I don't see any dilemma or "Catch-22" at all.

It's perfectly possible to have gay characters without their sexual orientation being treated as an "issue" or suggesting that this is still a big deal in the future. For all the reasons I've explained before.

Just show Lt. O'Roarke admiring an attractive member of the same sex, as straight Trek characters have done with the attractive members of the opposite sex for nearly fifty years. Mission accomplished. Easy-peasy.

There's only a "Catch-22" if we persist in thinking that any story featuring gay characters has to be about gay issues. As opposed to, say, Lt. O'Roarke's sexuality being treated the same way Geordi's or Sisko's is.

I mean, it's not like TOS made an "issue" out of the fact that there were black or Asian crew members aboard. There was no Catch-22 there.

"So, Lieutenant Uhura, you're black and it's the 1960s, so I guess we have to deal with that and call attention to it, even if that runs of the risk of making it seem that race is still an issue in the future."

 

Think of a large square divided into four smaller ones inside, each segment is an Andorian gender. Pick one, it's attracted to the other three, repeat for all four.

Whatever gender you are on Andoria, you fancy three others, tri-sexual.

A quad-sexual Andorian would also be attracted to it's own gender, making a 5-some, which would just be terribly awkward for the 5th Andorian...

 

Ishan Anjar is dead to me!

 

Well, it was made an issue of, in "The Savage Curtain", and while bordering on the ham-fisted, I think that they pulled it off and managed to make racism seem anachronistic. Explicitly using a construct of the past semi-deftly dodged the boldfaced issue.

 

True, but that was well into the third season and Uhura's presence had long been taken for granted at that point. And it made sense to address the issue in the context of Abraham Lincoln!

 

Good point.

Yes.

 

If Lieutenant O'Roarke falls through a time warp and ends up at the Stonewall Riots, then you can have him being gay an issue.

But not before we get to know him as just another crew member first, who just happens to be gay.

 

Regardless of the Trek Universe, the public's reaction needs to be taken in consideration as to the success or failure of such a film. Too much of a risk to take I would think with hundreds of millions at stake. I for one would have a very huge problem with it but that is just my opinion, everyone has one.

 

I don't see it as a risk at all. The sexuality of fictional characters doesn't seem to have any impact on the success or failure of a film.

Given your history in topics such as this, I suggest you tread carefully in this thread.

 

And one does not compromise the principles of the franchise because it makes some of the audience most of which doesn't like Trek anyway a little uncomfortable.

 

I see what you're say, except if a Andorian were a quad-sexual then that would be the equivalent of a Human bi-sexual, where the Andorian was attracted to the 3 opposite (opposing?) genders, plus was attracted to members of their own gender.

They're gay.

And if a Andorian were attracted solely to those of their own gender that would make them a homosexual.

Also gay

Plus if a Andorian were attracted to one or two of the other genders, but not all three ... we're going to need some new words here.

While gay main characters are not exactly ubiquitous, we common enough in multiple series and movie for it really to be part of the standard mix of just about any new show.

Gays, just part of the normal crowd like the uptight Brit, the funny Mexican and the slutty Korean girl.

 

Given that we live in an era in which every other sitcom has a gay character or two, and only the usual suspects ever object, I can't see this being much of a risk nowadays . . . and it's becoming even less so at an accelerating rate. Demographically, the vast majority of young people couldn't care less . . . and that's where the real box office is.

And Star Trek, properly, should be out ahead of the curve, not dragging behind.