I should have clarified; I actually didn't mean on this board.
Spoilers On Seven and sexuality
- Thread starter rfmcdpei
- Start date
Fair enough.
I don't go to places like Twitter or Reddit for Star Trek takes and opinions. They have way too many trolls and I like a good, clean debate more than the puke fests that aren't moderated.
Yep.
I'm still trying to figure out what the fuck they were thinking when they did that.
And what kind of fucking "shoehorning" is there? I'm sorry, but I ain't buying it.
Not to mention, at least Raffi, if not Seven, is bi, and that group has much less decent representation everywhere than people who are strictly hetero or homosexual. We have Mirror Georgiou in DSC, but she's evil. Most bi characters are portrayed as plain evil, morally compromised, closeted gay, just confused, or sex addicts in popular fiction and real life, and it REALLY pisses me off.
We exist too, goddamn it, and we're distinct from hetero and homosexual people!
In sum: I find your post just a bit condescending, and based on fallacious assumptions--though I doubt you meant it that way.
I could say more, but I would almost certainly get in trouble, (because this thread has upset me so much,) so I won't.
I just needed to get that off my chest.
Last edited:
Because it doesn't exist.
If it does, I'm too stupid to see it.
I figured I was, so you're not alone there.
Although there are few heavy hitters on your side. Sara Lance and Clarke come to mind, for instance.
No, your brain is working properly. Some people just have irrational reactions to seeing any form of LGBTQ representation in media.
Man, with all this one-person-out-of-a-dozen-characters overrepresentation and forced diversity I don't know how Star Trek is going to survive. The possibility of three openly gay or bisexual characters out of dozens across the history of the franchise is just asking for trouble.
The gripe I had with the dialogue between. Seven and Bajazyl was that it left the nature of their relationship vague. I know some people thought it was obvious because of the way the characters related and spoke to each other, but that wasn’t the way everyone saw it, if it had been, the discussion would have not have been whether or not Seven was bi.
I think the writers wanted to say something about Seven’s past and her sexuality in that scene using a “light” touch, but the touch was too light and many fans debating Seven’s sexuality in the scene. I couldn’t understand why they didn’t just come out and say what they meant. Heck, now we know Seven is probably bi but we still have no irrefutable on screen evidence that she had a romance with Bajazyl.
To me, the shot of Seven and Raffi in the finale may have been kind of a do-over which cements my feeling that the scene with Seven and Bajazyl may not have been “poorly” written but could have been better written.
I think the writers wanted to say something about Seven’s past and her sexuality in that scene using a “light” touch, but the touch was too light and many fans debating Seven’s sexuality in the scene. I couldn’t understand why they didn’t just come out and say what they meant. Heck, now we know Seven is probably bi but we still have no irrefutable on screen evidence that she had a romance with Bajazyl.
To me, the shot of Seven and Raffi in the finale may have been kind of a do-over which cements my feeling that the scene with Seven and Bajazyl may not have been “poorly” written but could have been better written.
shoehorning? This was not scripted, just ad-libbed by the actors:
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/star-trek-picard-season-2s-burning-questions-1287014
I thought that's what happened, but was too lazy to look it up myself (or was it "busy"--sometimes I can't tell the difference.
)
Alright, let's get real here. I'm a straight, white man in America, I have some obvious advantages in life that I don't necessarily deserve.
That being said, I feel like I am very open minded to acceptance and inclusion. I actually think that most Trek fans overall are open and accepting. And the series has evolved over the years as well.
I want LGBTQ represented in my shows, not just Trek, because it's a community that needs to be represented and recognized.
I like both characters and both actresses. I think it would be an interesting and important thing in the realm of the series.
I also have never and likely will never watch Enterprise or Discovery, that is more because I don't like going backwards with TV series (I'm also aware that Discovery has jumped way ahead chronologically).
Round up. I just don't like that it was done so suddenly with no backdrop and seemed just like a throw in. That's it, that's all.
That being said, I feel like I am very open minded to acceptance and inclusion. I actually think that most Trek fans overall are open and accepting. And the series has evolved over the years as well.
I want LGBTQ represented in my shows, not just Trek, because it's a community that needs to be represented and recognized.
I like both characters and both actresses. I think it would be an interesting and important thing in the realm of the series.
I also have never and likely will never watch Enterprise or Discovery, that is more because I don't like going backwards with TV series (I'm also aware that Discovery has jumped way ahead chronologically).
Round up. I just don't like that it was done so suddenly with no backdrop and seemed just like a throw in. That's it, that's all.
Ok, that makes sense now. Actors ad-libbed it is different than it being put in by the show runner or writers.
I thought that's what happened, but was too lazy to look it up myself (or was it "busy"--sometimes I can't tell the difference.
When on quarantine, the line between lazy and busy gets pretty blurred.
People keep using that word. I don't think it means what they think it means.
Fingers intertwining. This much over fingers intertwining. It seems there's other issues. As they say in Hamlet, Me thinks they doth protest too much.
Ok, Inigo Montoya (great movie btw), how would you describe two characters that had no one-on-one interaction at all holding hands?
I really do appreciate that being your takeaway from that entire post.
I don't think it is other issues but rather a desire to experience more depth. At least, that's my takeaway from the descriptor of "suddenly."
However, I personally have no issue with it for multiple reasons, the chief of which is that both of these people have experienced significant lost recently and are bonding over a shared pain. People in movies get together for far less than that.
You can think that if you like. It doesn't actually mean anything, let alone that it's true, but whatever.
And with that, I'm done. It's boring to have people ascribe meanings to posts that simply don't exist. Life's short enough as it is.
Similar threads
