Homosexual Rights in the Star Trek Universe

[Grendelsbayne]

But how much of that actually has anything to do with them being married?

The 7% poverty rate is linked to the couple being married. Cohabiting (unmarried) poverty rate is 14%.

Cohabiting couples statistically average two-thirds of the combined income of married couples, and are less likely to pool all of their incomes. The U.S. Census Bureau in 2011 puts that figure at 75% for cohabiters verses 83% for married couples. Cohabiting couples who've had children together are more likely to pool their money.

Cohabiting couple are more likely to separate than marrieds (of course they do separate as well, just less) and therefor have less chances to accumulate financial assets over time.

Correlation still doesn't equal causation. It could just as easily be that many people choose not to get married (or postpone it) because they're already financially unsound. (marriage can be expensive, especially the way many people would prefer to do it)

And any accumulated assets still have to be accumulated from the individual partners, so that's really only a factor when one partner is completely dependant on the other, thereby potentially pushing them into poverty if the relationship ends (which is the kind of problem that the govt. can't solve just by giving marriage incentives).

 

[Grendelsbayne]

I know that I feel a kinship with those in the LGBTQ community because they have gone through similar experiences. They, too, had to come out to their family, had to deal with the media interpretations that I have to see and listen to, and they have tried to date within the confines of the community. Coming out is a life-affirming experience and I embrace the day when we don't have to conglomerate for rights and to stick with our brethren.

However, I think the ties of the community wouldn't dissipate if tomorrow we no longer had to bond over rights. Just as those that are Irish still celebrate St. Patrick's Day with a lager and a parade, even though most are actually Americans with history of a Irish community, we would still have gay pride parades. It would be a celebration of self-acceptance, not just that of the community. It would be a way of newly out gays of being welcomed to the club of not fighting yourself. And, of keeping the traditions alive.

Some questions that come after "Me, too" are about their dating experience, who and when did they come out to, their view of life and how it has changed since coming out, and how they are treated in the world, etc.

Still, being 2014, I find it difficult to imagine the day in 200 years where this hypothetical question might be answered.

But, if the Federation really is such a perfectly accepting society, why would 'coming out' as concept even exist at all any more? Why would gay young people be fighting themselves in the first place? Self-acceptance shouldn't even be a real issue in this situation, shoud it?

 

[CTGuyton]

I know that I feel a kinship with those in the LGBTQ community because they have gone through similar experiences. They, too, had to come out to their family, had to deal with the media interpretations that I have to see and listen to, and they have tried to date within the confines of the community. Coming out is a life-affirming experience and I embrace the day when we don't have to conglomerate for rights and to stick with our brethren.

However, I think the ties of the community wouldn't dissipate if tomorrow we no longer had to bond over rights. Just as those that are Irish still celebrate St. Patrick's Day with a lager and a parade, even though most are actually Americans with history of a Irish community, we would still have gay pride parades. It would be a celebration of self-acceptance, not just that of the community. It would be a way of newly out gays of being welcomed to the club of not fighting yourself. And, of keeping the traditions alive.

Some questions that come after "Me, too" are about their dating experience, who and when did they come out to, their view of life and how it has changed since coming out, and how they are treated in the world, etc.

Still, being 2014, I find it difficult to imagine the day in 200 years where this hypothetical question might be answered.

But, if the Federation really is such a perfectly accepting society, why would 'coming out' as concept even exist at all any more? Why would gay young people be fighting themselves in the first place? Self-acceptance shouldn't even be a real issue in this situation, shoud it?

If you've ever seen the movie Love Acutally, there is a scene between a father and his redheaded son where they discuss his first "love". The fathers attitude is pretty much how I envision every parent being in the future.

 

[DonIago]

As homosexuality is almost certainly likely to remain an atypical sexual orientation, I don't see "coming out" ever going away, though ideally the pressures associated with it will lessen in the future.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Being the minority sexual orientation doesn't mean that it will be in any way shamed or stigmatized. I suppose that most children would assume they were heterosexual just by virtue of probability, so they would still at some point 'Come out'. But it probably wouldn't be a terrifying experience anymore, it'd just be something you learn about yourself at some point.

