Is Star Trek homophobic?

[RandyS]

Obviously, Star Trek is also islamophobic.

I was so close to posting this myself, but I didn't want to be the one to open that can

It seems they cover a larger percentage of the world's population than homosexuality does. Are Trek saying that they're all eradicated in the future? So why is homosexuality the one thing some people dwell on?

As someone who lives outside of the US (*shock*), I'll say that the representation of the world in Trek seems to be woeful far beyond just homosexuality. Throw in the occasional Scottish or British guy, but basically America is the world.

Well, in fairness, it IS an American made show.

 

[JarodRussell]

As someone who lives outside of the US (*shock*), I'll say that the representation of the world in Trek seems to be woeful far beyond just homosexuality. Throw in the occasional Scottish or British guy, but basically America is the world.

Well it is produced in the United States for American consumption. So it would stand to reason that it the characters would be primarily American.

Why does it "stand to reason"? Are you Americans so xenophobic that you run away yelling if a show has non American characters?

 

[BlobVanDam]

As someone who lives outside of the US (*shock*), I'll say that the representation of the world in Trek seems to be woeful far beyond just homosexuality. Throw in the occasional Scottish or British guy, but basically America is the world.

Well it is produced in the United States for American consumption. So it would stand to reason that it the characters would be primarily American.

It's also made for a predominantly straight audience. Are these valid excuses to exclude groups?
Isn't future Earth united as one big happy family? Last time I checked, USA only made up a tiny portion of the world's population, and yet they portray the vast majority of characters. America's population is a much smaller percentage of the world's population than gay people. Is this misrepresentation of the world much different to not showing gay people? Do you think I get offended that they've never had an Australian crew member?

(the answer is no. I'd be embarrassed to hear an Aussie accent on Trek tbh)

 

[DonIago]

I didn't realize Australians faced discrimination in the modern world just for being Australian. Do Australians hope for a future where they will be treated as equals as opposed to facing legal discrimination?

The reason why gays get put-out about this is because in the modern world we -are- second-class citizens.

 

[JarodRussell]

Bullshit. Gays aren't second class citizens. Women are.Or have gays been denied to vote until 1920 in the USA?

It's also an outrage that Star Trek has never ever shown midgets. What is the message behind that non-inclusion?

 

[BillJ]

As someone who lives outside of the US (*shock*), I'll say that the representation of the world in Trek seems to be woeful far beyond just homosexuality. Throw in the occasional Scottish or British guy, but basically America is the world.

Well it is produced in the United States for American consumption. So it would stand to reason that it the characters would be primarily American.

It's also made for a predominantly straight audience. Are these valid excuses to exclude groups?
Isn't future Earth united as one big happy family? Last time I checked, USA only made up a tiny portion of the world's population, and yet they portray the vast majority of characters. America's population is a much smaller percentage of the world's population than gay people. Is this misrepresentation of the world much different to not showing gay people? Do you think I get offended that they've never had an Australian crew member?

(the answer is no. I'd be embarrassed to hear an Aussie accent on Trek tbh)

But these are TV shows produced in the 'here and now', not created in the future where we're all one big, happy family. To be honest, Trek now exists in the 500 channel universe... if you don't think a particular subset of humanity is represented to your liking watch something else.

I don't go on message boards and complain if Modern Family (which is a great show) is too 'gay' or too 'latino' for me. I simply find something else to watch that does entertain me or go and read a book or go spend time with my kids.

 

[JarodRussell]

But these are TV shows produced in the 'here and now', not created in the future where we're all one big, happy family.

I think I will never understand this kind of logic. Don't you guys have any imagination?

"I want a show about the future, but it shouldn't be too futuristic!"

 

[BillJ]

Bullshit. Gays aren't second class citizens. Women are.Or have gays been denied to vote until 1920 in the USA?

It's also an outrage that Star Trek has never ever shown midgets. What is the message behind that non-inclusion?

Plato's Stepchildren

 

[BillJ]

But these are TV shows produced in the 'here and now', not created in the future where we're all one big, happy family.

