The idea that alien species would be attracted to members of the same sex is much more plausible to me than the idea that they would be attracted to humans.
you can't see an alien wanting to procreate with this Human? lol

The idea that alien species would be attracted to members of the same sex is much more plausible to me than the idea that they would be attracted to humans.
Then again, since almost all Trek aliens are humans with either bumpy heads or weird skin colours, I think it's safe to say they all have gay people too.
Then again, since almost all Trek aliens are humans with either bumpy heads or weird skin colours, I think it's safe to say they all have gay people too.
Exactly.
I mean, sure, they're supposed to be completely alien species, but, in practice, all the well-known humanoid races behave more or less like Terrans, particularly where love and sex and relationships are concerned. They have romances and marriages and families, etc. Granted, the Vulcans have their own weird spin on it, but given that even they have their own version of marriages and mating rituals, why assume that somehow homosexuality is a uniquely human trait when all Star Trek humanoids seem to share the same basic biology and social structures.
Now if you want to argue that there are no gay Hortas . . . okay, the jury is out on that one.![]()
Actually, it's pretty straight-forward to figure out what they would protest/comdemn, and it has even been addressed in the novels: their complicated plumbing requirements for having offspring combined with their declining population mean that the government has taken great power in the citizens' sexual matters. Not only are any relationship combinations that aren't procreative seriously, seriously frowned upon, any relationships that aren't government selected as genetically optimized for producing healthy offspring are, as well.It would just get really complex with the 4 gendered andorians. It would so confusing, who would know what to protest?![]()
As an aside, this is actually close to my personal belief about the Judeo-Christian restrictions against homosexuality: at the times they were put in place, the Jews first and then the Christians later were very small groups surrounded by larger, hostile forces, and infant mortality rates were high, too. They needed everyone possible makin' babies to keep their numbers up and grow. Somehow the restrictions and stigma have survived even into an era when there are over 2.2 BILLION Christians and Jews on the planet, infant mortality in the first world is low, and participating in a NON-reproductive lifestyle might even be seen as a VIRTUE, if it wasn't for the "unchanging Word of God".![]()
Contemporary scholarship focuses on this last point: the prohibition against homosexuality was a means of creating distinction between Israelite (Jewish would be an anachronism)As an aside, this is actually close to my personal belief about the Judeo-Christian restrictions against homosexuality: at the times they were put in place, the Jews first and then the Christians later were very small groups surrounded by larger, hostile forces, and infant mortality rates were high, too. They needed everyone possible makin' babies to keep their numbers up and grow. Somehow the restrictions and stigma have survived even into an era when there are over 2.2 BILLION Christians and Jews on the planet, infant mortality in the first world is low, and participating in a NON-reproductive lifestyle might even be seen as a VIRTUE, if it wasn't for the "unchanging Word of God".![]()
To add, IIRC, several of those larger, hostile forces surrounding the Jews were also mostly okay with homosexuality, or at the very least didn't forbid it. The relatively young Jews, in forming their collective identity, needed to set laws that not only kept order and serve a social purpose, but also to differentiate themselves from the other factions with whom they were competing with. Several books like Leviticus served to state these laws that would clarify how Judaism differed from the other nations/factions/religions of the area.
Contemporary scholarship focuses on this last point: the prohibition against homosexuality was a means of creating distinction between Israelite (Jewish would be an anachronism)As an aside, this is actually close to my personal belief about the Judeo-Christian restrictions against homosexuality: at the times they were put in place, the Jews first and then the Christians later were very small groups surrounded by larger, hostile forces, and infant mortality rates were high, too. They needed everyone possible makin' babies to keep their numbers up and grow. Somehow the restrictions and stigma have survived even into an era when there are over 2.2 BILLION Christians and Jews on the planet, infant mortality in the first world is low, and participating in a NON-reproductive lifestyle might even be seen as a VIRTUE, if it wasn't for the "unchanging Word of God".![]()
To add, IIRC, several of those larger, hostile forces surrounding the Jews were also mostly okay with homosexuality, or at the very least didn't forbid it. The relatively young Jews, in forming their collective identity, needed to set laws that not only kept order and serve a social purpose, but also to differentiate themselves from the other factions with whom they were competing with. Several books like Leviticus served to state these laws that would clarify how Judaism differed from the other nations/factions/religions of the area.
