Politically motivated fans

[Captain Whitmire]

Hey fellow Trekkies, I don’t know about you but I feel like that most modern Trek celebrities use the excuse of Star Trek has ways been political as a way to post overly extreme takes on their profiles online when most fans are there for their Trek stuff. To me this seems rather arrogant and once someone responds with this question at hand the host’s fans would come at you for daring to criticize them. As someone who is politically moderate and tries to be nuanced about how I approach things it feels rather unsafe to be in fandoms that are supposedly inclusive to anyone.
I’d like to hear anyone’s opinions and reports of similar events to see how this is affecting the Trek community as a whole. Thanks for your time in advance.

 

[valkyrie013]

"Grabs popcorn and waits to see how long the thread lasts.."

 

[Shat Happens]

can you give some examples of these extreme takes?

 

[Tosk]

I feel like that most modern Trek celebrities use the excuse of Star Trek has ways been political as a way to post overly extreme takes on their profiles online when most fans are there for their Trek stuff.

Celebrities posting whatever they want on their own social media?! This is an outrage!

You should teach them a lesson by unfollowing them immediately.

 

[XCV330]

 

[Dukhat]

Yes, people will be political. Even Star Trek fans.

What's way more annoying is when people make political comments in a discussion that has absolutely nothing to do with politics. Never be that guy. Nobody likes that guy.

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

Speaking as a centrist militant, I've almost always found Star Trek to be entirely in line with my own political views. (Except maybe when Diane Carey gets a bit heavy-handed in some of her novels.)

 

[HotRod]

 

[Citiprime]

As someone who is politically moderate and tries to be nuanced about how I approach things it feels rather unsafe to be in fandoms that are supposedly inclusive to anyone..

Unsafe?

If you offer your opinion, or in this case offer a contradictory opinion in a comment section where people are having a discussion about a topic, it's the nature of the beast that you have to be willing to take criticism of your own. It's not "unsafe" for someone to tell you that you're wrong.

Where did people get this idea that they should be immune from criticism or otherwise it's an "unsafe" environment?

 

[Takeru]

Hey fellow Trekkies, I don’t know about you but I feel like that most modern Trek celebrities use the excuse of Star Trek has ways been political as a way to post overly extreme takes on their profiles online when most fans are there for their Trek stuff.

1. Star Trek has always been political, that's not an excuse that's just reality.
2. What fans are there for is completely irrelevant, they don't dictate what a celebrity posts on their personal accounts.
3. What extreme takes?

To me this seems rather arrogant and once someone responds with this question at hand the host’s fans would come at you for daring to criticize them.

It is not arrogant for them to post whatever they want on their profiles, it is arrogant for you to expect them to post things you approve of. If you don't like what they post don't follow them.

As someone who is politically moderate and tries to be nuanced about how I approach things it feels rather unsafe to be in fandoms that are supposedly inclusive to anyone.

Fandoms should not be inclusive to anyone, if people post racist or homophobic stuff for example I have no problem excluding them and making them feel unwelcome. Otherwise the fandom is pretty welcoming (at least this corner), we have a ton of different opinions and discussions here.

 

[Captain Whitmire]

Most of the time I’m fine with criticism as that’s how I improve on my designs and discussions. It’s a problem when there’s a hive mind effect within the community that can be a red flag.

 

[Sci]

I mean, the very first episode of TNG had Picard mocking American patriotism and capitalism as primitive nonsense. I don't know why it should surprise you that ST attracts people with politics further left than your own.

 

[Captain Whitmire]

Letting them post whatever they want is the issue. There needs to be controls and basic guidelines and not just the ToS.

 

[fireproof78]

As someone who is politically moderate and tries to be nuanced about how I approach things it feels rather unsafe to be in fandoms that are supposedly inclusive to anyone.

People are not nuanced. Their takes are just as valid as yours. Unless they are threatening violence or such, it isn't unsafe.

And Star Trek as a show preaches inclusivity, but in practice the fandom has it's mix of people, just like the general population. Not everyone will agree on everything, or even welcome different ideas on STAR TREK, much less politics.

Letting them post whatever they want is the issue. There needs to be controls and basic guidelines and not just the ToS.

And who determines the controls?

It can't simply be "This offends me." The nature of speech is that we engage in dialog about it, not avoid those viewpoints we disagree with.

 

[Sci]

Letting them post whatever they want is the issue. There needs to be controls and basic guidelines and not just the ToS.

Shockingly, this is illegal in a free country. There's this thing called "freedom of speech" that means they get to say whatever they want, even if their politics bothers you.

 

[Captain Whitmire]

Shockingly, this is illegal in a free country. There's this thing called "freedom of speech" that means they get to say whatever they want, even if their politics bothers you.

There is another thing called consequences. You can’t say that you want to burn down a house for the fun of it.

 

[Sci]

There is another thing called consequences.

Sure. But those consequences do not include anyone having the right to censor someone.

If an actor's politics offend you, you have the right to unfollow them on social media, or to refuse to watch anything they appear in. I used to love Firefly and Chuck, but I absolutely detest the politics of actor Adam Baldwin and refuse to watch anything he's in these days.

You can’t say that you want to burn down a house for the fun of it.

Sure you can. That's free speech. And it's your free speech to watch something else if that bugs you.

 

[XCV330]

There is another thing called consequences. You can’t say that you want to burn down a house for the fun of it.

congrats, you win the Strawman medal for illogical fallacies in the course of an argument. Sadly I had wagered 30 quatloos that you would go all in on Appeal to Authority first. I was wrong. Please DO continue

 

[fireproof78]

There is another thing called consequences. You can’t say that you want to burn down a house for the fun of it.

Yes, you actually can. And people can follow up, safety plan, etc. There are consequences. You then determine if the consequences are acceptable or not, and then change behavior accordingly.

No where are there stipulations on censoring speech, even if I disagree strongly with it.

 

[Sci]

@Captain Whitmire , what specific actor's specific posts have bothered you so much?