LGBTQIA characters and Bechdel test

[Tuskin38]

Just to point out Bryan Fuller himself is gay, so it is pretty likely we'll see at least one LGBT character.

 

[Michael]

Just to point out Bryan Fuller himself is gay, so it is pretty likely we'll see at least one LGBT character.

I think the fact that on several occasions now Fuller and others from the production have confirmed that they will include LGBTQ representation among the new crew makes it pretty clear that that's what we'll get. I'm not sure the producer's sexuality alone ensures the inclusion of such a character, though. Fuller has written for many show before that didn't feature LGBTQ characters.

 

[Tenacity]

muslim woman as captain

in this last movie, Captain Kirk's boss, Commodore Paris, was an Iranian woman

But was she Muslim? In many countries today, few female Muslins are in positions of power. Plus it would speak to Human religious freedom, some fans seem to feel that in the future religion has been all but eliminated.

Perhaps we could have a crewman who was bigoted against religious people (or the opposite).

if the series introduced a gay character, there should be an anti-gay character. That isn't a political debate, it's being a bigot.

Worf was obviously bigoted against the Romulan people in general, Picard was bigoted against people from the twentieth century. Unless you're going to insist that everyone in the future has the same position on gays, then personal opinions could vary widely among the population. And among the personal aboard a starship.

People are individuals.

In order for there to be a regular character who is a bigot, they would have to be a villain. You can't have a "sympathetic" bigot.

Not automatically a villian. You could have a officer who was multifaceted, and whose long list of personality traits included their position on gays. There could also be other aspects of them that you might find positive and admirable, it would be a mixed bag. Just like with everyone.

and who then grow to rethink their positions over the course of the evening

Don't know if this would be what I would want to see happen, such a move would be the "blanding" of the character. The idea that everyone has to think the same.

Nah. ST fans would never go for a supposedly sympathetic main cast character in ST being a bigot toward homosexuals

I think that would depend on the quality of the writing and the skill of the actor.

 

[JeffinOakland]

But was she Muslim? In many countries today, few female Muslins are in positions of power. Plus it would speak to Human religious freedom, some fans seem to feel that in the future religion has been all but eliminated.

Perhaps we could have a crewman who was bigoted against religious people (or the opposite).Worf was obviously bigoted against the Romulan people in general, Picard was bigoted against people from the twentieth century. Unless you're going to insist that everyone in the future has the same position on gays, then personal opinions could vary widely among the population. And among the personal aboard a starship.

People are individuals.Not automatically a villian. You could have a officer who was multifaceted, and whose long list of personality traits included their position on gays. There could also be other aspects of them that you might find positive and admirable, it would be a mixed bag. Just like with everyone.Don't know if this would be what I would want to see happen, such a move would be the "blanding" of the character. The idea that everyone has to think the same.I think that would depend on the quality of the writing and the skill of the actor.

Why would viewers "want" a bigoted character as a part of their beloved progressive franchise? Who wants to sit on the couch and watch some 24th Century equivalent of Archie Bunker make an asshole of himself for false drama or a cheap laugh?

 

[Michael]

Why would viewers "want" a bigoted character as a part of their beloved progressive franchise? Who wants to sit on the couch and watch some 24th Century equivalent of Archie Bunker make an asshole of himself for false drama or a cheap laugh?

Well, depends. Is the franchise progressive because it merely shows an utopian world that we can try to live up to, complete with perfect characters and without conflict? Or is the franchise progressive because it reveals and addresses the problems of today in a sci-fi setting and thus allows us the audience/society to get a new perspective, change our way of thinking and/or let's us work out solutions?

I for one hope it's the latter.

 

[JeffinOakland]

Well, depends. Is the franchise progressive because it merely shows an utopian world that we can try to live up to, complete with perfect characters and without conflict? Or is the franchise progressive because it reveals and addresses the problems of today in a sci-fi setting and thus allows us the audience/society to get a new perspective, change our way of thinking and/or let's us work out solutions?

I for one hope it's the latter.

Both, either, neither...as the plot dictates through 725 episodes and 13 movies. And ST was never meant to be showing a utopian future.

 

[mlk]

I think people want characters they can identify with, not people with a clear agenda. If that officer with a good backstory, a good character, good history, we see him in drama and action etc, if he just happens to like guys instead of girls, that's fine. It's when the guy basicaly has no other reason on the show then to be gay that's when not only is it stupid, it becomes a risk for the entire shows existance.

