Star Trek and Homosexuality

[Bry_Sinclair]

^ That is quite true T'Girl. But I would like to see it that way, just basically to stick it to the narrow minded bigots who are opposed to same-sex marriage.

There's nothing to say that another character on the series couldn't be bisexual and sleeps around

[Miss Lemon]

Bry_Sinclair wrote:

---

There's nothing to say that another character on the series couldn't be bisexual and sleeps around

Cause them bisexuals are bed-hopping 'deviants'?

[T'Girl]

They could also be celibate, and sleep around.

But what would be the point?

")

[Bry_Sinclair]

Miss Lemon wrote:

---

Cause them bisexuals are bed-hopping 'deviants'?

I know a few and they are lovely people. But they do like to keep their options open

[Nightdiamond]

Miss Lemon wrote:

---

It always puzzles me how people argue that the "Dax kiss" is not a "lesbian kiss" and how it were actually the heterosexual symbionts doing the kissing.

Maybe because it happened rather quietly. No gimmicks and hype, just a quiet episode.

Strangely, it was said that it got a huge number of calls and they were mostly negative.

Like I said, it's bizarre how many closed minded people watch Trek, considering that it stated from the beginning that all (human) prejudices were eliminated in the 23-24th century.

What could they expect?

This may be why Trek is always going to very, very careful about 'crossing the line'.

So that they're not seen as stereotypical bed-hopping 'deviants

Like M.U Kira ?

[The Castellan]

Nightdiamond, I am not surprised with a lot of closed minded folks watching Trek. Hell, I got chewed up rather thoroughly with my thread regarding UFOs, alien life, and other items of the paranormal. To me, those people are fine if things happen in an artificial, fictitious universe, bot not in a real one. It's akin here, where it's "Fine, but don't let it be on MY television!" Or they try to make some counter argument like with the Dax kiss.

Take Cassy, and her wife, Luna, here.

This one will mess with the closed minded folks since it can be both hetro and homosexual.....in that Cassy biologically a male, (aka she's a girl, but has male genitals), and homo, since while she is a 'male' she's still a girl, and sex and gender are two different things, plus Cassy has been with one or two males who think of themselves as hetro, so I'd like to see the closed minded, Archie Bunker types try and explain this one.

Trek needs to cross more lines, I think. They did it with Kirk and Uhura kissing, pissed off most of the Southern United States, so let's find some more groups to piss off, says myself.

Personally, I would not mind having the bed with MU Kira....since she's game for many things.

[Destructor]

Yeah as someone mentioned above, you couldn't really create a character that was 'like Riker/Kirk, only gay', because that plays directly into the stereotype of the gay man as sexually voracious. It'd be like having a black character who loves fried chicken and is awesome at basketball- those have become such cliches about black characters that it'd SEEM offensive, even if you were in fact just treating the gay character equally.

[J. Allen]

Danoz wrote:

---

Fair point. But I think this is more what some people are looking for:



It's so engrained into the national psyche to find this repulsive that no producer would take it on. Having a kid brother who is gay and having many friends in theater, this doesn't shock me. Trek led the charge in so many ways on the progressive front, that I think it's fair to say they were weak on the issue of homosexuality.

That doesn't change the fact that I freaking love all Trek, from ToS to Enterprise.

<_<
>_>

...

*right click* *save*

<_<
>_>

[The Castellan]

Destructor wrote:

---

Yeah as someone mentioned above, you couldn't really create a character that was 'like Riker/Kirk, only gay', because that plays directly into the stereotype of the gay man as sexually voracious. It'd be like having a black character who loves fried chicken and is awesome at basketball- those have become such cliches about black characters that it'd SEEM offensive, even if you were in fact just treating the gay character equally.

Some guy folks don't fit any cliche's. John Barrowman tried to go for a role of the gay fellow in "Will and Grace" but was rejected because he "felt too straight". He's the sorta who likes cars and watches football.

Making any character, regardless of sexuality, just need to be made as the writer sees fit. If it's about a Klingon who likes to eat roast beef, plays shuffleboard and trying to breed pet rocks, go for it.

[Nightdiamond]

The Castellan wrote:

---

Nightdiamond, I am not surprised with a lot of closed minded folks watching Trek. Hell, I got chewed up rather thoroughly with my thread regarding UFOs, alien life, and other items of the paranormal.

So therefore it's ok to fantasize about aliens and supernatural beings in a tv show, but to speculate about in real life, no way!
So strange.... Trek pretty much has said religion is akin to superstition and that hasn't p*ssed anyone off after all this time?

This one will mess with the closed minded folks since it can be both hetro and homosexual.....in that Cassy biologically a male, (aka she's a girl, but has male genitals), and homo, since while she is a 'male' she's still a girl

This is interesting...remember that speech that Quark gave Odo in Chimera?.

Trek needs to cross more lines, I think. They did it with Kirk and Uhura kissing, pissed off most of the Southern United States, so let's find some more groups to piss off, says myself.

Agreed. If Trek is to survive on tv they may have to adapt to a new formula that is less repressed or limited.
They don't have to force anything down the fans throat (no puns, no puns) and neither should the fans to them.

There is too much competition from other shows that have already pushed the envelope.

The shows that did this, like on cable, are enjoying huge ratings, not because they show explicit smut all the time, but the storylines are new and different and the fans have to watch each week.

The kiss in DS9 is NOTHING compared to the stuff they show in Japanese anime (which airs on regular television)

[The Castellan]

Nightdiamond wrote:

---

So therefore it's ok to fantasize about aliens and supernatural beings in a tv show, but to speculate about in real life, no way!
So strange.... Trek pretty much has said religion is akin to superstition and that hasn't p*ssed anyone off after all this time?