society and neighbors. Much about Israelite was a rejection of what were perceived to be the excesses of Egyptian religion. Among those were the plethora of sexual rituals that required the individual to submit to cult clergy. Indeed, the language used to prohibit sodomy--and it is a prohibition against sodomy, not homosexuallit, and certainly not lesbianism--classes it with prohibitions of other cult acts, not merely casual behavior. Given that it focuses exclusively on the act of sodomy and the high requirement of proof in courts, private practice of homosexuality is nearly untouchable. It really could only apply to public acts, such as ritual sex, and reflects other laws that separate sexuality from the practice of religion.
About 1,500 species on Earth have been observed engaging in same-sex sexual activities or behaviors.I think it's a bit of a stretch to even assume that homosexuality even exists in other species. We see it in only a few here on Earth ...
The portion of the Klingon society devoted to the warriors might consider gay behavior to be a perfectly normal part of a warriors life. While we do see female warriors aboard ships, they often appear to be the exception, the males would be celibate for protracted periods of time or gay.I wouldn't expect to see it in Klingon, and as mentioned before, it's illogical to a Vulcan.
This would make sense.I would think that each world even within the UFP would have their own laws governing the situation.
No exactly, you need the permission of the state for the resulting marriage to be recognized by the state. People do get married everyday without state approval, it's not illegal to enter into such a marriage, just (again) the state won't recognize it.In our laws, we currently outlaw all marriages unless you receive permission (license) from the government.
It probably varies from member to member.I assume the Federation allows for equal rights for homosexuals ...
It quite common for neither male in a gay relationship to manifest "feminine personality traits," although it not completely unknown either.... given how sexist the society is, any Ferengi who displays any sort feminine personality traits (like being attracted to men) would likely be treated as an outcast.
Unless you live in a state that recognizes common law marriage (Alabama, Colorado, Kansas, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Iowa, Montana, Texas, and the District of Columbia). There, you can get married without a license, and as long as you do certain other things (generally, present yourself in public as married, cohabitate, consummate the marriage) then you are legally married. And in North Carolina, if a man and woman sign into a hotel as a married couple, they are.People do get married everyday without state approval, it's not illegal to enter into such a marriage, just (again) the state won't recognize it.
(Jewish would be an anachronism)
Right, and I also stand corrected re: Jewish vs. Israelite
I didn't say exclusive. I said rare. There are an estimated 8.5-9 million species on Earth. And we've seen homosexual behavior in less than 2%. Even if the number were 10 or 15% then I'd still say it was rare enough to not assume we would see it throughout the galaxy.
About 1,500 species on Earth have been observed engaging in same-sex sexual activities or behaviors.I think it's a bit of a stretch to even assume that homosexuality even exists in other species. We see it in only a few here on Earth ...
1,500 hardly constitutes "a few."
![]()
Jew references only the people who emerged in the Southern Kingdom in the era after the Babylonian exile. The term does not cover the entirety of the tribes that made up the united Kingdom of Israel, some of whom survive still today under a different name: Samaritans. Considering that we are discussing the formative era of the religion as it relates to taboos, Israelite is the appropriate term.(Jewish would be an anachronism)
Right, and I also stand corrected re: Jewish vs. Israelite
Why is Jew or Jewish an anachronism?
The 8 million estimate comes with a proviso: only 10% of those species have been scientifically observed. Added to that is many will be single cell organism that reproduce asexually (and a few other species that exhibit hermaphroditism). Homosexuality, when compared to heterosexuality, might not be as rare as you suggest.I guess it really depends on your definition of "a few." As CTGuyton stated, there are over 8 million species on Earth. You stated 1,500 of those species have been observed in homosexual activities or behavior. That comes out to 0.01% or one-one hundredth of a percent.
The 8 million estimate comes with a proviso: only 10% of those species have been scientifically observed. Added to that is many will be single cell organism that reproduce asexually (and a few other species that exhibit hermaphroditism). Homosexuality, when compared to heterosexuality, might not be as rare as you suggest.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.