Homosexual Rights in the Star Trek Universe

[borgboy]

Yes, T'Prynn fought as her own champion in kallee-fee.

The Vucan's Forge/Heart/Soul novels do detail Spock's marriage to Saavik.

I don't know how old Selar's brother was, but there is dialogue about how he doesn't go thru Pon Farr, it's obviously intended that he will never go thru it, and implied that that is standard for gay male Vulcans iirc.

Spock was speaking about his own situation though. I think it's a pretty broad interpretation to interpret that a gay Vulcan would be motivated to form a heterosexual union. T'Prynn certainly didn't seem interested in her male betrothed. I think what Spock means is that Pon Farr physically drives him to have sex, and by Vulcan tradition that means marrying first. Selar does "mate" during her Pon Farr in New Frontier, but she's explicitly not interested in marriage. It's worth pointing out though that she is a widow whose husband had died during Pon Farr a few years ago while mating with her - the excitement was too much for him apparently.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

The rules of acquisition I think prove the Ferengi tolerance of homosexuality.

#113: Always have sex with the boss.

As for the 'anti-homophobia pill' thing, I can't tell if you guys really don't recognize it as a parody of homophobe's solutions to curing homosexuality or if you're just playing along.

There are parents who actually send their gay children to camps to try to force them to become straight, and it's a horrible, barbaric practice. There are also people who insist that faithfulness to God can cure homosexuality and all they accomplish is to inflict self-hatred on innocent people.

Of course just exposing children to homosexuality as something normal and educating them properly is a far more effective way to fight homophobia than any kind of cartoonishly radical persecution.

 

[T'Girl]

it's a horrible, barbaric practice

People should not be sent to a camp to make them be or think in a different way.

I think what Spock means is that Pon Farr physically drives him to have sex, and by Vulcan tradition that means marrying first.

Not my interpretation, YMMV.

 

[Tiberius]

It also seems that the Ferengi Alliance would not tolerate homosexuals, 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.

The 113 Rule of Acquisition would encourage homosexual behaviour...

 

[borgboy]

I think it's completely believable that the Ferengi would be gay for pay if the money were good enough lol
As for the whole anti gay camp thing, I knew a teenage guy in the late 80s whose parents committed him against his will to a private mental hospital to de-gay him. There was a whole group of gay kids in that program. He got out later by pretending to have fallen in love with a lesbian who was there.

 

[Enterprise1701]

I don't understand how anyone buys the idea that homosexuality can be "cured" and holds to it steadfastly. It's one of the worst loads of crap I know of.

 

[JarodRussell]

I wouldn't consider the change of sexual orientation a "cure", because it's not a disease, and homosexuality does not endanger anyone. But I wouldn't rule out that it's possible to change sexual orientation. All it means is that you change the priming, what features a person reacts to. Some react to male features, some to female, others to the features of children, others to the features of elderly, and again others to features of certain animals. It's the same mechanism, and once it's understood, it's probably possible to change it.

ICD-10 defines pedophilia as "sexual preference for children, boys or girls or both, usually of prepubertal or early pubertal age". And that one is believed to be "cured" one day, meaning that it is believed it's possible to change the sexual preference of pedophiles to something other than children. So why should it technically be impossible to change the sexual preference in general?

 

[T'Girl]

I don't understand how anyone buys the idea that homosexuality can be "cured" and holds to it steadfastly.

If you step away from the term "cured," given the medical science we've seen on the show it's likely that they would have the ability to change a person's sexual orientation.

DNA resequencing, chemical infusions, micro surgery.

The real question is would they? The Bashir's were able to find someone to preform a illegal procedure on their young son.

I think it's completely believable that the Ferengi would be gay for pay if the money were good enough

Which wouldn't make the individual gay. It's the difference between what you're doing, and what you are.

A heterosexual, engaging in sexual acts with a member of the same sex for money, is still a heterosexual.

 

[borgboy]

Quark did think that the female Ferengi that was passing as a man was making a move on him, at least right before he found out the truth. I think any species that has gender will have homosexuality. That seems to be the way it works in Trek from what we've seen. At the very least in the novels when gay and alternative orientations among aliens are seen, there doesn't seem to be any surprise. It's presented as being completely natural, and in the novels there have been gay Trills, Klingons, Vulcans, humans of course, and an Andorian who is not attracted to three different genders would be the minority.
Are there any other alien races we've seen gay members of that I didn't mention?
If Q could even be said to have gender and an orientation I think he'd be a bisexual male.

