Pre-2009 Star Trek and LGBTQI+ representation: simple disinterest or active hostility?

[BK613]

They could have introduced the crop top variant of the uniform.

Or the a-shirt version, with the rank insignia worn on a leather-studded armband....

My point is that TPTB didn't even do that great a job with the relationships they showed, so expecting them to produce decent LBGT+ representation is a stretch, IMO.

 

[Oddish]

My point is that TPTB didn't even do that great a job with the relationships they showed, so expecting them to produce decent LBGT+ representation is a stretch,

GOOD POINT!! I mean, how many really solid relationships did Trek have in the Berman era? Maybe three: Ben/Kasidy, Miles/Keiko, and Tom/B'Elanna. And how many romantic trainwrecks? Get a calculator.

 

[BillJ]

Star Trek has prided itself as a progressive show since very early on, that creates expectations and makes them not delivering on LGBTQ representation worse.

The mistake is for people to have those expectations from what has always, clearly, been a for-profit enterprise.

 

[Jayson1]

In the end though, I wonder how well they would have done. My money is on them botching it and instead of complaining on the absence, we'd be here bitching about the number of 80s gay stereotypes they squeezed into the character.

If they had did it in the first two seasons of TNG it would have failed badly. When Pillar took over as head writer I think any episode exploring the issue or any gay characters introduced actually would I think be handled pretty well. Same on DS9. One of the reasons is because "The Outcast" is a good episode even it wasn't what everyone was hoping for or not enough in terms of representation.

It's well written and acted. The speech from Soren is great. The ending despite some not liking it, actually works and hits hard because the bad guys win in the end. It only makes you feel even more bad for Soren because she didn't get saved in some big Hollywood happy ending kind of way.

 

[The Wormhole]

Berman has been very quiet over the years since leaving Trek. I imagine a book or podcast or something would be fascinating and full of rebuttals for these accusations as well as reasons why certain choices were made.

Berman talked about doing a memoir about his time with Star Trek back around 2006 or so, though that clearly never happened. There's the interviews he and Braga did on the Enterprise Blu-rays where they basically blame UPN for everything. Then there's the book The Fifty Year Mission published in 2016 where the interviews where Berman was questioned about abusing Terry Farrell on DS9 and he responded with the aforementioned "a woman's job on TV is to look pretty" quote. He also refutes the claim that he hates background music, saying he it was only on one particular TNG episode where he felt the music was overpowering and distracting and said so, and somehow that snowballed into everyone thinking he only wanted auditory wallpaper.

Maybe I’m misreading you, but if you’re genuinely curious which Gerrold story I was referring to, it’s the one that was relayed here earlier.

Huh. Somehow I overlooked that earlier. Interesting, though.

One thing I find interesting to note about the whole “Is Berman a homophobe?” debate is that — and I didn’t realize that before — he’s actually the co-author of both “Cogenitor” (the quasi non-binary episode) and “Stigma” (the HIV/Aids awareness allegory), having written both together with Brannon Braga. So even if he actually is a homophobe, I think it’s fair to say that he didn’t completely shy away from writing LGBTQ+ stories, even if — like he says in interviews — he prefers to write them as allegories exclusively. The results can only be seen as mixed as well.

Something to consider, though I can't back this up, I've often suspected the Enterprise scripts where Berman and Braga are credited co-writers, it was Braga doing the heavy lifting. Mainly because prior to Enterprise, the majority of Berman's writing credits were Story By credits, with only two scriptwriting credits before Enterprise. Though I guess that's a distinction without a difference, regardless who did the actual scriptwriting, the episodes still wouldn't have happened without Berman's approval.

Though in the case of Stigma, IIRC at that time Paramount wanted all the shows it produced to do an episode related to HIV/Aids.

 

[Skipper]

You know, maybe I was too hard on Berman. Perhaps the lack of LBGTQI+ characters was truly due to creative difficulties. Maybe he really thought that the introduction of one of them should have been organic into the fabric of the series and not gratuitous, otherwise it would have been a disservice to the entire non-heteronormative community. But evidently the solution was too complex and has understandably eluded him all these years. The introduction of one of these characters was, from a narrative point of view, a titanic undertaking not within everyone's reach.

To put things in perspective, we can see Discovery managed to untie this inextricable Gordian knot, this dead-end labyrinth, the elusive white whale. I don't know if a single post is enough to illustrate the incredible complexity, story-wise, of their solution, but anyway, here it is:


Wow. More than story-telling, here we are talking about four-dimensional chess! I'm not even sure that viewers truly understood the intricacies of what they witnessed.

