Same here. Honestly, if they could omit sexuality altogether and just tell adventures in space stories I would prefer that. But, sexuality is a fundamental aspect of humanity (unfortunately) so no avoiding it I suppose.
Season 3 Finally Lands October 15
- Thread starter Khan 2.0
- Start date
Fine, then we'll come at you from this angle: there were five Star Trek shows before DSC without any LGBT Representation whatsoever. So consider this making up for lost time. And if you're going to show LBGT characters, they're going to show them in a relationship, so they would come in pairs.
If they don't come in pairs, critics and anti-fans would hit them with "Oh! So they have gay characters but aren't willing to show them in a relationship to prove it, so what's the point?"
The new character isn't in a relationship and the whole point of non-binary, from what I understand, is to not be associated with gender at all.
LD doesn't seem like it has any LGBT characters. And I get the impression SNW is designed to appeal to old-schoolers, which guarantees they won't get much or any representation there. Though I'd like to be wrong. Because having a woman second-in-command in 1964 was bold, so I'd like to see SNW continue in that spirit today.
One more thing: I doubt the reporting of how many LGBT+ people are out there is accurate. Not everyone who's LGBT+ wants to say they're LGBT+ out of fear of judgment. Even today.
Last edited:
I'm going to come at it from a different angle-this is a show written in the 2020s and is influenced as such. The writers decided these are the characters they wanted to write about and so that is what we are seeing.
Up to individual audience member to decide if they find them engaging or not. But, the "politicization" or whatever of casting has always been present in Hollywood. Star Trek has never been exempted from this. To @Lord Garth 's point I think that Star Trek should return to a spirit of trying out something new like it did in TOS. Thus far I think that Discovery is the most risk it has taken in decades of Trek.
Up to individual audience member to decide if they find them engaging or not. But, the "politicization" or whatever of casting has always been present in Hollywood. Star Trek has never been exempted from this. To @Lord Garth 's point I think that Star Trek should return to a spirit of trying out something new like it did in TOS. Thus far I think that Discovery is the most risk it has taken in decades of Trek.
IMHO one of the things I dislike about Kurtzman Trek is that the politics are mostly left to casting/inclusion. Trek has never shied away from open, almost didactic, explorations of hot-button issues in past incarnations, but Discovery (and to a lesser extent Picard) feel somewhat hesitant to take an explicit stand on something.
He's not. That's my point. I'm talking about five main characters out of 12/13/15 having gay/bi tendencies, AT LEAST. Could be more you're right, but even if it's just those five, that still seems a bit OTT and forced to me, that's all.
True. Admittedly 'character development' is a bit of a low bar on Discovery, but I just feel like I know a tad more about Stamets, whereas I know almost nothing about Culber.
It's strange to hear people say it's the best couple in 50 years, when we literally know almost nothing about the characters. Kira/Odo, Dax/Worf, Riker/Troi, Tom/B'ellana.... characters first, relationship second. Discovery wants to fast forward through character development and drama, just to get to the pay off, without it being earned in the slightest.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
Why?
People who would say that aren't worth listening to.
You can't possibly know that.
The main character is a straight white male, believe me they will over-compensate in other ways for all three distinguishers.
That's why I said "doesn't seem". Seem being the most critical word. I didn't see anything to indicate LGBT+ anywhere.
I might have just not said anything at all in that case, if you're judging who's gay or bi in a 2 minute trailer. Discovery or Picard didn't show anything in their reveal trailers either, funnily enough.
I feel like that was starting in Berman era, towards the end. But, I can see your point.
We know very little about Lower Decks, yet you've still torn it apart.
Because they're people?
In Star Trek?! Fuck that! I don't want no people in my Star Trek!!!
I said "anywhere". I didn't say "going by the trailer". The exact wording I use matters. For DSC, they said upfront that it would have a gay character. Unless I've missed something, they haven't said anything about gay characters being in LD. So it seems like they're either not in there, or they've reached a point where they don't think they need to mention it anymore. I'm fine either way, if they do or don't have LGBT+ characters or how many they have. But you seem not to be.
Plenty of classic TOS episodes have a simple message with political implications as well. Most notably regarding Vietnam (A Private Little War) and racism (Let That Be Your Last Battlefield).
I'm sick of all these motherpeople in my mother
Honestly a Star Trek composed of nothing but ship shots and narration of Memory Alpha articles would appeal to a certain percentage of fandom.
Stamets/Culber do have a backstory. I'm not sure I see the issue with them already being a couple from the start. We knew so very little about either Miles or Keiko prior to "Data's Day", and the world didn't stop spinning.
On that particular note: I'm disturbed by how relevant "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" still is.
Yes, I agree. I was saying that in Berman era that was a trend towards far more softer touch and less political commentary. I don't think much reached the heights as TOS.
The bridge crew? Detmer is straight (we see her making out with a guy at the party in season 1) Airiam was straight (she was married to a guy). And the only recurring Admiral on Disco is Cornwell, who was straight, given she was in a relationship with Lorca.
But please, continue your whining about the scary gays cluttering up your Star Trek with their rainbows.
Similar threads
