RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,734
Posts: 5,432,826
Members: 24,836
Currently online: 464
Newest member: crazycornuts

TrekToday headlines

Episode Four of The Red Shirt Diaries
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Star Trek: The Compendium Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Orci Drops Rangers Project
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Retro Review: Image in the Sand
By: Michelle on Sep 20

Star Trek: Shadows Of Tyranny Casting Call
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

USS Vengeance And More Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek 3 To Being Shooting Next Year
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 10 2013, 01:19 PM   #271
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

T'Grinch wrote: View Post
it's INSULTING to have Lester tagged as merely a nutjob so that one's precious Star Trek can remain precious.
She's tagged as a nutjob becuase she was a nutjob.

People who murder an entire research team to set up a plan to steal their ex-boyfriend's body so they can play starship captain and then spend the rest of the episode being a paranoid loon that is planing to illegally execute people are not sane.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 01:34 PM   #272
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

This is the point of disagreement. We aren't writing off Lester as a nutjob just to suit ourselves. The fact is she's written and portrayed as a nutjob. And if we hew to the narrowest possible interpretation of Lester's dialogue then it means the writers were cowards and didn't have the courage of their convictions. Instead of portraying Lester as a totally stable and competent individual facing discrimination they chose to use an erratic and hysterical one that could be easily dismissed. If anything it says the writers didn't dare come right out and say what they were really thinking.

But "Turnabout Intruder" was the last episode in a cancelled series and it displays examples of very sloppy writing. The thinking behind this episode (and not just the sexism issue) is flawed and sloppy. Add in that the subtext goes against the overall spirit of the rest of the series. It's fiction and not a documentary or docudrama. You can make a case it reveals sexism that actually existed in 1960's society (you can say that about every show of that era), but we don't have to accept only that interpretation for the fictional universe of TOS that mostly argues against it.

Your own personal experience possibly influences you to see aspects of this episode differently than I do. I don't think that can be argued.

For me it still comes down to wanting firsthand evidence on the issue. Was the sexism in the episode deliberate and an affirmation as to why we never saw a female Starfleet command officer or was it unconscious?
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 01:56 PM   #273
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

Take another point of contention within the series: the miniskirt uniform. Today a lot of people see it as a blatant example of sexism, but the idea for the costume came from Grace Lee Whitney (I believe) and not Roddenberry. The miniskirt was a symbol of empowerment for many women back in the day, but time has changed perceptions and lost the original symbolism. So now the miniskirt is being seen in another light from what was originally intended.

Would it have been better if they had stuck with the more unisex design for the uniform? Yes, from a more practical standpoint (within the context of TOS' fictional universe) and from an historical context. But that's not how it played out and partly because the producers had no inkling the show would continue to be dissected for decades upon decades later. Even if they could have had an inkling the show could remain popular how could they predict future changes of perspective in society and what they might be?

And is the miniskirt any more sexist than the ridiculous skin tight catsuits seen in later Treks, the epitome of which was the character 7 of 9? At one time (historically) the miniskirt represented something of value to women. What does the catsuit represent?
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 03:27 PM   #274
CommishSleer
Fleet Captain
 
CommishSleer's Avatar
 
Location: At the After Party Still...
View CommishSleer's Twitter Profile
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

I'm not sure that any of the Treks were ahead of the times when it came to equality of the genders though. I wouldn't say Troi (with her low-cut tops) or Crusher would be classified as 'women liberationists'. Maybe TNG had too much GR influence.

I got no problems with DS9 or VOY. ENT was probably a little step backwards though. I don't care about the miniskirts or catsuits that much. I sort of explain the catsuits away as 'most efficient outfit' but laugh at the big heels that 7of9 wears.

I am old enough that I have experience sexism in my life. I wasn't allowed to take certain subjects. I remember when equal pay for women came in my country.

