Do you think LGBT characters will feature more prominently?

[Guy Gardener]

But that quote had to do with people who were engaging in sexual behavior that put them at unusual high risk of acquiring HIV/AIDS, no condom use and large numbers of sexual partners.

Pence was advocating counselling and education on how not to become infected, not reprogramming gays to become heterosexual.

I did say that the language was "wishy washy".

http://www.politifact.com/californi...-support-conversion-therapy-not-settled-matt/

Lets use logic.

The Ryan White Care Act.

https://hab.hrsa.gov/about-ryan-white-hivaids-program/about-ryan-white-hivaids-program

Grant money for people with AIDs to visit hospitals, and pay for medication.

Basic decency to the terminally ill.

If Pence wasn't talking about conversion, and the hard line Christains' answer to everything is "Abstinence Only" or "wait till marriage" then Mike must have been advocating that any hospital which counsels safe sex, sells/gives out birth control, or has a needle program, or a methadone program, or practices abortions, will no longer be illegible for that Federal money from the Ryan White Act to subsidize it's AIDs patients requirements.

The Veep elect was asking to be allowed (at the time) to decide for the State which hospitals are moral and which hospitals are immoral, using his yard stick, which would probably lead to closures, mass unemployment and a dangerous reduction of necessary Health services.

http://www.snopes.com/mike-pence-condoms-are-too-modern-and-liberal/

 

[m.lp.ql.m]

Whether or not Pence advocated 'gay conversion therapy' is important, but in the past. What matters is that evangelical xians, who DO advocate gay conversion torture, believe Pence is one of their own.

 

[Tenacity]

And don't forget a whole lot of people outside of the "evangelical xians" also feel that Pence (and of course POTUS 45) are one of them.

 

[Balok's Decoy]

gay conversion torture

Definitely think we should use honest terminology rather than euphemisms. Thanks for describing the practice accurately.

 

[Tenacity]

Supergirl did it pretty freaking great this season with a 30 year old woman...

"Coming out" isn't just about informing those close to you about your long realized sexual orientation. It can also be an internal revelation, the pieces have some times been there for years, but you just now put the pieces together.

An epiphany.

 

[dahj]

^^
Yes... that's why I said Supergirl did it great...

 

[BRINX01]

I'd like to chime in on this subject. When I recently read that Discovery would feature an "openly gay" character, I have to admit that I felt it was a bit of a wrong turn to take straight out of the gate. Here's my take on it... In the future, after humankind has taken its place in the galactic neighborhood, I think the ideas of gender and sexual preference will likely be more of an afterthought to most people. I feel that when people are surrounded by alien species who differ in so many ways, the ideas of human gender identity or sexual preference will be issues of the past. I am just concerned that they might be depicting a future that is not in keeping with Gene's vision. In my opinion it would be better if this character is simply more open minded than most modern people. I'm not saying not to do it, and I realize that they likely won't call attention to it every time the guy walks in the room, but to me modern gay people on tv seem to be very angry at straight people a lot of the time. To me that's just another form of prejudice, so it has no place on a show about a future where everybody accepts everyone. I also recognize that they didn't say this character would be against straight people. No, there shouldn't be anti-gay people on the ship. There shouldn't be anti any people on the ship. A fitting example is the fact that Gene had a bald captain on the Enterprise D. Everyone joked, haven't they cured baldness by the 24th century?! Gene basically said, sure, they just wouldn't care. To clarify: I am not saying not to have a character with a flexible view of human sexuality, I am concerned that the show runners immediately called attention to it in such a specific way. Like saying, "Get ready for the drama!"

 

[Shaka Zulu]

Half? Bull-s**t. A few, perhaps 5%-10%, maybe 15%, yes, say that. Half? No way. Most people couldn't give a rip.
And that's the argument I've gotten from several Hollywood writers. A couple flat out stated they view it as their job to inflict and enforce social change upon an unwilling population.

Said 'unwilling population' can either deal with this (and they've had three decades to get ready to do so) or they can get lost and not watch TV anymore. But they shouldn't be able to dictate what's shown on TV at all, or be trying to force the major American studios to waste billions of dollars catering to their whims of putting older shows on DVD/Blu-Ray/4K that are no longer culturally or socially relevant.

 

[JonVP]

Being gay means that there’s something different about you than the rest of the population.
Star Trek stands for IDIC: i.m.o. this means MORE than just tolerating the fact that someone is gay. It’s about embracing diversity.

So I am very happy that Star Trek (Discovery) finally embraces homosexuality as a part of who we are. Besides: how can you make first contact with strange alien races when you can't even accept your own diversity as a race?

 

[Tenacity]

I am just concerned that they might be depicting a future that is not in keeping with Gene's vision

Part of Gene's vision was the complete absence of gays, one of the creators of TNG was essentual thrown off the team for pushing a single story that would depict a gay Starfleet officer.

