You could say that Picard has prejudices (inaccurate preconceptions) on the subject of religion in general and it's impact on a society.
Is Star Trek homophobic?
- Thread starter Agenda
- Start date
- Status
You could say that Picard has prejudices (inaccurate preconceptions) on the subject of religion in general and it's impact on a society.
But if the studio doesn't approve of the message then the script never gets to the filming stage like The God Thing.
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
LOL, yeah right, they are all assholes because society made them like that.
My girlfriend works with disabled, and one very important thing I learned from them: No one has the right to be an asshole. Like people in wheelchairs who think they can bitch at anything and everyone just because they think they've earned it because they think life fucked them hard enough. They are assholes, plain and simple. But that's for another thread maybe.
Excuse me, but why should a persecuted minority act happy and contented for the edification of the majority that is persecuting them? Putting up with religious fundie Tea Bagger bigots and their influence/effect on society is more than anybody should have to bear, and that (for some) probably expresses itself in anger and bitchiness. And I wouldn't stop being that way unless society changes or gets a clue that GLBT people are a part of it-not to be hidden, ignored or insulted away.
Picard had a very good reasons for his statements in Who Watches The Watchers btw, reasons based on historical facts, reasons I completely agree with. So again: it's not prejudice against religion what's shown in that episode.
We are drowned in "in your face" heterosexuality from birth, so we barely notice it. But a gay peck on the cheek is so absurdly rare that it might as well be a flashing neon sign.
That's why morons say "they're shoving it down my throat" when it was only a peck on the cheek.
^Let's please back off from the "morons", "assholes" and "bigot" labels in this Trek-related thread.
Also, if anyone is, as a few have indicated, really "pissed off" by this discussion, then perhaps you should avoid reading it (or many other topics on this board). Take a deep breath instead. There are too many really pissed off people on the internet already.
Also, if anyone is, as a few have indicated, really "pissed off" by this discussion, then perhaps you should avoid reading it (or many other topics on this board). Take a deep breath instead. There are too many really pissed off people on the internet already.
Picard presented "facts" in a highly biased, subjective manner. Yes, religious organizations have killed millions over the years. So have secular organizations, including atheistic organizations. Hell, the Soviet Union was an officially atheist state, and killed more people than Hitler.
The simple fact of the matter is that tribalism of any sort -- religious, national, economic, ethnic, racial, sexual -- often lends itself to violence. This is not unique to religion, and it is an act of prejudice to claim that religions are any more prone to violent tribalism than any other institution.
Just to be clear, my post was in response to the content of a previous posting of Dusty Ayres, and not to Picard's comments in Who Watches The Watchers..
I don't agree with Picard's little speech, you think someone with Picard's supposed historical perspective would recognize that the activities sighted (by himself and Doctor Barron) were the exceptions rather than the rule, still I appreciate Picard's position and opinions on the matter being made clear.
It's ironic that a show about future humans who overcame their bigotry and prejudices can have viewers and fans that have them.
From the 60's till today.
Majel Barret was originally cast as the first officer in the pilot, but she had to give it up because the viewers wouldn't accept her role. (the brass claimed).
It was too hard for the viewers to believe (psssp, it's in the f-u-t--u-r-e)
And everyone knows about the controversy surrounding "the kiss".
If Trek says the future (for humans) is wonderful and there are NO prejudices, what some fans are going to say is "hey, you put it out there, now prove it".
If you say it, but deliberately avoid showing it, then they'll consider it an insult to their intelligence..
From the 60's till today.
Majel Barret was originally cast as the first officer in the pilot, but she had to give it up because the viewers wouldn't accept her role. (the brass claimed).
It was too hard for the viewers to believe (psssp, it's in the f-u-t--u-r-e)
And everyone knows about the controversy surrounding "the kiss".
If Trek says the future (for humans) is wonderful and there are NO prejudices, what some fans are going to say is "hey, you put it out there, now prove it".
If you say it, but deliberately avoid showing it, then they'll consider it an insult to their intelligence..
Last edited:
^Let's please back off from the "morons", "assholes" and "bigot" labels in this Trek-related thread.
Also, if anyone is, as a few have indicated, really "pissed off" by this discussion, then perhaps you should avoid reading it (or many other topics on this board). Take a deep breath instead. There are too many really pissed off people on the internet already.
THIS is what brings you in to "moderate"? Christ, just censor the whole damned thread then... Boo Hoo... Someone said they're pissed off (AKA: ME)... Tough titties...
No one has expressed anger towards anyone or a group, and if you can't express emotion through words to add to a statement, then what the hell are we doing here, writing esays?
Take it to PM. Keep the thread on topic, please.^Let's please back off from the "morons", "assholes" and "bigot" labels in this Trek-related thread.
Also, if anyone is, as a few have indicated, really "pissed off" by this discussion, then perhaps you should avoid reading it (or many other topics on this board). Take a deep breath instead. There are too many really pissed off people on the internet already.