 

[borgboy]

Just found this.

http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/star-trek-3-director-open-gay-character-not-necessary270614


A gay character that is both open and is integral to the plot is ‘not necessary’ in Star Trek 3, according to the director.
Roberto Orci has spoken about the follow-up to the adventures of the USS Enterprise, last seen in Star Trek (2009) and Star Trek Into Darkness (2013).
But even though the film will take place over 200 years in the future, Orci said he has doubts we will ever see a character having a same-sex relationship.
‘It can be part of a character and not be the whole shebang,’ he said on the Humans From Earth podcast.
‘It doesn't have to be like South Park, like “what have we learned today”.
‘It can be so normalized that it just exists. I agree it can't be shoe-horned in. And it is not necessary for it to be the whole point of the thing.
‘It is an ensemble and there is lots of people to represent so no one point of view should hog it.’
- See more at: http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/...ot-necessary270614#sthash.hss0YjzK.J119XqUp.d
gay character that is both open and is integral to the plot is ‘not necessary’ in Star Trek 3, according to the director.
Roberto Orci has spoken about the follow-up to the adventures of the USS Enterprise, last seen in Star Trek (2009) and Star Trek Into Darkness (2013).
But even though the film will take place over 200 years in the future, Orci said he has doubts we will ever see a character having a same-sex relationship.
‘It can be part of a character and not be the whole shebang,’ he said on the Humans From Earth podcast.
‘It doesn't have to be like South Park, like “what have we learned today”.
‘It can be so normalized that it just exists. I agree it can't be shoe-horned in. And it is not necessary for it to be the whole point of the thing.
‘It is an ensemble and there is lots of people to represent so no one point of view should hog it.’
- See more at: http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/...necessary270614#sthash.hss0YjzK.J119XqUp.dpuf
Star Trek 3 director: Open gay character ‘not necessary’


Roberto Orci says it would not be right to 'shoe-horn' in a character that was openly gay just for the sake of it
27 June 2014 | By Joe Morgan

A gay character that is both open and is integral to the plot is ‘not necessary’ in Star Trek 3, according to the director.
Roberto Orci has spoken about the follow-up to the adventures of the USS Enterprise, last seen in Star Trek (2009) and Star Trek Into Darkness (2013).
But even though the film will take place over 200 years in the future, Orci said he has doubts we will ever see a character having a same-sex relationship.
‘It can be part of a character and not be the whole shebang,’ he said on the Humans From Earth podcast.
‘It doesn't have to be like South Park, like “what have we learned today”.
‘It can be so normalized that it just exists. I agree it can't be shoe-horned in. And it is not necessary for it to be the whole point of the thing.
‘It is an ensemble and there is lots of people to represent so no one point of view should hog it.’
Star Trek 3 is slated for 2016.



- See more at: http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/...necessary270614#sthash.hss0YjzK.J119XqUp.dpuf

 

[T'Girl]

A gay character that is both open and is integral to the plot is ‘not necessary’ in Star Trek 3, according to the director.http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/...necessary270614#sthash.hss0YjzK.J119XqUp.dpuf

The introduction of a integral gay character is less likely to occur in a movie, and far more like to happen in a TV series.

Orci's movie will consist of nonsensical dramatic dialogue, explosions, girls in their underwear and lots of running around with the camera slightly tilted.

So where does he insert a gay character?

Well, there's the newest villain. A Baron Harkonnen type perhaps? Or one of the villains henchmen.

Within the current movies Scott, Sulu and Chekov's sexualities haven't been established. Or a new good guy, problem with the new guy is that the movie is already top heavy with good guy main characters.

 

[Maurice]

http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/star-trek-3-director-open-gay-character-not-necessary270614

A gay character that is both open and is integral to the plot is ‘not necessary’ in Star Trek 3, according to the director.
Roberto Orci has spoken about the follow-up to the adventures of the USS Enterprise, last seen in Star Trek (2009) and Star Trek Into Darkness (2013).
But even though the film will take place over 200 years in the future, Orci said he has doubts we will ever see a character having a same-sex relationship.
‘It can be part of a character and not be the whole shebang,’ he said on the Humans From Earth podcast....

Same old tired dodges. "It can be part of the character and not the whole shebang". Like any other well-written character. Duh.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

So where does he insert a gay character?

I say that they give the fans what they want and finally show Kirk and Spock admitting their true feelings for one another, followed by them getting down and dirty in the middle of the bridge--we all know what's really going on there!

 

[borgboy]

So where does he insert a gay character?

I say that they give the fans what they want and finally show Kirk and Spock admitting their true feelings for one another, followed by them getting down and dirty in the middle of the bridge--we all know what's really going on there!

