News Star Trek: Discovery Nominated for GLAAD Award

A new news article has been published at TrekToday:

This morning, the 31st Annual GLAAD Media Awards nominees were announced, and Star Trek: Discovery (CBS All Access) was on the nomination...

Continue reading...

 

All life in the multiverse was saved by gay love.

 

From what I understand, they always planned on bringing him back, it was never intended on being a permanent death, and it has been said that the writers consulted with GLAAD during the production of season 1.

The actor who plays Culber is also a member of the organization IIRC.

 

Yes, from the moment Culber was "killed", Wilson Cruz kept telling people on Twitter that Culber would be back. So yeah, they had planned his return all along, but that still doesn't negate the fact that they USED the trope, which angered a lot of people (including myself).

 

The nomination is for season 2 so whatever happened in season 1 doesn't really matter, improving and fixing mistakes should be rewarded. A nomination for season 1 would make me raise my eyebrow because when Culber died I was pissed ... but even then the show did better than many others.

Culber returning in some capacity was probably planned from the start but I think it was more likely supposed to be mycelial network ghost thing. Full revival felt a bit like damage control especially because the way they brought him back was so convoluted and it probably would have been hinted at more in the show.
If you have to use Twitter and other media to tell people he'll be back it wasn't properly set up.

 

Yay Discovery
As a gay man myself, it’s comforting to see “in the future” that being gay is normalised and no one really cares. I would have loved that sort of representation growing up when I was struggling with my own sexuality.

 

TNG Outcast did a reasonably good job considering the opposition it faced

 

It really didn't.

From KRAD's review (https://www.tor.com/2012/08/03/star-trek-the-next-generation-qthe-outcastq/) - "Everything about this episode that’s supposed to challenge gender stereotypes instead just reinforces them, from Soren’s talk with Crusher to Worf’s macho idiocy. In addition, as with “Code of Honor,” a casting decision makes the script come across worse than it actually is: all the J’Naii are played by women with awful haircuts. Jonathan Frakes is on record as saying the episode would have been much stronger if Soren was played by a male actor—indeed, it’s impossible to think of Soren as anything other than female, the way Culea plays the character—and he’s absolutely right."

Alternately, Jammer's review (https://www.jammersreviews.com/st-tng/s5/outcast.php) - "But there's a fundamental flaw in the conception of "The Outcast," which is that it's so obviously an allegory about the discriminatory issues facing gays, and yet, in the 24th century, there apparently is no such thing as homosexuality. Riker and Soren have lengthy conversations about sexuality and human sex roles (and these discussions touch upon only the most conventional of sexual and gender roles, ignoring the rest), but there isn't so much as a word that homosexuality exists — or ever existed in human history. The writers dance around the subject completely, as if afraid to offend their audience. Maybe if this episode had aired in 1967 as part of TOS, I could forgive the tap dance. But airing in 1992, this strikes me as gutless. (Might it have been more of a challenging choice, for example, to have Soren be played by a man instead of a woman?)"

TrekCore (http://blog.trekcore.com/2014/07/reflections-on-lgbt-themes-in-tngs-the-outcast/): "For many fans of the show, “The Outcast” failed to deliver on its promise of a gay-rights episode. There was no coming-out for a member of the crew. There was no new character on the ship who was introduced as gay. It felt like a cop-out: a way of addressing the issue in a quick, one-hour installment with an alien race that no one really cared about or would care about next week when the crew was dealing with an altogether new crisis. What’s more, the alien lead was noticeably female in appearance and voice (a female actor did play the part), which kept the dynamic between her and Riker comfortably heterosexual. For what was to be a bold, water-cooler episode, it felt far too safe and conventional for its ambitions."

 

evidence, supporting arguments, reference of any kind?

 

I was putting it together at the time you replied.

 

Ah, much better.
That's what I mean with "considering the opposition it faced". Berman and the studio apparently didn't dare go all the way.
Her speech at the end is very much on point. And the episode includes conversion therapy, gender fluidity, asexuality, and transsexuality as well, making it about the whole LGBTQ community, not just gays. It was a good first step considering that background.

 

The speech is just about the only good part of "The Outcast". (I fully agree with all the issues @DonIago quoted, couldn't have said it better myself, especially that second part.)

I'm torn tho - part of me is glad that DSC introduced Culber and Stamets, another part of me views it as rather… "too little, too late" (perhaps this is influenced by the fact that I've been writing m/m Trek fic for over a decade tho). It just took Trek way too long, and it's one of my biggest issues with TNG as my favorite series that it didn't pave the way when it should have done so and resorted to dancing around the issue in the most awkward and sometimes even downright offensive ways.

 

Phase II (New Voyages) did it nicely. Maybe we'll see more in S3, but I thought it was great that they showed real relationship issues instead of just them doing it in bed or stuff like that. They also took the time to build up to the first kiss to give it more meaning.

 

Of the other nominated shows I am watching Supergirl and Batwoman. Both deserve a win more than DIS. DIS practically forgot both gay characters for a bunch of episodes and their relationship was also often hardly more than a side note. It really felt like they did the absolute minimum.

 

And here I thought TNG did the absolute minimum...

 

The minimum when you have LGBT characters on a show nowadays. It is not the 80s anymore. LGBT characters are not so rare anymore in series. There are still big problems in regards to Hollywood movies, but the situation is far better with series. And there are quite a bunch of series out there which give their LGBT characters more focus than DIS has.

 

It really wasn't, Dynasty had an openly gay character in a gay relationship in 1981, Hill Street Blues, Cheers, St. Elsewhere, Hotel, Cagney & Lacey, The Golden Girls, L.A. Law, Designing Women, thirtysomething, Night Court and many others had gay and lesbian characters in the 80s, so it clearly wasn't impossible. TNG boldly having a female actor declare she's a woman and in love with a man was a piss poor attempt. It could have been a male actor playing the female Soren or a male Soren who falls in love with Riker anyway and it's not a big deal but none of that happened, they cast a woman to play a woman and to smooch Riker and I'm supposed to think that's great because she had a boyish haircut?
The episode did include conversion therapy and while it wasn't shown to be a good thing it was shown to work which is very problematic.

I love TNG but let's not make excuses for them, they didn't have gay characters because they didn't want to not because their progressiveness was stifled by the times it was made in.

 

They showed that the J'naii force it on healthy people and that they lose an important part of their personality with it, essentially lobotomizing them to turn them into empty shells of their former selves.

 

Conversion therapy has a high "success" rate ... for the first month.