This is interesting...remember that speech that Quark gave Odo in Chimera?.

Agreed. If Trek is to survive on tv they may have to adapt to a new formula that is less repressed or limited.
They don't have to force anything down the fans throat (no puns, no puns) and neither should the fans to them.

There is too much competition from other shows that have already pushed the envelope.

The shows that did this, like on cable, are enjoying huge ratings, not because they show explicit smut all the time, but the storylines are new and different and the fans have to watch each week.

The kiss in DS9 is NOTHING compared to the stuff they show in Japanese anime (which airs on regular television)

Yesh. Cross more lines. And in my own Trek crossovers I do put in stuff like magic, mysticism and religious related stuff, since I feel that as a species, man has to have a scientific, yet spiritual balance, since one without the other is nothing.

And yes, you won't believe the amount of tinfoil hat jokes or names like conspiracy quack when even hinting at alien life, or that we've been visited, and maybe influenced by their visitations in the distant past, rather than say the typical, "There is nothing out there!" or "If they are out there, we'll never see them because they are so far away and because we can't go faster than light, they can't either" or the much tired "if they were out there, they'd land on the white house lawn". Even Roddenberry hinted to this in "Who Mourns for Adonis" with Apollo and the other gods influencing ancient Greece or the guy who was Davinchi and other influential people in human history, and also acknowledged cover ups regarding UFO's in Tomorrow is Yesterday. Personally, I think many directors, producers, and writers know what's going on and are trying to tell us something.

I have not seen much DS9 (never got the chance to watch it much), so I don't know what Quark told Odo. I also made Cassy a 'male' or 'chick with a dick' to also really test the readers/watchers, and see if they can accept such a concept or still find her attractive/desirable despite having a pole between her legs instead of a hole.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...ron/Hover7.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...on/Travel5.jpg
I am pondering Cassy also having a fling with Vanda, the Andorian girl of the crew (both Cassy and Luna have a poly relationship, since both don't get to see each other for a long time, so they both get to see someone on the side...plus I've gotten requests for naughty images of Vanda )

And as a person who loves anime, if I can get my own Trek comic going, it's going to be an anime take on Trek, sweat drops, fall overs, colorful hair and glomping and all.

~Gives Night Diamond a cookie~

[Sci]

The Castellan wrote:

---

And yes, you won't believe the amount of tinfoil hat jokes or names like conspiracy quack when even hinting at alien life, or that we've been visited, and maybe influenced by their visitations in the distant past,

Castellan, demanding that there be reliable empirical evidence that something has happened or that something exists is not the same thing as being closed-minded about the possibility. Science is a process, not a belief system.

[The Castellan]

Sci wrote:

---

Castellan, demanding that there be reliable empirical evidence that something has happened or that something exists is not the same thing as being closed-minded about the possibility. Science is a process, not a belief system.

Well, name calling or posting cheesy pictures or captions are not a process, either, but it does not stop them now, does it?
Also, in my own experiences, a majority of the so-called scientific community is as, if not more, dogmatic than the religious community, with more concerns of their egotism and staying 'correct' than anything else. Especially since many of them will still deny things, and will only listen to those in positions of some type of authority, rather then their own eyes, and the evidence in front of them. Galileo and Copernicus were looked upon the same way, to the point where they got arrested, and no one would listen to them, despite the evidence right in front of everyone's eyes. So, I hold to the idea that the scientific community is just as egotistic as the organized religious community. Hell, in the infamous Brookings Report, which I hate with extreme passion, on page 215, if I remember right, it even said that, should we make contact, engineers and scientists would be the most devastated due to no longer being the top masters over nature and matter. And believe me, many scientists I know are more arrogant than rock stars.

[Sci]

The Castellan wrote:

---

Well, name calling or posting cheesy pictures or captions are not a process, either, but it does not stop them now, does it?
Also, in my own experiences, a majority of the so-called scientific community is as, if not more, dogmatic than the religious community, with more concerns of their egotism and staying 'correct' than anything else. Especially since many of them will still deny things, and will only listen to those in positions of some type of authority, rather then their own eyes, and the evidence in front of them. Galileo and Copernicus were looked upon the same way, to the point where they got arrested, and no one would listen to them, despite the evidence right in front of everyone's eyes. So, I hold to the idea that the scientific community is just as egotistic as the organized religious community. Hell, in the infamous Brookings Report, which I hate with extreme passion, on page 215, if I remember right, it even said that, should we make contact, engineers and scientists would be the most devastated due to no longer being the top masters over nature and matter. And believe me, many scientists I know are more arrogant than rock stars.

If you have reliable empirical evidence for the things you're supposing happened, I'd be happy to see it. Otherwise, long ad hominem attacks do not support your position.

[YARN]

The Castellan wrote:

---

Take Cassy, and her wife, Luna, here.

This one will mess with the closed minded folks since it can be both hetro and homosexual.....in that Cassy biologically a male, (aka she's a girl, but has male genitals), and homo, since while she is a 'male' she's still a girl, and sex and gender are two different things, plus Cassy has been with one or two males who think of themselves as hetro, so I'd like to see the closed minded, Archie Bunker types try and explain this one.

No, what you have there is a creepy cat-eared cgi image feeding another lifeless computer image a strawberry. What's even creepier is that you are referring to this image as if it depicts a real couple.

You might as well post a picture of a furry and describe it's sexual organs and preferences to "mess" with people.