Stargate is Gay!

[Broccoli]

From Gateworld, reporting on Joseph Mallozzi's blog, apparently Captain Vega was intended to be a lesbian, but the scenes that established that were cut for time (she asks Keller out). I wonder if this could end up in a deleted scenes section on the DVD sets.

Also, according to him, one of the male reoccurring characters on the show is also gay, but he didn't reveal who. Gateworld narrows the list of who it could be down to Zelenka, Lorne, or Chuck.

Thoughts?

 

[Rÿcher]

So that makes Stargate gay?

tits!

 

[Kpnuts]

So in other words, Stargate is normal! *Gasp!*

Obviously Mallozi wanted to go for the safer, less shocking of a lesbian rather than a gay guy... but surely you're not allowed to reveal that you're gay in the US military?

 

[Broccoli]

So that makes Stargate gay?

tits!

No, it doesn't. Since the linked article concerned itself with possibly gay characters, I gave it an intentional silly, OTT title. (actually in inspiration came from the South Park episode of a similar name) If it offends you that much, I'll change it.

 

[Jax]

Weak call by the producers to say it after her death and to one of the male characters just to look edgy, shame on you Mallozi.

 

[Broccoli]

Weak call by the producers to say it after her death and to one of the male characters just to look edgy, shame on you Mallozi.

Um...it is never once said that they were thinking to do this because it was "edgy".

The keyboard warriors in the comments section make that claim.

So in other words, Stargate is normal! *Gasp!*

Obviously Mallozi wanted to go for the safer, less shocking of a lesbian rather than a gay guy... but surely you're not allowed to reveal that you're gay in the US military?

Unless the character isn't military (or from the US).

 

[Captain Shaw]

From Gateworld, reporting on Joseph Mallozzi's blog, apparently Captain Vega was intended to be a lesbian, but the scenes that established that were cut for time (she asks Keller out). I wonder if this could end up in a deleted scenes section on the DVD sets.

Also, according to him, one of the male reoccurring characters on the show is also gay, but he didn't reveal who. Gateworld narrows the list of who it could be down to Zelenka, Lorne, or Chuck.

Thoughts?

I do not think it was Zelenka because he had a thing for Elizabeth i would go for Chuck because then the writers would not have had to worry about don't ask don't tell.

 

[Broccoli]

From Gateworld, reporting on Joseph Mallozzi's blog, apparently Captain Vega was intended to be a lesbian, but the scenes that established that were cut for time (she asks Keller out). I wonder if this could end up in a deleted scenes section on the DVD sets.

Also, according to him, one of the male reoccurring characters on the show is also gay, but he didn't reveal who. Gateworld narrows the list of who it could be down to Zelenka, Lorne, or Chuck.

Thoughts?

I do not think it was Zelenka because he had a thing for Elizabeth i would go for Chuck because then the writers would not have had to worry about don't ask don't tell.

Zelenka would be the obvious choice because he's had the most "background character" presence on the show since day one. However, since we do know about him, it would be to "wait...what?" if that was revealed about him. We know next to nothing about Chuck other than his name is Chuck.

Speaking of Chuck, were has be been lately? It seems they have ditched him in favor of Kung-Fu Girl.

 

[Smiley]

If it has to be said in a blog, then it's not very relevant to the show, is it? At least with Garak on DS9, you can see the subtext he was trying for, even if the viewers' interpretations can vary.

Not having seen Atlantis, maybe someone can tell me if this "revelation" makes certain scenes make more sense or if Mallozzi is just trying to stir up some renewed interest in the series.

 

[Kpnuts]

They wouldn't have the balls to make it Lorne, even though it should be. To go against the ridiculous gay stereotype as seen on tv, ie camp queens.

But yes Mallozi is just being stupid in bringing this up anyway. No surprise there.

I'm quite disturbed by some of the retarded comments on Gatework though with regards to this. Again, no surprise there.

 

[Harvey]

So, I'm supposed to care about something that the producers thought it fit to cut on one hand, and on the other, care about something that doesn't even exist except in Mallozi's imagination of a character he doesn't even have the balls to name?

I mean, c'mon! This is not to pinpoint Stargate as the only science fiction series to ignore gays all together (hello, Star Trek), but this doesn't mean a thing.

 

[Kpnuts]

He wants to name the character after the show has finished it's run because he doesn't have the balls to do before. Then again that would impact ratings pretty negatively in the US.

