Tell me about Titan

[Christopher]

^Yes, a name has been picked, and I've been told what it is, though I don't remember it fully. Naturally it would be revealed in a TNG novel, and at this point there's only one announced TNG novel on the upcoming schedule. Make of that what you will.

 

[Dave Scarpa]

I'm about half Way thru Taking Wing and am enjoying it alot, there's alot of character background stuff to be expected in tyhe 1st novel of a new setting, but I like the ship and crew. I'm expecting to ready all the titan novels in order before I move onto something else.

 

[AthanisTree]

As far as I remember, the namesake of Troi/ Rikers baby had a strong, emotive impact upon Troi, especially during her 'holographic farewell gesture' and, for a character so short-lived, I think she IS still talked about rather fondly these days.. Strong, assertive and very able in doing her job to the end: Can't think of a better role-model for the child Minus the tar-pit thing...

Must say, I love the Titan series, for all the reasons so far listed but, (perhaps unfairly, perhaps not,) because in Ranul Keru I see a fleshed out example of a real gay fellow who mourns for his love yet performs his duties, gets on with the rest of the crew and doesn't conform to the homogenised, oddly effeminate stereotype that our psychotic 'Media-Culture' is comfortable with. He's the sort of character I can look up to and even identify with when it comes to notions of same-sex masculinity, his depth of concern for others and the conflicts within his character. All the same, with Trek's apparent history of avoiding openly gay characters on screen and the only relatively recent development of in-depth same-sex relationships on the literary side, I'm just waiting, with the worst cynicism, for Keru to be killed. I hope against hope that he'll live and breath and be given romantic, professional and emotional freedom inside the upcoming novels but it's depressing that Trek's history compells me to be paranoid in such a manner . (Off-point perhaps...)

Being optimistic, (Aha!) the deliberate diversity of the crew has been an absolute joy so far, perhaps slightly ignored in the Destiny novels, (understandably perhaps ) but the writers need a good clap on the back for fleshing out species habits that don't easily mesh with our own (the herbivore/ carnivore unease for instance) and for attempting that most daunting of tasks: convincing an ashamed arachnophobe that even a Giant spider-esque creature can have feeling and thought, a combadge and a career

Oops, ranted a bit! Viva la Titan (And Keru... and K'chak'!Op.)

 

[Christopher]

For what it's worth, I intended K'chak'!'op to be more of a crustacean/beetle sort of thing than a spider.

 

[Geoff Thorne]

Here's my agenda for promoting homosexuality:

Write people as people.

Sex permeates our lives from just before puberty until death.

In the far future we depict we have multiple species, some with only one gender, some with "extra" genders and with a wide variety of sexualities within each. Not to mention inter-species romance of the non-humanoid kind (Medusan/human anybody?).

To me this whole "Who's having it off with whom" stuff is a bit juvenile.

People have sex. In Trek world, we have to assume, along with our gender, faith and ethnic prejudices being put away, sexuality would not be the issue it is for us now.

Sex permeates Sword of Damocles. Procreation, sexual attraction, romantic love, lust, to me these are the primary axes around which life revolves.

And that means hetero, homo, bi, tri, quad, omni, multi, inter, whatever. All of it is in play.

Loolooa Tereshini is, for instance, a sexually mature female of her species who has both male and female parters. Does that make her bisexual? She's not even human. Who knows what permutations she's used to? Not me.

Xin Ra-Havreii is what I call an "aggressive hedonist." Natural for his species. A bit much for a lot of humans. Is he therefore amoral or immoral? I don't think so. He simply is.

I doubt the word "gay" is even used to denote homosexuality in the Trek future. No more than anyone would refer to me as black. I'd be "human" (or "brownskin" if you were a pissed-off Andorian).

Which is sort of the whole point.

 

[Tino]

I approached Orion's Hounds as a sort of "second pilot" (...)

And taking a storyline out of the TNG pilot?
Brilliant! :-)

 

[DimesDan]

Here's my agenda for promoting homosexuality:

Write people as people.

Sex permeates our lives from just before puberty until death.