Still TOS always inspired me in my career choices. I thought that girls still could do anything even if the system made it difficult at the time. Maybe I didn't look too closely or critically at TOS then. Maybe just having women working on the bridge or women scientists, women occasionally kicking butt or the woman Romulan Commander were enough considering the times.
CommishSleer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 04:14 PM   #275
RandyS
Vice Admiral
 
RandyS's Avatar
 
Location: Randyland
View RandyS's Twitter Profile
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

Elf Spock wrote: View Post

I got no problems with DS9 or VOY. ENT was probably a little step backwards though.
Really? In what sense?
RandyS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 04:25 PM   #276
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

borgboy wrote: View Post
Lost Girl is pretty good with the lesbian issue, although I've heard some criticism of the same sex relationship being treated as "less than". I'm not sure I agree with that completely, but it does seem like Bo's relationship with her wolf is going to be her "endgame".
Wow, I hope not. Dyson is so boring. Bo and Lauren are great together, but Bo and Tamsin have incredible chemistry and I really hope they get together this coming season.

And I don't see any "less than." I think Lost Girl does a fantastic job treating sexual orientation as a complete non-issue. It writes relationships as relationships regardless of the sexes of the participants.


Warped9 wrote: View Post
^^ You've essentially answered the question: individuals behind the scenes not yet ready to go forward with the idea.
But I've already cited shows that have gone forward with the idea. There have been several gay male characters in lead roles in SFTV over the past several years. Jack Harkness and Ianto Jones were lead characters on Torchwood. Steve Jinks is a regular cast member on Warehouse 13. Felix Dawkins is one of the lead male characters on Orphan Black.

So this is not some hypothetical future scenario. These changes have already happened. Gay characters of both sexes are now a regular presence in a significant and increasing amount of SFTV (although, granted, more so on cable and imported shows than on US commercial network TV).


Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
T'Grinch wrote: View Post
it's INSULTING to have Lester tagged as merely a nutjob so that one's precious Star Trek can remain precious.
She's tagged as a nutjob becuase she was a nutjob.

People who murder an entire research team to set up a plan to steal their ex-boyfriend's body so they can play starship captain and then spend the rest of the episode being a paranoid loon that is planing to illegally execute people are not sane.
Yes, exactly. The whole point was that Janice Lester was a delusional psychotic. True, there was a subtext that she was irrational because of inherent feminine weakness -- the old sexist myth of "hysteria" -- but she was clearly not intended to be a stable individual. Which makes it easy enough to justify dismissing her problematical assertions.

And, again, they're assertions in one isolated, bad episode that are hard to reconcile with the rest of the series. If anything, it's more insulting to Star Trek to take this one crappy third-season episode and treat it as the template for the entire series. I can't understand why anyone would want to do that. If the insinuation about female captains had been in, say, "The City on the Edge of Forever" or "Amok Time," then there'd be something to talk about, but it's "Turnabout Intruder," for Pete's sake. It's one of the worst, most flawed episodes of the entire series. It can't even remember which general order carries the death penalty. It calls David L. Ross's character "Galloway" in the credits even though Galloway died a year before. It ignores the events of "Return to Tomorrow" when Spock claims he's never known a life-essence transfer to be achieved before. It gets the pronunciation of "Benecia" wrong. The continuity in this episode is lousy. It's full of mistakes. So it's bizarre to want to hold it up as the model for the entire series.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 04:45 PM   #277
Armored Saint
Fleet Captain
 
Armored Saint's Avatar
 
Location: Quebec City
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

Normally, I would agree with those who put the thing in its historical context, but I will not because I'm a young former history student (I've my bachelor's degree). Although Space Seed is a great episode, this ludicrous depiction of historians as parasitic people having erotic fascination for big figures makes me say: BURN IN HELL GENE!