 

[JarodRussell]

Being the minority sexual orientation

Btw, is it actually frustrating for gays if they hit on guys and girls and constantly get to hear "sorry, I'm not gay" as a response?

 

[USS Triumphant]

As homosexuality is almost certainly likely to remain an atypical sexual orientation, I don't see "coming out" ever going away, though ideally the pressures associated with it will lessen in the future.

Coming out to society may go away. Coming out to parents and grandparents might not ever go away, since those people may have certain expectations about their kids - conscious or not. Like that their child will give them a genetically related grandchild, rather than an adopted one, for example. Disappointing those expectations will continue to be an issue, but hopefully before long it will be no more of an issue than if a man/woman couple had to inform their parents that they can't biologically have kids or that they just don't want to have kids, rather than it also being some sort of weird and stupid bigoted and/or "religious" thing.

 

[DonIago]

Even if homophobia was extinct, it's not unreasonable for people to assume others are heterosexual given that it is the clear majority. Consequently, there will always be some level of "coming out" for anyone who wants anyone else to know that they are not of the majority orientation.

And yes, it is frustrating and embarrassing and potentially dangerous to hit on someone who isn't gay when you are.

That said, it can also occasionally be hilarious to see peoples' reactions to the implicit notion that they may not be straight.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

The point, that seems to be so spectacularly missed, is that coming out is a thing not because gay people are in the minority, but because the majority tends to impose negative consequences on gay people. What people here seem to be saying is that in the imaginary future of Star Trek's universe, people will still be assholes. That runs completely counter to all the assurances we have been given in canon that human society in the 23rd+ century is pluralistic.

 

[Johnny]

^ Forgive me, but what's a "rolling story line?"

I'm guessing he means more serialized storytelling and ongoing character arcs--as opposed to old-fashioned Love-Interests-of-the Week standalones.
At least that's how I'm reading it.

Sorry, yes I mean story/character-arcs, where characters develop, and god forbid... actually die!


I just think in the future it's a mute point. It's not something that will ever be visually obvious. And things like 'Do you have a girlfriend/boyfriend/wife/husband?' become '...partner?'.


I'll speak for that since an ex-employer started his first casual conversation with me saying, 'Do you have a girlfriend or a boyfriend?'. And it didn't seem an unreasonable question, since he didn't know me. (that's the only time I've not considered him an utter a..... though )

But, if the Federation really is such a perfectly accepting society, why would 'coming out' as concept even exist at all any more? Why would gay young people be fighting themselves in the first place? Self-acceptance shouldn't even be a real issue in this situation, shoud it?

Here, here!
Also, I think part of the problem is the assumption of hetrosexuality. Less assumption and more getting-to-know, and we're a good way there.

Btw, is it actually frustrating for gays if they hit on guys and girls and constantly get to hear "sorry, I'm not gay" as a response?

I'm bi, in the same way I don't hit on a girl until I find out if they're married, I don't come on to a guy until I know he's interested. I've never been turned down either way because you find out softly-softly first. ...unless they just don't like you, then you've got no chance!


However... saying all that, I would be inclined to think that the compulsion to be with people who are similar to yourself (whether that be in interests, sexuality, or race) will never truly go away. If you meet a human on romulus, it's still gonna be 'OMG, a human! Still with the two legs, eyes, nose and mouth thing, I see. How's Earth nowadays?'

 

[Nightdiamond]

But, if the Federation really is such a perfectly accepting society, why would 'coming out' as concept even exist at all any more? Why would gay young people be fighting themselves in the first place? Self-acceptance shouldn't even be a real issue in this situation, shoud it?

This is a big catch 22 for Star Trek. There's no need to point out a character's homosexuality, because it's not suppose to be an issue anymore in the 24th century, and therefore, no one would care.

And yet at the same time, there seems to be a reluctance for a character to simply announce or show sexual preference, because of the perception it might make too many viewers, or certain viewers uncomfortable. (This is just a theory by the way).

Trek is pretty brave with tackling issues, but it does it symbolically, instead of directly.

Btw, is it actually frustrating for gays if they hit on guys and girls and constantly get to hear "sorry, I'm not gay" as a response?