 

[Gertch]

There's nothing wrong with being Happy. But I would be more inclined to say that Stargate is Fun!

 

[Broccoli]

They wouldn't have the balls to make it Lorne, even though it should be. To go against the ridiculous gay stereotype as seen on tv, ie camp queens.

They may not have the balls to make Lorne gay, but even if they did, it wouldn't make sense for him to be gay. Last time I checked, the military still has a don't ask/don't tell policy (is that still in effect? I really don't know). If Lorne came out, it would become a big point of contention for the other US military officers there (not necessary with their personal opinion, but rather military protocol) and would undoubtedly have to become at least a subplot of the episode. Having it brushed aside would seem unlikely in a real world situation. Since JM would want to handle it in a "no big deal" way, having him make a causal comment about his homosexuality would seem suspend my disbelief too much.

I'm quite disturbed by some of the retarded comments on Gatework though with regards to this. Again, no surprise there.

I agree. I don't like that they added that feature.

So, I'm supposed to care about something that the producers thought it fit to cut on one hand, and on the other, care about something that doesn't even exist except in Mallozi's imagination of a character he doesn't even have the balls to name?

Like most bloggers, he just rambles on about whatever they feel like. So what? I bet he just figured it would be interesting for fans of the show to know about. Also, he probably didn't reveal the name as it was his personal theory and not part of the "real" background of the character. We of all people should know how throwaway comments can be treated as gospel truth around these parts.

Like he said, if they never do anything with it, he'd might consider revealing it in a JK Rowling way (which, interestingly enough, no one seemed to be in an uproar over when she threw Dumbledore out of the closet).

He wants to name the character after the show has finished it's run because he doesn't have the balls to do before. Then again that would impact ratings pretty negatively in the US.

Uh....what makes you think that? A background character coming out wouldn't really be that sort of big deal. Considering the success of Will and Grace here in the US, I don't think American audiences would react negatively to a gay character. The only way the current fans of a series would react negatively is if the already established stuff about a character would be completely contradictory to the character being gay.

 

[witchie]

Mallozi did the same thing when he revealed a cut scene from S4 where Sam says she's seeing someone in Washington. Wink. Wink. It's Jack! They decided to cut the scene, but to torment the Sam/Jack fans they let everyone know it existed. Whatever.

Not only was Vega gay, but lusting after Dr. Keller. So, we have Ronon, McKay, and Vega all lusting after Jennifer Keller. Shouldn't they rename her to Mary Sue? It fits.

I find nothing edgy about making any of the known characters gay. We know next to nothing about these people. Throwing this out there at the end elicits a big ol' yawn from me.

 

[Harvey]

^^
At least that scene ended up on the DVD (although not re-inserted into the episode). For a supposedly character-based piece, Trio seemed to have the most important character development in it cut!

 

[Harvey]

Like he said, if they never do anything with it, he'd might consider revealing it in a JK Rowling way (which, interestingly enough, no one seemed to be in an uproar over when she threw Dumbledore out of the closet).

That wasn't my perception of those events, but I'm not a fan of Harry Potter, so I'm on the outside of that situation. It certainly seemed cowardly to me for such a character detail to be revealed only long after the fact. But that's just my view on it.

 

[jamestyler]

Obviously Mallozi wanted to go for the safer, less shocking of a lesbian rather than a gay guy... but surely you're not allowed to reveal that you're gay in the US military?

Small team of people in a completely different Galaxy with little oppertunity to get home... balls to the rules, I'd be getting laid.

I always thought the 'Dont ask...' policy was there to not discriminate against personnel and that it's up to them to reveal it or not. There was an episode of Brothers & Sisters where an army guy was being openly gay - I would assume if that were the case, they'd have him be more discrete.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The gutsiest move would be for them to opt for Lorne being gay. Definitely shouldn't be Zelenka. Who the heck is Chuck?

Having lesbian soldiers or just lesbians in general is totally gutless. They don't dare upset their heterosexual male audience with gay guys, and certainly not macho type gay guys.

Lorne should be madly in love with Shep. No wait, forget it, it would make me sad that the show is ending instead of wildly indifferent.

 

[DWF]

They don't dare upset their heterosexual male audience with gay guys, and certainly not macho type gay guys.

No, Stargate isn't Torchwood.