Oups, sorry.
Armored Saint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 05:41 PM   #278
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

I have posted this before, but I think this passage from Roddenberry's outline says a lot (emphasis mine):

Despite command authority, Janice finds herself being backed down by those who should be her subordinates and finally in anger she goes female-hysterical.
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 06:10 PM   #279
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

^^ What is that from, Harvey?
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 06:11 PM   #280
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

Roddenberry's 'Turnabout Intruder' story outline (reviewed here).
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 06:16 PM   #281
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
 
Location: Hollywood, CA
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to doubleohfive
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

Warped9 wrote: View Post
borgboy wrote: View Post
Sci fi still lags behind in LGBT diversity. When Sci fi does bring diversity, more often than not it's a hot lesbian. Hot lesbians are great, but it's frustrating not to see gay men and trans people.
It was disappointing that Enterprise didn't have a prominent gay character. From what I've heard Reed was supposed to be gay. It would've been a chance to do something different, instead his sexuality revolved around a pointless attraction to T'Pol.
NuTrek really has disappointed me on that front. After the first movie came out I read an interview with JJ where he talked about wanting to do a gay character, but clearly it didn't happen. Not enough time once they had Kirk having three ways and ogling Carol Marcus in her underwear I guess.
BSG was a little disapointing, what with Gayeta only being shown to bi in the webisode without carrying it over to the main series. Besides Michelle Forbes's lesbian character I'm pretty sure all the Six cylons were supposed to be bi, for what that's worth.
After reading this post I've been thinking on how I could best respond without offering offense.

I don't mean to sound insesitive, but this is a matter of perception. For the larger part of the audience this isn't a pressing issue. We are also talking about something dealing with one of the last taboos in popular entertainment.

To what advantage does having a gay character bring? It's not something too many writers or creators or producers are going to take a chance on for anxiety over alienating some part of their core target audience. I'll admit that a lesbian character offers some measure of titllation for many men in the audience and as such are not seen as threatening. But a prominent gay character is one of the last taboos and there are males in the audience that would indeed feel uncomfortable with that.

Also it isn't like gay characters haven't been done in SF or more particularly SF literature. David Gerrold's Blood And Fire is what immediately comes to mind, but I'm sure there must be others. And the Phase II fan productions did a TOS version of Gerrold's story and did include a gay character who was actually Kirk's nephew. And Peter Kirk had a lover that Phase II didn't shy away from showing. There have been gay superheroes in comics. I'm thinking of Apollo and Midnighter in the superhero title The Authority. Apollo and Midnighter were also lovers. I think there might also have been a lesbian character in The Authority, but I'm not sure I recall exactly.

Since it hasn't happened yet in popular visual sci-fi then it possibly speaks to creator/producers not yet ready to tackle it.

I have to admit to a measure of blindness on this issue because in all honesty it isn't a pressing issue for me. I admit I'm uncertain about my own feelings if a major character in a favoured SF production were revealed to be gay. A lot would depend on how it was depicted. I know there was a bi female in Babylon 5 (Commander Susan Ivanova) and I love Babylon 5 as a series. And Ivanova was a major character. But admittedly a bi or lesbian female isn't usually seen as threatening to a male audience and Ivanova was done rather lowkey when it came to her sexuality. It wasn't something they really dwelled on.

Not being gay I'm at odds at seeing this as a pressing issue because I don't personally feel unrepresented in science fiction. I've known few openly gay men (mostly through work) and have never felt personally threatened by any of them. But then I've never seen them act in an overt manner that made me feel uncomfortable. I have to admit that when I was a teenager in the '70s it could have been a differnt issue, but then being openly gay in the '70s would have been a risky affair in broader society. On rare occasion I have been approached by a gay male in much the same way as a man might try to strike up an acquaintance with a woman. The circumstances played out in such a way that I didn't really feel threatened in any way because when I wasn't responsive the men took the hint and left me alone. If any of them had persisted then it would have crossed the line into harassment much the same way a woman could feel harassed from a man who won't take no for an answer.