In the Host, Beverly's male Trill lover is killed in an incident. Later, she rejects its new humanoid host because it is a female.

I think this is part of the catch 22, because Beverly doesn't just come out and say, 'I'm only into males', but instead gives a speech about 'I won't know what to expect if you get another Trill host'.

Saying she was only into males would seem too harsh a thing for an enlightened 24th century human to say, and yet that was what she was clearly showing.

 

[PhoenixClass]

I don't think it would have been harsh, even for a 24th century human.

But I think even if the new host was male, it probably still would not have worked out for Beverly. She loved that particular host/symbiont combination. She does fall in love with any male she has access to. So a new male host, unless it was a duplicate, is still a different person.

 

[T'Girl]

This is a big catch 22 for Star Trek. There's no need to point out a character's homosexuality, because it's not suppose to be an issue anymore in the 24th century, and therefore, no one would care.

Come on Nightdiamond, you've seen the show, main character's heterosexuality is regularly being "pointed out." Pike's hetero attraction to Vina in the first pilot, Kirk's speaking of nearly marrying a woman in the second pilot, Riker and Deanna's past relationship in TNG pilot, Sisko's marriage to a woman in DS9's pilot, Janeway's relationship to a man in VOY's pilot.

 

[DonIago]

The point, that seems to be so spectacularly missed, is that coming out is a thing not because gay people are in the minority, but because the majority tends to impose negative consequences on gay people. What people here seem to be saying is that in the imaginary future of Star Trek's universe, people will still be assholes. That runs completely counter to all the assurances we have been given in canon that human society in the 23rd+ century is pluralistic.

Speaking as a gay man, I would say that coming out is a thing both because gay people are in the minority -and- because for many there's a stigma attached to it.

As I already said, even if there were no stigma attached to it coming out would still happen and would still be a thing because as a gay person you're still atypical. Not in a -bad- way, obviously, but to my mind, if I'm not going to come out to someone then I really have no right to blame them for assuming I'm straight, given that all things being equal there's a 90%+ chance I am.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

This is a big catch 22 for Star Trek. There's no need to point out a character's homosexuality, because it's not suppose to be an issue anymore in the 24th century, and therefore, no one would care.

It shouldn't be an issue. The characters sexuality would be dealt with just the same as Geordi's, Kira's or was Paris' was--they have the occassional romance with a guest character, then would either continue with brief flings or they would find Mr/Miss Right and settle down to a happy life together (or not, for the added drama).

I once had someone say to me that they were thinking of writing a couple of their fanfic characters as gay, but wasn't sure on how to do it. I said, treat them just as you would a heterosexual pair--the love, desire, jealousy, heartache, companionship and all the other other emotions are the same, its just the pumbing that's different.

I want a gay character in the next Trek, but I don't want them to be the gay character, known only for their orientation, when it's just a part of the whole. He/she should be a fully realised character, with their own past, ambitions and desires, who happens to like their own gender.

In the Host, Beverly's male Trill lover is killed in an incident. Later, she rejects its new humanoid host because it is a female.

I think this is part of the catch 22, because Beverly doesn't just come out and say, 'I'm only into males', but instead gives a speech about 'I won't know what to expect if you get another Trill host'.

Saying she was only into males would seem too harsh a thing for an enlightened 24th century human to say, and yet that was what she was clearly showing.

Even in the 24th century people will have their preferences, no amount of enlightening will change that. Beverly is heterosexual--granted there may have been that one night at Dance Camp, but she was young and keen to experiment--so she is only interested in relationships with men.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

The point, that seems to be so spectacularly missed, is that coming out is a thing not because gay people are in the minority, but because the majority tends to impose negative consequences on gay people. What people here seem to be saying is that in the imaginary future of Star Trek's universe, people will still be assholes. That runs completely counter to all the assurances we have been given in canon that human society in the 23rd+ century is pluralistic.

Speaking as a gay man, I would say that coming out is a thing both because gay people are in the minority -and- because for many there's a stigma attached to it.

As I already said, even if there were no stigma attached to it coming out would still happen and would still be a thing because as a gay person you're still atypical. Not in a -bad- way, obviously, but to my mind, if I'm not going to come out to someone then I really have no right to blame them for assuming I'm straight, given that all things being equal there's a 90%+ chance I am.