I am concerned that the show runners immediately called attention to it in such a specific way.

There's never been a reluctance to show straight characters up until now. If the gay character isn't in some way "pointed out" as such to the audience then how is the character going to be gay in-universe?

There shouldn't be anti any people on the ship.

While you can take it too far, I basically feel the opposite. The people on the ship should not be uniform in their positions on a variety of matters, it isn't diversity if everyone thinks the same. Hopefully the people on the ship will have a wide multiplicity of views on any given subject.

On different matters some of them are going to be "anti."

I think the ideas of gender and sexual preference will likely be more of an afterthought to most people.

Sexuality is part of being Human.

Hollywood writers ... it as their job to inflict and enforce social change upon an unwilling population.

Maybe Hollywood writer should refrain from pushing their personal philosophies on the job.

Star Trek stands for IDIC: i.m.o. this means MORE than just tolerating the fact that someone is gay. It’s about embracing diversity.

IDIC came from the Vulcans, a people notorious for not embracing diversity.

 

[Nyotarules]

If social media existed in the 1960's I can imagine the outcry that there was a negress on the bridge who wasn't the maid (Uhura), a Chinese man on the bridge who wasn't running the laundry (Sulu), a Russian on the bridge who wasn't a Commie bastard (Chekov) and a negro doctor on the ship touching white people (M'Benga)! Some folks must have had a fit watching Star Trek in 1966. Let similar minded folks have a fit seeing a gay person in 2017..to hell with them!

 

[marsh8472]

http://www.agonybooth.com/wp-conten...trekdeepspaceninetheemperorsnewcloak.0114.jpg
Damn ya

 

[Nyotarules]

http://www.agonybooth.com/wp-conten...trekdeepspaceninetheemperorsnewcloak.0114.jpg
Damn ya

Goes outside to check the sky has not collapsed from the atmosphere

 

[Shaka Zulu]

First of all I don't think that the new show will be very "modern" or creative.

Secondly yes, but there were good examples?
Shows from 2006 onwards? I might have missed them.

There was a lesbian at Stargate Universe, which partner was in a wheelchair at the other end of the universe. How convenient.
I see shows produced by Steven Moffat etc., where they make jokes about transsexual horses.
Also the gay stereotypes from the Flash/Arrow-verse. They are all married and presumably monogamous and copy the lifestyle of the 1950s. The straight people are not married but the gays are. And when they talk about gays it's all about the visit-rights in hospitals.
There is also this sissy character from Black Orphan, which felt very much as if he came directly from the 1930s. He's interested in whoring around and art.
And the "bisexuality" in Westworld, which showed as some "carressing the arm", which was nothing but ridiculous.

So I haven't seen much that would make me optimistic.

There's this show. Unfortunately, it ended quite recently, and was a web show on YouTube.

 

[Kemaiku]

How can you make first contact with strange alien races when you can't even accept your own diversity as a race?

That would be an interesting episode, making first contact with a unified race that actually questions how united the Federation (and Humans) really are.

 

[RandyS]

Said 'unwilling population' can either deal with this (and they've had three decades to get ready to do so) or they can get lost and not watch TV anymore. But they shouldn't be able to dictate what's shown on TV at all, or be forcing the major American studios to waste billions of dollars catering to their whims of putting older shows on DVD/Blu-Ray/4K that are no longer culturally or socially relevant.

Forcing?

Older TV is better. Who cares if they're "relevant" (Whatever the hell that's supposed to mean) or not.

 

[Kemaiku]

Older TV is better. Who cares if they're "relevant" (Whatever the hell that's supposed to mean) or not.

In your opinion. And what he means is that older shows that have been around and shown long enough can be taken out of syndication to make way for up to date programming.

And a lot of people care about cultural relevance, when said culture is often trying rather hard to keep making it look like they don't exist or portraying them in outdated and offensive ways.

 

[Balok's Decoy]

Forcing?

Older TV is better. Who cares if they're "relevant" (Whatever the hell that's supposed to mean) or not.

I like my tv shows to be relevant and since not everyone is white and/or straight, it's kind of nice to, you know, actually see people who don't fit that description represented on television.

 

[Kemaiku]

I like my tv shows to be relevant and since not everyone is white and/or straight, it's kind of nice to, you know, actually see people who don't fit that description represented on television.

Oh but wasn't it so much better 30-40 years ago when blackface, yellow peril, slapping women around, no gays to be seen, men didn't show any kind of emotion was all the rage? I mean TV was so superior when that was 99% of it...apparently.

 

[Nyotarules]

Oh but wasn't it so much better 30-40 years ago when blackface, yellow peril, slapping women around, no gays to be seen, men didn't show any kind of emotion was all the rage? I mean TV was so superior when that was 99% of it...apparently.

At least TV represented the human race or at least the straight, Protestant, Anglo- Saxon male segment that resided in the USA....