That said I do know individuals who have been freaked out by being approached by another man, and these guys otherwise seemed like well rounded and well composed individuals. To me that speaks of a percentage of the audience who would indeed feel uncomfortable with seeing a major character in SF who was openly gay. Most men put a great deal of stock in their sense of masculinity of which being attractive to women is a big part of it. The fact that another male could find them (or someone with whom they identify) sexually attractive can make them feel uneasy in terms of their own masculinity. They wonder if they are somehow unconciously putting out the wrong subliminal signals.

Look at the backlash regarding the issue of slash faction regarding prominent SF characters. There is no question whatsoever that James T. Kirk and Spock are heterosexual men with no interest whatsoever in each other beyond starightforward friendship. And yet some element of fandom (oddly predominantly female) get a kick out of making the characters lovers. Other characters throughout popular sci-fi have been treated likewise. Note also when George Takei came out as gay and the backlash when some suggested his character of Hikaru Sulu might also have been gay. I admit I was one who took issue with the notion because previously it never occured to me that Sulu could be gay, particularly given we meet his daughter in Generations. But gay men portraying straight men is nothing new. Film star Rock Hudson was doing it in the 1950s and '60s and I'm sure others were, too, only it would be decades before the broader general public would learn of it.

At present I think we are still dealing with stereotypes when it comes to LGBT characters, stereotypes that can make many other people uncomfortable. I know for myself I'm not particularly fond of things like Toronto's Gay Pride Parade held every summer. Seeing how some of the individuals behave in public bothers me, partly because i see a double standard in which if straight people were to behave that way publicly they could well get arrested.

Forgive my rambling, but I'm at odds as to how else to respond to your post. I also apologize if I've unintentionally offended anyone.
I think it's really sad, actually, how limited your worldview is on the matter, Warped9.

Putting aside for the moment that you admit to your own "blindness" on the subject and putting aside for the moment that you hardly know anyone who happens to be gay and putting aside your needlessly escalated assertion that any gay teen hitting on you would constitute "harassment" ...

Who would it benefit? Plenty of people. The same way Nichelle Nichols' performance benefited LeVar Burton and Whoopi Goldberg and Tim Russ. The same way, I'm sure George Takei has inspired not only Asian-Americans over the years but now other gay a lesbian members of fandom. The same way Kate Mulgrew inspired young girls to go in to the sciences. Hell, the same way Patrick Stewart inspired prematurely balding young men to study Shakespeare!

For years I said that Enterprise should have included an Arab or Muslim character on the ship's crew as a recurring character. Not because I thought Berman and Braga had any particular ability to write such a character, but because at the time Enterprise premiered (ten days after 9/11) many Americans were itching to find reasons to hate and attack Arabs and Muslims.

What better tribute, what better legacy to the ideals that Star Trek has come to represent than to take a group of people Western society was currently at odds with and show them as friends and allies in the future?

A more pertinent example: there are many people who think that Barack Obama's landslide victory against John McCain in 2008 was in small part due to how positively Americans reacted to the character of David Palmer (as portrayed by Dennis Haysbert) on 24 seven years earlier. Popular culture had once again taken and impossible dream - an African-American as President - and had couched that idea as very legitimately possible for its viewing audience.

Now, obviously, there are many other factors involved with that particular example, but the possibility that Haysbert's performance played a role -however small in helping to shape the popular opinion on the subject is undeniable.

In summation Warped9, I don't think you're necessarily wrong to look at the situation the way you are - from what you think might be a studio executive's perspective - but I also think it's a perspective marred by blatant homophobia and entirely outmoded, outdated, limited, and small-minded.

Who would benefit from seeing a gay or lesbian member on a Star Trek crew? Easily answered: Every member of the viewing audience, that's who.

Last edited by doubleohfive; December 10 2013 at 06:29 PM.
doubleohfive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 06:21 PM   #282
Hazel
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: UK
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

borgboy wrote: View Post
What advantage was there to having female captains, or female officers at all on screen in the 60s? Star Trek in the 60s pushed boundries and made people think, and facilitated social change. Just as some people learned to overcome their racism in part from seeing the diverse cast of TOS and characters like Uhura were positive role models at a time when there weren't a lot of black characters in the media to look up to. Just as girls of all races could look up to Uhura as a woman exploring space, portraying previously unseen roles for women.