But being atypical does not automatically lead to a 'coming out' experience. Is there a 'coming out' for people who are left handed? Or for people who like weird food combinations?

I haven't had a tv connection in my house for several years. Last year, when our washing machine broke down, my wife and I did the laundry by hand for several months just to see what it was like (not because we couldn't afford a new one). We experimented once with living without a refridgerator, too. That's all certainly atypical in this particular age, and it's come up in various conversations every now and then, but I've never had any conversation that felt like 'coming out'.

 

[HaventGotALife]

The point, that seems to be so spectacularly missed, is that coming out is a thing not because gay people are in the minority, but because the majority tends to impose negative consequences on gay people. What people here seem to be saying is that in the imaginary future of Star Trek's universe, people will still be assholes. That runs completely counter to all the assurances we have been given in canon that human society in the 23rd+ century is pluralistic.

Speaking as a gay man, I would say that coming out is a thing both because gay people are in the minority -and- because for many there's a stigma attached to it.

As I already said, even if there were no stigma attached to it coming out would still happen and would still be a thing because as a gay person you're still atypical. Not in a -bad- way, obviously, but to my mind, if I'm not going to come out to someone then I really have no right to blame them for assuming I'm straight, given that all things being equal there's a 90%+ chance I am.

But being atypical does not automatically lead to a 'coming out' experience. Is there a 'coming out' for people who are left handed? Or for people who like weird food combinations?

I haven't had a tv connection in my house for several years. Last year, when our washing machine broke down, my wife and I did the laundry by hand for several months just to see what it was like (not because we couldn't afford a new one). We experimented once with living without a refridgerator, too. That's all certainly atypical in this particular age, and it's come up in various conversations every now and then, but I've never had any conversation that felt like 'coming out'.

Being left-handed is a bad analogy. This is more like picking a major in college. "Dad, I want to be a scientist and that's what I'm going to school for." This isn't that you pick up a pen, without thinking, and writing. It's "Dad, I love Joe. I want to be with him for the rest of my life." And your parents, depending on who they are, will either support you or not. Same thing with a major in college.

 

[T'Girl]

8Being left-handed is a bad analogy..

In someone's day to day life you can pick up on the fact that they're left handed, being gay isn't alway so apparent, and if the person does wish to conceal it, it's certain easier than write with your off hand.

 

[Sindatur]

As homosexuality is almost certainly likely to remain an atypical sexual orientation, I don't see "coming out" ever going away, though ideally the pressures associated with it will lessen in the future.

Coming out to society may go away. Coming out to parents and grandparents might not ever go away, since those people may have certain expectations about their kids - conscious or not. Like that their child will give them a genetically related grandchild, rather than an adopted one, for example. Disappointing those expectations will continue to be an issue, but hopefully before long it will be no more of an issue than if a man/woman couple had to inform their parents that they can't biologically have kids or that they just don't want to have kids, rather than it also being some sort of weird and stupid bigoted and/or "religious" thing.

Yup, just like having to tell them you don't want to become a Doctor like the 3 Generations before you, or don't want to carry on the Family Business or Don't want to join Starfleet nor attend their Alma Mater....

 

[Greg Cox]

This is a big catch 22 for Star Trek. There's no need to point out a character's homosexuality, because it's not suppose to be an issue anymore in the 24th century, and therefore, no one would care.

Come on Nightdiamond, you've seen the show, main character's heterosexuality is regularly being "pointed out." Pike's hetero attraction to Vina in the first pilot, Kirk's speaking of nearly marrying a woman in the second pilot, Riker and Deanna's past relationship in TNG pilot, Sisko's marriage to a woman in DS9's pilot, Janeway's relationship to a man in VOY's pilot.

Exactly. The trick is not to treat it as an "issue," but as simply a matter of who each individual is attracted to--or have holodeck romances with.

If even a gelatinous blob like Odo can have romantic subplots, I'm sure Lieutenant Jack O'Rourke of the Starship Endeavor can fall for that hunky male scientist from Gamma Omega VIII with having to make a big deal of it.