Also the bechdel test is a joke and i don't get why some leftists are so strung up on it, I mean I can understand if some total retards like it but when intellectuals and academics rant about it.. just WTF? I'll present you a movie which will pass the bechdel test:

In the future, all women are bred to please men, and everything is good, there are no wars, technology is great now that women only cares for the men and family, and no longer work or go to school, basically it was proven that education for women was the cause of everything bad. In the movie there is a 10 minute scene where two women with names talk about how to cook the best possible food to stay fit and beautiful.

That my friends, just passed the bechdel joke of a test so can certain people stop nag about this joke, for their own daughters sake if anything.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

^They're talking about how to stay fit and beautiful for the men. Test failed.

 

[mlk]

^They'retalking about how to stay fit and beautiful for the men. Test failed.

No I never wrote that they did it for the men.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

No I never wrote that they did it for the men.

You didn't have to. The context is already there.

 

[mlk]

Alright since in your universe everytime a woman talks about being beautiful it's for guys, instead of food, they talked about cars they like for 10 minutes. Bechdel-passed

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Also the bechdel test is a joke and i don't get why some leftists are so strung up on it, I mean I can understand if some total retards like it but when intellectuals and academics rant about it.. just WTF?

Damn, I think you might want to chill out before you rupture something. That post just went a bit off the rails here.

Maybe avoid words like "retard," too?

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Alright since in your universe everytime a woman talks about being beautiful it's for guys, instead of food, they talked about cars they like for 10 minutes. Bechdel-passed

True enough. Which is exactly why every time anyone talks about the test, including in this thread, the supporters specifcally mention the fact that just passing the test by itself is already an abominally low standard and the whole point of the discussion is that it's unbelievable how many movies can't even reach that standard.

 

[JeffinOakland]

Alright since in your universe everytime a woman talks about being beautiful it's for guys, instead of food, they talked about cars they like for 10 minutes. Bechdel-passed

Women don't care about cars in your fantasy world unless they're shopping for a car for a man.

 

[mlk]

But Bechdel shouldn't be a standard, it's a joke from a comic book. As I just showed the bechdel test doesn't prove anything at all so why have it as a standard. There can't be a universal criterium applied to everything since every movie has its own context and applying a forced gender-equality on certain things can actually make things very bad, especially in historic content.

 

[JeffinOakland]

But Bechdel shouldn't be a standard, it's a joke from a comic book. As I just showed the bechdel test doesn't prove anything at all so why have it as a standard. There can't be a universal criterium applied to everything since every movie has its own context.

Sorry but you dont decide that something that has stood the test of time and been proven academically and socially valid isnt just because you feel threatened by it.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

But Bechdel shouldn't be a standard, it's a joke from a comic book. As I just showed the bechdel test doesn't prove anything at all so why have it as a standard. There can't be a universal criterium applied to everything since every movie has its own context and applying a forced gender-equality on certain things can actually make things very bad, especially in historic content.

It's a guideline created mostly in jest to illustrate how male-centric most pop culture is. It's not a hard and fast rule about how people have to make movies or anything like that. "What a dumb test, it doesn't do things it wasn't designed to do!"

 

[mlk]

It's a guideline created mostly in jest to illustrate how male-centric most pop culture is. It's not a hard and fast rule about how people have to make movies or anything like that. "What a dumb test, it doesn't do things it wasn't designed to do!"

I do know that it was a thing just to show the malecentric popculture, but as you can read in above posts, it has been put up to an extremely high standard, much higher then it was intended to be and it deserves to be, which is pretty much my point.

 

[Dilandu]

The main problem with homosexual characters in exactly Star Trek is that... there hardly would be any particular intrigue around their sexuality. Face it: the Federation is utopian, better society. There is no place for bigotry and prejudice - no matter, racial, sexual, or others - in Federation.

So, basically, it would be pretty hard to invent some plot around someone's homosexuality in Star Trek. And if this could not work as plot device (frankly, "homophobic aliens" sounds a lot less plausibe than usual racists alines) then what reason to represent it more than for check?

The Sulu family episode was, IMHO, the clear demonstration how the LGBT matters should be shown in Star Trek. Basically - as the matter of fact, no more.

 

[mlk]

Why would viewers "want" a bigoted character as a part of their beloved progressive franchise? Who wants to sit on the couch and watch some 24th Century equivalent of Archie Bunker make an asshole of himself for false drama or a cheap laugh?

If it was a Archie Bunker character, yes, that'd be silly. But othervise it would mean a very deep character. Imagine the gay hero captain of the ship, saving earth etc etc, but he is abusive to his boyfriend and thinks women should never work on a starship. That for me would actually mean a much more interesting character then just someone who is perfect.