In the far future we depict we have multiple species, some with only one gender, some with "extra" genders and with a wide variety of sexualities within each. Not to mention inter-species romance of the non-humanoid kind (Medusan/human anybody?).

To me this whole "Who's having it off with whom" stuff is a bit juvenile.

People have sex. In Trek world, we have to assume, along with our gender, faith and ethnic prejudices being put away, sexuality would not be the issue it is for us now.

Sex permeates Sword of Damocles. Procreation, sexual attraction, romantic love, lust, to me these are the primary axes around which life revolves.

And that means hetero, homo, bi, tri, quad, omni, multi, inter, whatever. All of it is in play.

Loolooa Tereshini is, for instance, a sexually mature female of her species who has both male and female parters. Does that make her bisexual? She's not even human. Who knows what permutations she's used to? Not me.

Xin Ra-Havreii is what I call an "aggressive hedonist." Natural for his species. A bit much for a lot of humans. Is he therefore amoral or immoral? I don't think so. He simply is.

I doubt the word "gay" is even used to denote homosexuality in the Trek future. No more than anyone would refer to me as black. I'd be "human" (or "brownskin" if you were a pissed-off Andorian).

Which is sort of the whole point.

Absolutily well said good sir.

 

[JarodRussell]

Homosexuality will certainly not be any issue in 300 years. What I wondered about... sex between a Human, and, I dunno, a Klingon. That's bestiality, right? It's like sex between a human and an ape.

What would a human of the 24th century say about that?

 

[Steve Roby]

Was I wondered about... sex between a Human, and, I dunno, a Klingon. That's bestiality, right? It's like sex between a human and an ape.

You're almost there. Interspecies sex would have to make being gay but sticking with your own species look old-fashioned and conservative, true, but bestiality refers to dumb animals, not other sentient beings.

 

[Sci]

Homosexuality will certainly not be any issue in 300 years. What I wondered about... sex between a Human, and, I dunno, a Klingon. That's bestiality, right?

Why, exactly, would sex between a Human and another sentient entity equate to bestiality -- which is, let us recall, sex between a Human and an entity that lacks the ability to consent to a sex act, and therefore inherently an act of sexual assault?

 

[captcalhoun]

no offence Geoff, but i did not know you were black. not that it makes any difference, just interesting to know.

i default to assuming anyone online is a white male American until proven otherwise. it's prolly racist and sexist, but it tends to be true.

 

[Paris]

^

 

[JarodRussell]

Well, in my opinion, the solution is clear, but irrational. Species being able to build spaceships: check. Animals: never! Especially animals from Earth. Because animals are dumb and not sentient, and because it simply is disgusting (no doubt about that!).

But there's already the irrational part.

You're almost there. Interspecies sex would have to make being gay but sticking with your own species look old-fashioned and conservative, true, but bestiality refers to dumb animals, not other sentient beings.

What makes a sentient being a sentient being? Very philosophical, and hence very vague.

http://www.koko.org/index.php

Koko understands approximately 2,000 words of spoken English. Koko initiates the majority of conversations with her human companions and typically constructs statements averaging three to six words. Koko has a tested IQ of between 70 and 95 on a human scale, where 100 is considered "normal."

Many people with a lower IQ have sex and children.

Why, exactly, would sex between a Human and another sentient entity equate to bestiality -- which is, let us recall, sex between a Human and an entity that lacks the ability to consent to a sex act, and therefore inherently an act of sexual assault?

Interesting. Every species has mating rituals, with (mostly) the females allowing or rejecting potential partners to have sex with them. I'd call that being able to consent to a sex act. Unless you want to argue that every animal is just running a hollow program and there's no self-awareness and no conscious decision-making involved. That's again pretty philosophical.


And as for Star Trek's fictional world... Spock as a Vulcan was able to properly communicate with Humpback Whales and ask for their permission to bring them into another time. That makes them intelligent, self-aware, sentient beings able to consent to actions.



And let's say the aliens we encounter some day are human-sized jellyfishs. Clearly intelligent enough to build spaceships. That would be pretty disgusting, I guess.