The fact that there would be some people who would be uncomfortable with a gay character is why there should be one. I'm sure many people in the 60s were uncomfortable with TOS's racial and ethnic diversity, and that inclusion of a united humanity is one of the great things that is often brought up about the importance of Star Trek. A gay character in TNG would've meant the world to me in the 80s when I saw a teen and there were no role models, and that gay character could've helped some people grow past their homophobia into tolerance, or acceptance.

It is disappointing to see Trek, once on the cutting edge of social issues, to have fallen far behind and playing it safe for decades now. The novels have done better, as have the fan films, and that means the world to me. Being able to read about Keru in Titan, or T'Prynn in Vanguard, or the non-heteronormative characters in New Frontier, and other supporting LGBT characters that have been included, that's very important to me - and I appreciate all the people involved who brought those characters into Star Trek. I'd just like to see the movies, and any future television shows finally keep the promise of a future free of prejudice and a humanity truly united.

I think there is something of a parallel with the abscence of women in power in classic Trek and the invisibility, or erasure of LGBT people. We're supposed to assume that they're out there, but they're out of sight, and I think many people (they're out there) would put forth the suggestion that we're not seen because we're not a part of Star Trek's utopian future. I think a lot of straight people don't understand why the invisibility in media (Which is improving) is hurtful. I grew up in a society that tried to pretend I didn't exist, and that can be very alienating and isolating.
I just want to say thank for articulating all this - I get myself wound up when resistance to representation comes up and find it hard to not get frustrated, but you answered all the arguments beautifully
Regarding slash, it's not necessarily about fulfilling some kind of wish (plus hey, Kirk and Spock have been shown to like women - it doesn't mean they don't also like men!) but about creating a oppositional reading to the text. Perhaps the writers did not mean it that way but it doesn't really matter - the viewers are just as responsible for the meaning of a show and if they see slash, they see slash.
Hazel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 06:28 PM   #283
Hazel
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: UK
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

Christopher wrote: View Post
borgboy wrote: View Post
Lost Girl is pretty good with the lesbian issue, although I've heard some criticism of the same sex relationship being treated as "less than". I'm not sure I agree with that completely, but it does seem like Bo's relationship with her wolf is going to be her "endgame".
Wow, I hope not. Dyson is so boring. Bo and Lauren are great together, but Bo and Tamsin have incredible chemistry and I really hope they get together this coming season.

And I don't see any "less than." I think Lost Girl does a fantastic job treating sexual orientation as a complete non-issue. It writes relationships as relationships regardless of the sexes of the participants.

</p>
I am so thankful for Lost Girl. I can see how sometimes Bo/Lauren could seem less 'passionate' than Bo/Dyson simply because it was more of a mature relationship, but I think/hope it's an organic part of the story because of the character dynamics and not because it involves two women.
Hazel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 07:09 PM   #284
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

Hazel wrote: View Post
I can see how sometimes Bo/Lauren could seem less 'passionate' than Bo/Dyson simply because it was more of a mature relationship, but I think/hope it's an organic part of the story because of the character dynamics and not because it involves two women.
Well, there you go. The fact that Bo & Lauren's relationship is more gentle and sweet and not as fiery and physical as Bo & Dyson would seem to argue against the idea that it's just about "hot lesbian" titillation. To be sure, the whole show is about titillation, in a very sex-positive and unashamed way, but it doesn't treat same-sex pairings as any more unusual or noteworthy than opposite-sex ones.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 10 2013, 07:11 PM   #285
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: No female starship captains in the 2250s-60s?