THIS is what brings you in to "moderate"? Christ, just censor the whole damned thread then... Boo Hoo... Someone said they're pissed off (AKA: ME)... Tough titties...
No one has expressed anger towards anyone or a group, and if you can't express emotion through words to add to a statement, then what the hell are we doing here, writing esays?
Pretty much true.
Most people in Thailand are much more conservative than people over here in the U.S. but their cultures except homosexuals, but if homosexual people here go over there and start acting like a bunch of weirdos dancing around naked you might get some nasty remarks, and if you were a pain in the but and keep pushing the buttons, you might get your ass kicked. People over there tends to think that being good is being conservative which to them means having an open mind, being courteous, and showing a lot of gumption and not loose your temper so easily. They look up to people like that.... Americans tends to think being open minded and cool is acting crazy and having fun at other people's expense. Or is it just being cool! They think they can say whatever they want and there are no consequences; even though what they are saying does not have a shred of proof...just whatever they feel like saying at the moment. American movies tend to make fun of other countries and their cultures. They tend to think acting as an irresponsible child will proof their point and get them what they want. Which is why a lot of gays in this country are view as weirdos. In Europe it's the same way as in Thailand.... They usually have higher standard and are expected to be well behaved. Contrary to popular believe, if you go walking naked in Europe you will get arrested and people look at you like a weirdo. You might even get beat up! It's OK if you're gay, but it doesn't make you better anybody else or excuse you from doing obscene behaviors. You have restraint yourself and respect everyone no matter who you are. Gay people can act like normal people, too. This is why a lot of people are ashamed to come out. If you're gay...so what? You don't have to tell every stranger you meet.... [laugh] People can like gay people, but it doesn't mean they have to sleep with one.... Trying to compared the political view in this country to other countries is flawed. Usually, in Thailand and Europe people who are well behaved and tries to do good in life are the ones everybody looks up to.... Over here it's gangsters hip/hop cultures! [laugh] (Do dinosaurs have boobs?) And you wonder why our kids do poorly in school compared to other countries.
They think they can say whatever they want and there are no consequences; even though what they are saying does not have a shred of proof...just whatever they feel like saying at the moment. American movies tend to make fun of other countries and their cultures. They tend to think acting as an irresponsible child will proof their point and get them what they want. Which is why a lot of gays in this country are view as weirdos. In Europe it's the same way as in Thailand.... They usually have higher standard and are expected to be well behaved. Contrary to popular believe, if you go walking naked in Europe you will get arrested and people look at you like a weirdo. You might even get beat up! It's OK if you're gay, but it doesn't make you better anybody else or excuse you from doing obscene behaviors. You have restraint yourself and respect everyone no matter who you are. Gay people can act like normal people, too. This is why a lot of people are ashamed to come out. If you're gay...so what? You don't have to tell every stranger you meet.... [laugh] People can like gay people, but it doesn't mean they have to sleep with one.... Trying to compared the political view in this country to other countries is flawed. Usually, in Thailand and Europe people who are well behaved and tries to do good in life are the ones everybody looks up to.... Over here it's gangsters hip/hop cultures! [laugh] (Do dinosaurs have boobs?) And you wonder why our kids do poorly in school compared to other countries. 
Gene Roddenberry was told by the NBC brass to get rid of Majel Barret becasue no one was impressed with her acting ability, also because Roddenberry - a married man - was placing his girlfriend in such a important role (third billing?), she simply didn't possess the acting credentials . Roddenberry was perfectly free to recast the role with another woman, he declinded.
This was the mid-sixties, womans lib was a cultural force, women were making more buying decission for the house holds, NBC loved the idea of a female first officer, they just didn't want Majel Barret.
Gene Roddenberry was told by the NBC brass to get rid of Majel Barret becasue no one was impressed with her acting ability, also because Roddenberry - a married man - was placing his girlfriend in such a important role (third billing?), she simply didn't possess the acting credentials . Roddenberry was perfectly free to recast the role with another woman, he declinded.
This was the mid-sixties, womans lib was a cultural force, women were making more buying decission for the house holds, NBC loved the idea of a female first officer, they just didn't want Majel Barret.
I pointed out in another thread that Roddenberry's casting decisions seemingly had more to do with his libido than any real yearning for "progress".
Gene Roddenberry was told by the NBC brass to get rid of Majel Barret becasue no one was impressed with her acting ability, also because Roddenberry - a married man - was placing his girlfriend in such a important role (third billing?), she simply didn't possess the acting credentials . Roddenberry was perfectly free to recast the role with another woman, he declinded.
This was the mid-sixties, womans lib was a cultural force, women were making more buying decission for the house holds, NBC loved the idea of a female first officer, they just didn't want Majel Barret.
I pointed out in another thread that Roddenberry's casting decisions seemingly had more to do with his libido than any real yearning for "progress".
3 times the libido, three times the casting, lol.
You know,the more you look into this stuff the more unclear the true story is.
Was the whole premise genuinely believed by the creators, or just a storyline for a show set in the future?
Backstage bickering, affairs, contradictory attitudes to the show's ideology. Damn!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