 

[Christopher]

^Dolphins are well-known for their tendency to hump anything that moves, including humans. They're usually the initiators, so the consent question is on the other side.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Here's my agenda for promoting homosexuality:

Write people as people.

Sex permeates our lives from just before puberty until death.

In the far future we depict we have multiple species, some with only one gender, some with "extra" genders and with a wide variety of sexualities within each. Not to mention inter-species romance of the non-humanoid kind (Medusan/human anybody?).

To me this whole "Who's having it off with whom" stuff is a bit juvenile.

People have sex. In Trek world, we have to assume, along with our gender, faith and ethnic prejudices being put away, sexuality would not be the issue it is for us now.

Sex permeates Sword of Damocles. Procreation, sexual attraction, romantic love, lust, to me these are the primary axes around which life revolves.

And that means hetero, homo, bi, tri, quad, omni, multi, inter, whatever. All of it is in play.

Loolooa Tereshini is, for instance, a sexually mature female of her species who has both male and female parters. Does that make her bisexual? She's not even human. Who knows what permutations she's used to? Not me.

Xin Ra-Havreii is what I call an "aggressive hedonist." Natural for his species. A bit much for a lot of humans. Is he therefore amoral or immoral? I don't think so. He simply is.

I doubt the word "gay" is even used to denote homosexuality in the Trek future. No more than anyone would refer to me as black. I'd be "human" (or "brownskin" if you were a pissed-off Andorian).

Which is sort of the whole point.

Absolutily well said good sir.

Agreed.

 

[Geoff Thorne]

no offence Geoff, but i did not know you were black. not that it makes any difference, just interesting to know.

It's really not. What you should be interested in is my deep and abiding love for the poetry of Edward Lear.

 

[captcalhoun]

no, i'm interested in knowing when you're going to do another Trek novel and whether it's going to be more of a regular book or another mind-bending head-fuck like SoD...

 

[Sci]

Why, exactly, would sex between a Human and another sentient entity equate to bestiality -- which is, let us recall, sex between a Human and an entity that lacks the ability to consent to a sex act, and therefore inherently an act of sexual assault?

Interesting. Every species has mating rituals, with (mostly) the females allowing or rejecting potential partners to have sex with them. I'd call that being able to consent to a sex act. Unless you want to argue that every animal is just running a hollow program and there's no self-awareness and no conscious decision-making involved. That's again pretty philosophical.

No, it's actually pretty legalistic. I mean, hell, a twelve-year-old Human can get horny and beg for sex from an adult, but that doesn't mean that that twelve-year-old truly has the capacity to consent, especially from a legal standpoint. In the eyes of most cultures' laws, that twelve-year-old has an insufficiently-developed mind to be truly capable of consenting to a sex act with a Human adult. The same is true of animals; that's why it's considered a form of animal abuse.

And as for Star Trek's fictional world... Spock as a Vulcan was able to properly communicate with Humpback Whales and ask for their permission to bring them into another time. That makes them intelligent, self-aware, sentient beings able to consent to actions.

But then the question arises of whether or not their minds have the same level of sentience as an adult Human or most of the humanoid species we've seen in Trek. If they do not -- if they have the same level of sentience as, say, a Human child -- then I have to say that I'd see a Human or comparative species individual who engages in sexual activities with a Humpback Whale as sexually exploiting another creature.

And let's say the aliens we encounter some day are human-sized jellyfishs. Clearly intelligent enough to build spaceships. That would be pretty disgusting, I guess.

*shrugs* If they're smart enough to build spaceships, they're smart enough to consent to sex. I've got no problem with that.

 

[Paris]

^Dolphins are well-known for their tendency to hump anything that moves, including humans. They're usually the initiators, so the consent question is on the other side.

I wonder if this was ever a problem on the set of Flipper ?

 

[BrotherBenny]

I tend to see everyone as people, regardless of culture, colour, age, gender or sexual orientation, as I know and get on with people who vary on all of these.

I love Star Trek because it depicts that everyone can and does get on (no pun intended) for the most part.

So Geoff, when are you doing another Trek novel? You're not planning on being a one-hit wonder with us are you?