No one is surprised that the solution to this impossible conundrum eluded Berman & co for almost 20 years and 624 episodes! Few human minds could have come up with something like this!

P.S. Yes, I'M JOKING!
P.P.S Yes I know, it was a different time, Star Trek was a family show etc etc. The fact remains that EIGHT days after the end of Enterprise, Doctor Who (another family show) introduced this character:

without the need for complex narrative devices to explain his "non-straightness".

 

[Rahul]

You know, maybe I was too hard on Berman. Perhaps the lack of LBGTQI+ characters was truly due to creative difficulties. Maybe he really thought that the introduction of one of them should have been organic into the fabric of the series and not gratuitous, otherwise it would have been a disservice to the entire non-heteronormative community. But evidently the solution was too complex and has understandably eluded him all these years. The introduction of one of these characters was, from a narrative point of view, a titanic undertaking not within everyone's reach.

To put things in perspective, we can see Discovery managed to untie this inextricable Gordian knot, this dead-end labyrinth, the elusive white whale. I don't know if a single post is enough to illustrate the incredible complexity, story-wise, of their solution, but anyway, here it is:


Wow. More than story-telling, here we are talking about four-dimensional chess! I'm not even sure that viewers truly understood the intricacies of what they witnessed.

No one is surprised that the solution to this impossible conundrum eluded Berman & co for almost 20 years and 624 episodes! Few human minds could have come up with something like this!

P.S. Yes, I'M JOKING!
P.P.S Yes I know, it was a different time, Star Trek was a family show etc etc. The fact remains that EIGHT days after the end of Enterprise, Doctor Who (another family show) introduced this character:

without the need for complex narrative devices to explain his "non-straightness".

I know it looks so obvious & easy in retrospect - like all "ceiling breaks", where in the end you wonder what all the fuzz was even about in the first place?

But in my mind it's obvious the ONLY reason we were able to get this great, loving gay relationship on screen was because DISc was a GOT-inspired, adult oriented streaming show:
"Oh, we have live dismemberements, torture porn, cannibalism, and the gays are openly walking around. Just like GoT. GoT was successful, remember dear studio executive?"

Now the ceiling is broke. All the follow-up shows could in theory do the same (although Seven/Rafi was FAR from as great, and SNW goes only for guest characters so far).

But I have no doubt - if DIS would have been a syndicated show, not a streaming show, we still wouldn't have had our first gay main characters in Trek.

 

[Rahul]

The reason for this is btw super obvious:
Star Trek also has a very large, very conservative following. Yes, it's a largely liberal vision of the future. But it also resonates with people in the military, American exceptionalism, and sci-fi fans in general tend to be more white & male, both traditionally more conservative.

Meaning shows like "Sex & the city", "Greys anatomy" or something with a clearly liberal target demographic can easily show more "offending woke" stuff. Or foreign tv shows like doctor who.

But, especially with the American culture war going on, even if it's stupid, I can totally see the money people sweating bullets when they think something can offend a large part of their audience. And YouTube isn't exactly shy of shit takes like "the woke agenda ruined Star Trek & Wars", so I can absolutely see why the powers that be have always been so hesitant on Trek.

 

[Skipper]

and SNW goes only for guest characters so far

A little correction here: Chapel is bisexual.

 

[Michael]

I know it looks so obvious & easy in retrospect - like all "ceiling breaks", where in the end you wonder what all the fuzz was even about in the first place?

But in my mind it's obvious the ONLY reason we were able to get this great, loving gay relationship on screen was because DISc was a GOT-inspired, adult oriented streaming show:
"Oh, we have live dismemberements, torture porn, cannibalism, and the gays are openly walking around. Just like GoT. GoT was successful, remember dear studio executive?"

Now the ceiling is broke. All the follow-up shows could in theory do the same (although Seven/Rafi was FAR from as great, and SNW goes only for guest characters so far).

But I have no doubt - if DIS would have been a syndicated show, not a streaming show, we still wouldn't have had our first gay main characters in Trek.

There it is again, this notion that in order to portray LGBTQ+ characters you somehow need an “adult oriented show” that’s able to show sex scenes, nudity etc. I know, you’re saying that you think that’s how Discovery’s producers were seeing their own show, but to me it kinda reads like you support or justify this false notion. Or am I misunderstanding?

 

[BillJ]

To put things in perspective, we can see Discovery managed to untie this inextricable Gordian knot, this dead-end labyrinth, the elusive white whale. I don't know if a single post is enough to illustrate the incredible complexity, story-wise, of their solution, but anyway, here it is:


Wow. More than story-telling, here we are talking about four-dimensional chess! I'm not even sure that viewers truly understood the intricacies of what they witnessed.