I think I will never understand this kind of logic. Don't you guys have any imagination?

"I want a show about the future, but it shouldn't be too futuristic!"

Why are Doctor Who and his sidekick British? There are more than just Brits on the planet Earth. But I accept that it is a British show produced by British people for a British audience first and foremost. YMMV.

The United States is a secondary market.

 

[BlobVanDam]

I didn't realize Australians faced discrimination in the modern world just for being Australian. Do Australians hope for a future where they will be treated as equals as opposed to facing legal discrimination?

The reason why gays get put-out about this is because in the modern world we -are- second-class citizens.

I think you take it too personally that gays are not represented. It's not about discrimination, as Trek has made no explicit comment that homosexuals aren't around or not accepted. They also don't depict religious humans or a variety of cultural backgrounds. By the same logic, any of these could be considered unacceptable in the future. But all of this is reading too much into what isn't there.

At worst Trek is far too safe by avoiding the issues, but beyond that I think claims of homophobia have little objective basis IMO.

 

[OmahaStar]

But these are TV shows produced in the 'here and now', not created in the future where we're all one big, happy family.

I think I will never understand this kind of logic. Don't you guys have any imagination?

"I want a show about the future, but it shouldn't be too futuristic!"

Why are Doctor Who and his sidekick British? There are more than just Brits on the planet Earth. But I accept that it is a British show produced by British people for a British audience first and foremost. YMMV.

The United States is a secondary market.

Granddaughter - Gallifreyan
Vicki - Orphan, human from unknown 25th century
Katarina - from ancient Troy
Zoe - Librarian in space in the far future, unknown origin
Leela - From the far flung future, tribe of people who had crash-landed on another planet.
K9 - no country of origin
Romana - Gallifreyan
Adric - From another universe
Nyssa - From planet Trakken
Turlough - From another planet named Trion
Kamelion - Robot used by the Master, from the planet Xeriphas
Peri - From America
Ace - From the future
Grace - American
Captain Jack - From the 51st century, another planet
Astrid - Not Human

And that's without even getting into companions such as Erimem, a Pharaoh.

What was it you were saying? His companions are British? Might want to check your facts again.

 

[Bishop76]

Mmm... Peri...

 

[Nick086]

What someone said before Star Trek isn't homophobic. Its the majority of the viewers that watch the show. They have alot of pull if they don't like something they see on the show they'll complain online and the producers or writers will take it out. I have nothing against two guys having a late night conversation every day there nothing wrong with that. Guys can't have a bromance and be close like that? I remember going into Star Trek chatrooms or Star Trek Sim recruit rooms. You wouldn't believe how much homophobic conversations that were going on in the chatrooms. If Star Trek did have a gay character the writers should make him masculate. He can work in Security or Engineering. A postion where he can get his hands dirty or use brute force. Don't make him the type of gay man that most people wouldn't like to see or hear. Such as the loud "I'm hear and I'm queer type" Make sure he is attractive to both bi/straight women and gay/bi men.

 

[DonIago]

I didn't realize Australians faced discrimination in the modern world just for being Australian. Do Australians hope for a future where they will be treated as equals as opposed to facing legal discrimination?

The reason why gays get put-out about this is because in the modern world we -are- second-class citizens.

I think you take it too personally that gays are not represented. It's not about discrimination, as Trek has made no explicit comment that homosexuals aren't around or not accepted. They also don't depict religious humans or a variety of cultural backgrounds. By the same logic, any of these could be considered unacceptable in the future. But all of this is reading too much into what isn't there.

At worst Trek is far too safe by avoiding the issues, but beyond that I think claims of homophobia have little objective basis IMO.

Eh, if I actually was taking it personally I wouldn't watch Trek at all. I think overall it's a great franchise, but this is a pet peeve. And you'll note that we are in a thread where the issue specifically came up; I'm not spamming it in unrelated threads. For the folks that don't want to hear about it...why are -you- here?