doubleohfive wrote: View Post
Warped9 wrote: View Post
borgboy wrote: View Post
Sci fi still lags behind in LGBT diversity. When Sci fi does bring diversity, more often than not it's a hot lesbian. Hot lesbians are great, but it's frustrating not to see gay men and trans people.
It was disappointing that Enterprise didn't have a prominent gay character. From what I've heard Reed was supposed to be gay. It would've been a chance to do something different, instead his sexuality revolved around a pointless attraction to T'Pol.
NuTrek really has disappointed me on that front. After the first movie came out I read an interview with JJ where he talked about wanting to do a gay character, but clearly it didn't happen. Not enough time once they had Kirk having three ways and ogling Carol Marcus in her underwear I guess.
BSG was a little disapointing, what with Gayeta only being shown to bi in the webisode without carrying it over to the main series. Besides Michelle Forbes's lesbian character I'm pretty sure all the Six cylons were supposed to be bi, for what that's worth.
After reading this post I've been thinking on how I could best respond without offering offense.

I don't mean to sound insesitive, but this is a matter of perception. For the larger part of the audience this isn't a pressing issue. We are also talking about something dealing with one of the last taboos in popular entertainment.

To what advantage does having a gay character bring? It's not something too many writers or creators or producers are going to take a chance on for anxiety over alienating some part of their core target audience. I'll admit that a lesbian character offers some measure of titllation for many men in the audience and as such are not seen as threatening. But a prominent gay character is one of the last taboos and there are males in the audience that would indeed feel uncomfortable with that.

Also it isn't like gay characters haven't been done in SF or more particularly SF literature. David Gerrold's Blood And Fire is what immediately comes to mind, but I'm sure there must be others. And the Phase II fan productions did a TOS version of Gerrold's story and did include a gay character who was actually Kirk's nephew. And Peter Kirk had a lover that Phase II didn't shy away from showing. There have been gay superheroes in comics. I'm thinking of Apollo and Midnighter in the superhero title The Authority. Apollo and Midnighter were also lovers. I think there might also have been a lesbian character in The Authority, but I'm not sure I recall exactly.

Since it hasn't happened yet in popular visual sci-fi then it possibly speaks to creator/producers not yet ready to tackle it.

I have to admit to a measure of blindness on this issue because in all honesty it isn't a pressing issue for me. I admit I'm uncertain about my own feelings if a major character in a favoured SF production were revealed to be gay. A lot would depend on how it was depicted. I know there was a bi female in Babylon 5 (Commander Susan Ivanova) and I love Babylon 5 as a series. And Ivanova was a major character. But admittedly a bi or lesbian female isn't usually seen as threatening to a male audience and Ivanova was done rather lowkey when it came to her sexuality. It wasn't something they really dwelled on.

Not being gay I'm at odds at seeing this as a pressing issue because I don't personally feel unrepresented in science fiction. I've known few openly gay men (mostly through work) and have never felt personally threatened by any of them. But then I've never seen them act in an overt manner that made me feel uncomfortable. I have to admit that when I was a teenager in the '70s it could have been a differnt issue, but then being openly gay in the '70s would have been a risky affair in broader society. On rare occasion I have been approached by a gay male in much the same way as a man might try to strike up an acquaintance with a woman. The circumstances played out in such a way that I didn't really feel threatened in any way because when I wasn't responsive the men took the hint and left me alone. If any of them had persisted then it would have crossed the line into harassment much the same way a woman could feel harassed from a man who won't take no for an answer.

That said I do know individuals who have been freaked out by being approached by another man, and these guys otherwise seemed like well rounded and well composed individuals. To me that speaks of a percentage of the audience who would indeed feel uncomfortable with seeing a major character in SF who was openly gay. Most men put a great deal of stock in their sense of masculinity of which being attractive to women is a big part of it. The fact that another male could find them (or someone with whom they identify) sexually attractive can make them feel uneasy in terms of their own masculinity. They wonder if they are somehow unconciously putting out the wrong subliminal signals.