That, a decade, a completely different corporate structure, delivery method of content and that it isn't as ad/affiliate dependent as old Star Trek used to be.

It is a completely different day, I'm glad we made it, but I have no interest in crucifying those of the past that were playing by different rules.

 

[Skipper]

That, a decade, a completely different corporate structure, delivery method of content and that it isn't as ad/affiliate dependent as old Star Trek used to be.

Well I suppose there was a seismic shift in attitude on this subject in the 8 days between the last episode of Enterprise and the one of Doctor Who where Jack Harness appears.

 

[BillJ]

Well I suppose there was a seismic shift in attitude on this subject in the 8 days between the last episode of Enterprise and the one of Doctor Who where Jack Harness appears.

You mean an episode produced in the US vs. an episode produced in the UK?

 

[Skipper]

There it is again, this notion that in order to portray LGBTQ+ characters you somehow need an “adult oriented show” that’s able to show sex scenes, nudity etc. I know, you’re saying that you think that’s how Discovery’s producers were seeing their own show, but to me it kinda reads like you support or justify this false notion. Or am I misunderstanding?

Yeah. And I don't think Star Trek was ever a "Family Show." Sure, it was/is a show you can watch with the whole family, but I don't think it was ever intended specifically for that. . Unless in the States it is absolutely normal in a series dedicated also for an audience of children to talk about planets where "rape ganga" dominate, in which case I apologize.

 

[BillJ]

Yeah. And I don't think Star Trek was ever a "Family Show." Sure, it was/is a show you can watch with the whole family, but I don't think it was ever intended specifically for that. . Unless in the States it is absolutely normal in a series dedicated also for an audience of children to talk about planets where "rape ganga" dominate, in which case I apologize.

Star Wars is considered kid friendly in US, and Vader chokes a dude out in the first five minutes. One of the things that gets lost in translation when discussing these things across various nations is that different nations have different taboos about what is acceptable. In the US, for an incredibly long time, sexuality was really frowned upon. To the point that in some family sitcoms, the parents slept in separate beds. That lingered into the 90's and 2000's here.

 

[Skipper]

You mean an episode produced in the US vs. an episode produced in the UK?

Well, if you want i can list all the American series broadcast during Enterprise in which LBGTQI+ characters appeared

 

[BillJ]

Well, if you want i can list all the American series broadcast during Enterprise in which LBGTQI+ characters appeared

They are different nations with different standards. At the time, Doctor Who (the reboot/revamp/whatever one calls it) was only available via cable TV here. While the various Star Trek shows air via OTA (over-the-air).

Plus, humanity doesn't jump forward all at once. We get there as local conditions permit.

 

[Skipper]

They are different nations with different standards. At the time, Doctor Who (the reboot/revamp/whatever one calls it) was only available via cable TV here. While the various Star Trek shows air via OTA (over-the-air).

Plus, humanity doesn't jump forward all at once. We get there as local conditions permit.

I said American (as "US") tv shows. There are a lot of them in the early 2000s.

 

[BillJ]

I said American (as "US") tv shows. There are a lot of them in the early 2000s.

I already have a list. I'm sure there are others...

Category:2000s American LGBT-related television series - Wikipedia

Most are reality TV affairs, that aired on cable, that most people wouldn't watch and none, according to this list, are franchise shows. It circles back around to money ruling the roost.

I do think another consideration that most outside the US don't take into account, there are a lot of conservative Star Trek fans out there. More than I ever imagined would be possible.

Be thankful that we've made it to this point. Be vigilant in the here-and-now because there are a lot of people who would love to roll back the gains made. Understand that a sizable portion of the US Star Trek audience back then was more conservative than it is now.

 

[Oddish]

Star Trek also has a very large, very conservative following. Yes, it's a largely liberal vision of the future. But it also resonates with people in the military, American exceptionalism, and sci-fi fans in general tend to be more white & male, both traditionally more conservative.

That's really about the size of it. We had a good topic going on what conservatives liked about Trek, unfortunately it drifted to political discussion and got shut down. But there's a lot about Trek that conservatives like.

But, especially with the American culture war going on, even if it's stupid, I can totally see the money people sweating bullets when they think something can offend a large part of their audience. And YouTube isn't exactly shy of takes like "the woke agenda ruined Star Trek & Wars", so I can absolutely see why the powers that be have always been so hesitant on Trek.

Don't forget Disney, too. A lot of people have given up on them, and I can see why. And no, it's not the gay characters. Because of "Frozen's" original novelization, I know exactly when they doubled down on going woke.

A little correction here: Chapel is bisexual.

And so is Mariner. Surprised no one's mentioned that Trek has an LGBTQ series lead.