Spoilers 1st openly gay character.

[Vger23]

Everyone is a human being deserving equality and dignity. Just my humble 2 cents.

It's just that simple. People argue and fight and kill in denial of this one simple truth.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Of course diversity should not be limited only to sexual orientation and gender. It’s (should be) also about ethnicity, race, color, culture, religion, age, socio-economic status/class, mental/physical abilities, etc...

Of course, unfortunately orientation and gender has been consistently ignored.

Maybe religion too, but Trek has been iffy about its existence in the future.

 

[cultcross]

Race too, really. Especially combined with gender - before Discovery, great black female roles include Uhura, and.... erm, Kassidy Yates? The Saratoga Captain who was on screen for about a minute? The astronaut who beamed someone up once?

Basically, Star Trek had big holes in its ship of diversity. Discovery has to its credit done something toward that, but I'd still argue it's a way behind even the average modern show. Almost every other show I watch regularly at the moment is better. Cutting edge it isn't.

 

[Spot261]

Of course, unfortunately orientation and gender has been consistently ignored.

Maybe religion too, but Trek has been iffy about its existence in the future.

Trek has rarely touched on gender (The Outcast is the only overt example that springs to mind) and where it might be perceived as doing so it has been sufficiently abstract to be deniable, which might be seen as a double edged sword. Making people think about the question is always better than screaming the answer at them. Allegory has always been the MO of the star trek and the question is how openly do we want that done.

Personally I agree there's certainly room for trek to have gone further and more often and that we haven't seen an openly gay character is at best poor form. That people have watched the show for half a century and see the inclusion of a gay couple as being incompatible with the show's ideals is pretty damning IMO when we ask if the show has done enough.

I'm not sure though religion has been ignored, in fact I'd suggest deconstructing it has been the driving force behind a lot of classic trek. TOS and TNG set the scene for this with a tendency to show "Gods" as being fundamentally inferior to human reason, inept, vain, vhildish or otherwise unworthy of being idolised, be it Apollo, Trelane, the Edo God, Q, Sybok's "God", The Founders, so on and so forth.

That it did this so often in fact it became arguably overkill, but for me what is most telling is the way those superbeings potentially deserving of our respect also tend to be those least inclined to seek it out, the Organians being obvious examples, along with the more cautious members of the Q continuum. There definitely seems to be a message there about the controlling nature of religion and it's ideal role (if any) in our lives.

Within the federation we know some form of "religion" exists at least amongst the Vulcans and the presence of the "chapel" seen in BoT suggests a degree of religious faith is at least accommodated for within starfleet, even if it isn't commonly expressed.

It's also hard to ignore DS9's social commentary on the Bajoran occupation and the role of their faith, played (in my view) very well by placing a starship captain in the dual (and tension causing) role of representing the basically secular federation AND the all too real Bajoran gods, often finding the two seemingly incompatible.

 

[F. King Daniel]

In a time where the Federation delights and celebrates the diversity of various species, it seem perverse that the same would not be true of humans. We should see far more than a single gay character, at this point we need trans people, asexual crew members, gender and sexually fluid crew members. Star Trek should be leading the way, not catching up after 30 years.

Way back when, Diane Duane introduced an alien in the novels whose gender changed depending on the season. That's something I'd like to see on-screen.

 

[tenmei]

Wasn't there a character like that on the Excelsior in one of the Lost Years novels - P'mula Hopman?

 

[Refuge]

I'm not sure though religion has been ignored, in fact I'd suggest deconstructing it has been the driving force behind a lot of classic trek. TOS and TNG set the scene for this with a tendency to show "Gods" as being fundamentally inferior to human reason, inept, vain, vhildish or otherwise unworthy of being idolised, be it Apollo, Trelane, the Edo God, Q, Sybok's "God", The Founders, so on and so forth.

That it did this so often in fact it became arguably overkill, but for me what is most telling is the way those superbeings potentially deserving of our respect also tend to be those least inclined to seek it out, the Organians being obvious examples, along with the more cautious members of the Q continuum. There definitely seems to be a message there about the controlling nature of religion and it's ideal role (if any) in our lives.

Within the federation we know some form of "religion" exists at least amongst the Vulcans and the presence of the "chapel" seen in BoT suggests a degree of religious faith is at least accommodated for within starfleet, even if it isn't commonly expressed.

It's also hard to ignore DS9's social commentary on the Bajoran occupation and the role of their faith, played (in my view) very well by placing a starship captain in the dual (and tension causing) role of representing the basically secular federation AND the all too real Bajoran gods, often finding the two seemingly incompatible.

I think it is unreasonable to portray the future of human and alien kind without religion. Much of Star Trek projects an ideal agenda from an atheist perspective.

 

[Longinus]

I think it is unreasonable to portray the future of human and alien kind without religion.

Perhaps, but Star Trek has always been pretty optimistic about the future. Besides, people have already forgotten countless of gods; couple of more to go, we can do it!

Much of Star Trek projects an ideal agenda from an atheist perspective.

One of my favourite aspects of it.

 

[Refuge]

You think Star Trek is really optimistic about the future - Discovery suggests a little pessimism If we still have war in the future and division, we will still have belief systems. I'm not necessarily pushing that boat because I think that is part of what makes many peoples' 'tick'.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I liked the way they handled Stahmets' partner, they're just a couple. They have arguments but one is mainly just concerned for the other.

 

[gblews]

You think Star Trek is really optimistic about the future - Discovery suggests a little pessimism

Actually, Enterprise, before DSC, pointed out that humans in the 22nd century at least, were still quite a ways from solving it's issues with prejudice. So if there is a perception of DSC having an air of pessimism, it didn't start there.

At the beginning of the season 4 of Ent, Archer tells a woman from the 1940's about how humans in the 22nd century have overcome prejudice and have learned to live with their fellow humans in peace. In Demons/Terra Prime, we find out that Archer is correct about that. Humans have overcome petty racial, religious, and other cultural prejudices against one another.

But as the episode points out with great subtlety, is that humans never conquered the underlying things that caused that prejudice in the first place; fear and distrust of those who are different. That fear and distrust in the 22nd century was simply redirected at aliens.

 

[bookworm8571]

I think there is religious belief of various kinds on Earth and elsewhere. Phlox attended Mass and other religious ceremonies on Earth. A hundred years later, Spock spoke of honoring his family gods. Religion is unlikely to die out, though it may be more of the spiritual/deeply personal and private variety.

As for gender, I would assume that they have the technology in the future to recognize and treat different conditions. Any transgender child would probably be treated at birth or in the womb so their body aligns with their gender.

 

[Spot261]

Actually, Enterprise, before DSC, pointed out that humans in the 22nd century at least, were still quite a ways from solving it's issues with prejudice. So if there is a perception of DSC having an air of pessimism, it didn't start there.

At the beginning of the season 4 of Ent, Archer tells a woman from the 1940's about how humans in the 22nd century have overcome prejudice and have learned to live with their fellow humans in peace. In Demons/Terra Prime, we find out that Archer is correct about that. Humans have overcome petty racial, religious, and other cultural prejudices against one another.

But as the episode points out with great subtlety, is that humans never conquered the underlying things that caused that prejudice in the first place; fear and distrust of those who are different. That fear and distrust in the 22nd century was simply redirected at aliens.

This absolutely hits the nail on the head for me.

Trek shows a future largely free of our current crop of prejudices, not one where humanity have fundamentally changed.