Don't tease me!
I was thinking it wouldn't be too much of a strech to see Kirk have a threeway with a woman and another man, since we've already had him have a threeway with two women. I don't think it's too big a strech to imagine a bi Kirk (and that would put his one step closer to the Kirk/Spock pairing I really want!) Of course, there would be rioting in the streets if Kirk were outed as being bi.

Also I bet we'd hear a lot more on the moral outrage of it all, even though the previous threeway didn't get a blip on the public's morality police.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

Don't tease me!
I was thinking it wouldn't be too much of a strech to see Kirk have a threeway with a woman and another man, since we've already had him have a threeway with two women. I don't think it's too big a strech to imagine a bi Kirk (and that would put his one step closer to the Kirk/Spock pairing I really want!) Of course, there would be rioting in the streets if Kirk were outed as being bi.

Also I bet we'd hear a lot more on the moral outrage of it all, even though the previous threeway didn't get a blip on the public's morality police.

After all the earache (no pun intended) Spock is getting from Uhura about not being in touch with his feelings (he's half-Vulcan for crying out loud!), he deserves to be with someone who actually appreciated him (and with whom he actually had some onscreen chemistry with), whilst all Kirk's bed-hopping does is show that no woman can satisfy him (and I doubt Carol Marcus and her daddy issues will be much of a distraction for him).

It makes total sense to me

If the PTB finally had these two getting together on the next NuTrek film I'd be first in line to see it at my local cinema! Actually, it may be the only thing that would make me want to go and see it.

 

[JarodRussell]

So the very first gay character in Star Trek would be a Barney Stinson type bitch? Good choice.

 

[T'Girl]

lso I bet we'd hear a lot more on the moral outrage of it all, even though the previous threeway didn't get a blip on the public's morality police.

Would the "other guy" in your sex scene have a tail?

 

[xavier]

I am new here and I guess,I am extremely late to this party but as a Christan and a person of strong faith, I have never personally promoted or supported homosexuality.However I am very tolerant of it because you can not escape it in any tv show or films anymore.

However it feels like if a person say they disagree with homosexuality they are immediately called homophobes, intolerant and can even get banned on fandoms forums. I genuinely respect other people's opinion and we can all agree to disagree on such complex subjects like homosexuality and even the human sexuality but I do not get where all of this is coming from. how come all this trek characters like kirk, spock, the ferengi all of a sudden must now be gay?


most of this characters we have mentioned already have established loving relationship with the opposite sex. (Spock and Savik) I do not see how and why they all of a sudden must now leave their loving partners and enter into a sexual relationship with their same sex bffs.

I don't think when Gene created pon farr he had to rethink the issue. Gene created pon farr for vulcan men and vuclan women to mate. it is why Vulcan men marry vulcan women even when they are babies. their vulcan parents arranges it for their kids, so technically and in theory the Vulcan tradition does not support homosexuality because if it did they would not have all their men marry their women by default, Vulcans saw sexual acts as male and female.

I am not hating or attacking anyone but I believe even in a public scifi forum. I want to stand up for my Christian faith and my beliefs with me being prosecuted, mocked and ridiculed like Hollywood has done for so long to Christians who have a different view of homosexuality.

We are talking of homosexual rights and that is fine it is a social debate. However, I want to see Christian/jewish rights in star trek as well. all group of people should be welcomed in trek regardless of their faith, race or sexual orientation. People of faith are not represented at all in pop culture or in fiction we are usually ridiculed and used as comic relief. Trek can correct this error.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I am new here and I guess,I am extremely late to this party but as a Christan and a person of strong faith, I have never personally promoted or supported homosexuality.However I am very tolerant of it because you can not escape it in any tv show or films anymore.

Concession is not tolerance.

However it feels like if a person say they disagree with homosexuality they are immediately called homophobes,

Because there is no sound logical reason to "disagree" with homosexuality. Any discord is almost always a result (either directly or indirectly) of fear or enmity. That's literally the definition of phobia.

intolerant and can even get banned on fandoms forums. I genuinely respect other people's opinion and we can all agree to disagree on such complex subjects like homosexuality and even the human sexuality

And herein lies the problem. There is nothing complicated about it. Nothing. Any attempt to assert as such is needless obfuscation.

but I do not get where all of this is coming from. how come all this trek characters like kirk, spock, the ferengi all of a sudden must now be gay?

Who said they did?

most of this characters we have mentioned already have established loving relationship with the opposite sex. (Spock and Savik) I do not see how and why they all of a sudden must now leave their loving partners and enter into a sexual relationship with their same sex bffs.