I explicitly said earlier that I thought TPTB were being avoidant, not homophobic, so I'm not sure whether you're indicating you thought I felt otherwise...

But when gay people are denied the right to marry that straights take for granted they -are- second-class citizens.

 

[JarodRussell]

Bullshit. Gays aren't second class citizens. Women are.Or have gays been denied to vote until 1920 in the USA?

It's also an outrage that Star Trek has never ever shown midgets. What is the message behind that non-inclusion?

Plato's Stepchildren

That's like lesbian Kira in the Mirror Universe! It's discriminating!!!!

 

[DonIago]

I don't recall Alexander generally being considered a negative portrayal of vertically-challenged folks.

 

[OmahaStar]

I don't recall Alexander generally being considered a negative portrayal of vertically-challenged folks.

There's also the bell-ringer in the pilot and finale of TNG, in Q's courtroom scene.

 

[T'Girl]

Very few movies have ever included a gay character. Does that make them homophobic?

If they have a couple of dozen adult main characters and every last one of them is shown to be straight, then the answer is yes to your question

Going by that logic there would have to be at least one black/Asian/Hispanic/transgender/fat/anorexic/disabled character in your group just to 'balance things out' in an attempt to make every demographic happy. Reality doesn't work like that.

Problem with that is that gay sexuality exist in all Human demographic groups, you can have a large group of random blacks, there would be nothing unusual about there being no whites present. It is impossible to have a large group of random blacks without a statistically number of them being gay.

The same applies to any group above a certain size, regardless of race, gender, abilities, eating habits or weight. Put enough transgenders in one room, some of them will be gay sexually.

This has nothing to do with just making a segment of Trek fans happy. It has to do with reality and the way reality works.

Being hassled in the street or workplace for your sexuality is homophobia in action. Star trek not having an openly gay character is not.

Definitions of homophobia include antipathy, aversion, and irrational fear. Aversion is a fixed desire to avoid or turn away from something or someone.

"Ron Moore .... There is no answer for it other than people in charge don’t want gay characters in Star Trek, period."

Star trek didn't just happen not to contain any major characters who were gay, it was a considered, deliberate decision on the part of the management group in charge of Star Trek. That's aversion.

In others words, homophobia.

from the OP: "Is Star Trek homophobic?"

Yes.

 

[Bishop76]

Star trek didn't just happen not to contain any major characters who were gay, it was a considered, deliberate decision on the part of the management group in charge of Star Trek. That's aversion.

In others words, homophobia.

But I think that this definition ignores intent. Yeah, they were averse to it, but they were averse to it because, as I mentioned earlier, it's a business. They believed that putting gay characters into a show in the 90s was a bad business decision. They believed that the number of people who would be turned off by a gay character would be more significant than the number that would desire a gay character in a leading role.

If a Trek series were to take off now, I think they probably would try to work a gay character in. It's a lot more acceptable now and there are several shows that have set a precedent for some level of success with a gay lead.

Their intent was nothing more sinister than their bottom line.

 

[Agenda]

Star trek didn't just happen not to contain any major characters who were gay, it was a considered, deliberate decision on the part of the management group in charge of Star Trek. That's aversion.

In others words, homophobia.

But I think that this definition ignores intent. Yeah, they were averse to it, but they were averse to it because, as I mentioned earlier, it's a business. They believed that putting gay characters into a show in the 90s was a bad business decision. They believed that the number of people who would be turned off by a gay character would be more significant than the number that would desire a gay character in a leading role.

If a Trek series were to take off now, I think they probably would try to work a gay character in. It's a lot more acceptable now and there are several shows that have set a precedent for some level of success with a gay lead.

Their intent was nothing more sinister than their bottom line.

Thing is, I could see in the 80s/early 90s why they wouldn't do it because of a business decision. Back then, homosexuality was rarely on TV compared to these days. However, things really began changing when DS9 and Voyager ended and Enterprise started (the era of Will and Grace). No one can tell me with a straight face that there would have been a severe viewer backlash if they'd featured homosexuality in one fricking episode.