Look at the backlash regarding the issue of slash faction regarding prominent SF characters. There is no question whatsoever that James T. Kirk and Spock are heterosexual men with no interest whatsoever in each other beyond starightforward friendship. And yet some element of fandom (oddly predominantly female) get a kick out of making the characters lovers. Other characters throughout popular sci-fi have been treated likewise. Note also when George Takei came out as gay and the backlash when some suggested his character of Hikaru Sulu might also have been gay. I admit I was one who took issue with the notion because previously it never occured to me that Sulu could be gay, particularly given we meet his daughter in Generations. But gay men portraying straight men is nothing new. Film star Rock Hudson was doing it in the 1950s and '60s and I'm sure others were, too, only it would be decades before the broader general public would learn of it.

At present I think we are still dealing with stereotypes when it comes to LGBT characters, stereotypes that can make many other people uncomfortable. I know for myself I'm not particularly fond of things like Toronto's Gay Pride Parade held every summer. Seeing how some of the individuals behave in public bothers me, partly because i see a double standard in which if straight people were to behave that way publicly they could well get arrested.

Forgive my rambling, but I'm at odds as to how else to respond to your post. I also apologize if I've unintentionally offended anyone.
I think it's really sad, actually, how limited your worldview is on the matter, Warped9.

Putting aside for the moment that you admit to your own "blindness" on the subject and putting aside for the moment that you hardly know anyone who happens to be gay and putting aside your needlessly escalated assertion that any gay teen hitting on you would constitute "harassment" ...

Who would it benefit? Plenty of people. The same way Nichelle Nichols' performance benefited LeVar Burton and Whoopi Goldberg and Tim Russ. The same way, I'm sure George Takei has inspired not only Asian-Americans over the years but now other gay a lesbian members of fandom. The same way Kate Mulgrew inspired young girls to go in to the sciences. Hell, the same way Patrick Stewart inspired prematurely balding young men to study Shakespeare!

For years I said that Enterprise should have included an Arab or Muslim character on the ship's crew as a recurring character. Not because I thought Berman and Braga had any particular ability to write such a character, but because at the time Enterprise premiered (ten days after 9/11) many Americans were itching to find reasons to hate and attack Arabs and Muslims.

What better tribute, what better legacy to the ideals that Star Trek has come to represent than to take a group of people Western society was currently at odds with and show them as friends and allies in the future?

A more pertinent example: there are many people who think that Barack Obama's landslide victory against John McCain in 2008 was in small part due to how positively Americans reacted to the character of David Palmer (as portrayed by Dennis Haysbert) on 24 seven years earlier. Popular culture had once again taken and impossible dream - an African-American as President - and had couched that idea as very legitimately possible for its viewing audience.

Now, obviously, there are many other factors involved with that particular example, but the possibility that Haysbert's performance played a role -however small in helping to shape the popular opinion on the subject is undeniable.

In summation Warped9, I don't think you're necessarily wrong to look at the situation the way you are - from what you think might be a studio executive's perspective - but I also think it's a perspective marred by blatant homophobia and entirely outmoded, outdated, limited, and small-minded.

Who would benefit from seeing a gay or lesbian member on a Star Trek crew? Easily answered: Every member of the viewing audience, that's who.
You took one thing I said and took it completely out of context. I said if the guy had persisted (after already being rebuffed) that could be seen as harassment in much the same way a woman could feel harassed after rebuffing a man's advancement and the guy persists and doesn't take no for an answer.

So before you jump all over my world view or opinion read the damned post in entirety rather than just pick and choose what might tick you off. It's not a flaw of my character or my existence if I haven't (knowingly) had much interaction with gay men. It is a testament to my character that I never gave anyone gay a hard time or treated them any differently than anyone else. I might not have sought out anyone gay but I've never avoided them either.

And if that's not good enough for you then too bad. At least I tried to engage a discussion where I might get a different perspective and understanding and I did it in an open and honest way. I certainly didn't leap down someone's throat because they didn't share my "enlightened" worldview. If that's not good enough for you either then that's too bad.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.