Very few characters in Star Trek are in committed relationships. I honestly have no idea what you're talking about.

And even if true, people break up all the time. Would you have a problem if a couple broke up and each found a new partner of the opposite sex?

Hell, one of the most clichéd stories in Hollywood is about a people in relationships goes through a bad break ups only to realize their long-time BFFs are the loves of their lives.

I don't think when Gene created pon farr he had to rethink the issue. Gene created pon farr for vulcan men and vuclan women to mate. it is why Vulcan men marry vulcan women even when they are babies. their vulcan parents arranges it for their kids, so technically and in theory the Vulcan tradition does not support homosexuality because if it did they would not have all their men marry their women by default, Vulcans saw sexual acts as male and female.

Argumentum ad ignorantiam.

Also, Roddenberry didn't write "Amok Time."

I am not hating or attacking anyone but I believe even in a public scifi forum. I want to stand up for my Christian faith and my beliefs with me being prosecuted, mocked and ridiculed like Hollywood has done for so long to Christians who have a different view of homosexuality.

They (like the rest of us) don't mock so much as point out the blatant hypocrisy in the cherry picking. The West Wing did this better than I ever could.

I should add that the pointing was done by the main character who, like the show's creator, was Christian.

We are talking of homosexual rights and that is fine it is a social debate. However, I want to see Christian/jewish rights in star trek as well. all group of people should be welcomed in trek regardless of their faith, race or sexual orientation. People of faith are not represented at all in pop culture or in fiction we are usually ridiculed and used as comic relief. Trek can correct this error.

The problem here is that, simplistically speaking, "faith" is antithetical to Star Trek's conceptual core.

 

[borgboy]

I am new here and I guess,I am extremely late to this party but as a Christan and a person of strong faith, I have never personally promoted or supported homosexuality.However I am very tolerant of it because you can not escape it in any tv show or films anymore.

However it feels like if a person say they disagree with homosexuality they are immediately called homophobes, intolerant and can even get banned on fandoms forums. I genuinely respect other people's opinion and we can all agree to disagree on such complex subjects like homosexuality and even the human sexuality but I do not get where all of this is coming from. how come all this trek characters like kirk, spock, the ferengi all of a sudden must now be gay?


most of this characters we have mentioned already have established loving relationship with the opposite sex. (Spock and Savik) I do not see how and why they all of a sudden must now leave their loving partners and enter into a sexual relationship with their same sex bffs.

I don't think when Gene created pon farr he had to rethink the issue. Gene created pon farr for vulcan men and vuclan women to mate. it is why Vulcan men marry vulcan women even when they are babies. their vulcan parents arranges it for their kids, so technically and in theory the Vulcan tradition does not support homosexuality because if it did they would not have all their men marry their women by default, Vulcans saw sexual acts as male and female.

I am not hating or attacking anyone but I believe even in a public scifi forum. I want to stand up for my Christian faith and my beliefs with me being prosecuted, mocked and ridiculed like Hollywood has done for so long to Christians who have a different view of homosexuality.

We are talking of homosexual rights and that is fine it is a social debate. However, I want to see Christian/jewish rights in star trek as well. all group of people should be welcomed in trek regardless of their faith, race or sexual orientation. People of faith are not represented at all in pop culture or in fiction we are usually ridiculed and used as comic relief. Trek can correct this error.

It's not your place to agree or disagree with other people's sexual orientation. You sound prejudiced to me, and worse, are quick to take the role of victim here. The vast majority of media is steeped in Christianity, but it's so pervasive that you take it for granted and thus don't see it. The discussion of homosexuality in Star Trek is nothing new. Fans were writing romantic fiction for Kirk and Spock as far back as the 70s at least. Gay relationships were erased from culture then and that was one avenue people had of finding diversity and inclusion.

Just because the only Vulcans we see on tv are straight doesn't mean that all Vulcans are. The novels have had a gay male Vulcan, brother to Selar. Selar herself had a relationship with a bisexual hermaphrodite, and Vanguard has a lesbian Vulcan T'Prynn. The Vulcans do embrace the concept of IDIC - Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. There are many other gay characters in the novels from many different races, and for what it's worth, it was the novels that developed Spock and Saavik's relationship to being one of romance and eventually marriage. The Vulcan tradition of arranged marriages doesn't really say much about the orientations of the people who weren't given a say in the choice of their spouse.


The topic is homosexual rights in Star Trek. I suggest if you want to discuss Christianity in Star Trek you start a new thread for that. I would say that perhaps people would have more respect for religion when it's practitioners stop using it as a weapon against gays and other minorities.