Do you think LGBT characters will feature more prominently?

[Tim Walker]

Re: Awesome Possum post

Indeed, this may be their last chance. Because gay marriage is about (in this context) an official, legal status, I would have expected last ditch attempts to block it. But even if they succeed, they may have won a battle but lost the war. Because society is becoming much more tolerant about LGBT than it used to be, just a few decades ago.

That is a huge change in itself.

 

[HIjol]

"Basically it boils down to being respectful of people even if they have views that differ from yours."

uniderth said this, and I think it is very important. One cannot have a meaningful dialog with someone who is not respected. That is the first step towards understanding and attempting to persuade a point of view that may be outdated or exclusionary.

"Maybe the anti-LGTB people can try not to be bigots, it is a choice after all."

Awesome said this, and, with respect, I am not so sure. It has been my experience on this planet that many holding extreme and/or exclusionary views have learned these views from those they respect: Elders, "Religious" figures, peers, and the like. Not so much a "Choice", but a set of learned behaviors and preferences so engrained as to be the Default. In the Extreme Extreme, some are willing to sacrifice their lives and the lives of innocents for these, to many others, outdated and repugnant beliefs.

On Topic, considering the actual sexual orientation of many of the actors/actresses performing in Star Trek - past and present - and the shifting (glacially?) mores of our society, I cannot imagine not seeing more diversity in the roles and "stories" of our beloved characters, old and new!

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I'd be surprised if there weren't at least one homosexual character. In the current cultural landscape it's almost a necessity for a Trek show.

When gay marriage became legal for the whole country, it's hard to have a last ditch backlash because it happened after over 50% of the people were in favor of it. At that point republicans had figured out they can't take a hard stand against gay marriage and still win national elections.

Personally I'm 100% in favor of gay marriage rights but I think there's a difference between disapproving of homosexuality and hating gay people. One is your own internal feelings and the other is forcing them on others. Like "Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose". All about having the maturity to realize you can love and respect those you disagree with and that the law should not just reflect your own personal feelings.

 

[Amaris]

I really think they have to at this point. Part of the legacy of the franchise was that it had a diverse crew in a time when TV was almost all white. It's really odd that Trek hasn't already had a LGBT crewmember.

Right? I read Garak was supposed to be openly non-heterosexual, I think pansexual, but the writers decided not to go that way for undisclosed reasons. Probably because they didn't think it would go well with viewers.

That would have been wonderful. As a pansexual myself, a little representation on the screen would be nice!

I think if DS9 were airing now instead of then, they would probably have played up the pansexuality and made him more obviously interested in Bashir (as he was initially planned to be, supposedly). Perhaps even have had reciprocal relationship at some point!

One could hope. Still, maybe they'll do it with this coming series!

 

[uniderth]

I think though that by the time of Star Trek the views we consider "modern" will be outdated. The reality is that there is no such thing as cultural progress. There is only cultural change. Things are constantly changing. I guess this is why I also disagree with Trek's depiction of the future as largely American. The things we value today will be considered old fashioned in 80 years. Imagine if we did encounter alien life. Cultures everywhere would be turned on their heads. This is neither good nor bad, nor progress or regression. It's just change. So to bring this back to what I said earlier about the depiction of a gay character. Let me try and rephrase.

I would hope a gay character would be handled like Uhura or Sulu were handled. There was no extra attention paid to their ethnicities were different than anyone else's. There were few moments that said, "Hey look we have a black woman and an asian guy on our show! Look at how diverse we are!"

So with a gay character I hope it wouldn't be, "Hey, look, we're up with the times. He have a gay character there! Look at how gay this main character is! We have this gay main character that is gay."

My fear though is that with the current social climate this is exactly what would happen. Trek should be willing to go against the current conservative/liberal social trends.

If we can shame bigots out of existence let's get that done.

I really hope you can see the self-contradictory nature of this statement.

bigot [big-uh t]
noun 1. a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

 

[HIjol]

I think though that by the time of Star Trek the views we consider "modern" will be outdated. The reality is that there is no such thing as cultural progress. There is only cultural change. Things are constantly changing. I guess this is why I also disagree with Trek's depiction of the future as largely American. The things we value today will be considered old fashioned in 80 years. Imagine if we did encounter alien life. Cultures everywhere would be turned on their heads. This is neither good nor bad, nor progress or regression. It's just change. So to bring this back to what I said earlier about the depiction of a gay character. Let me try and rephrase.

I would hope a gay character would be handled like Uhura or Sulu were handled. There was no extra attention paid to their ethnicities were different than anyone else's. There were few moments that said, "Hey look we have a black woman and an asian guy on our show! Look at how diverse we are!"

So with a gay character I hope it wouldn't be, "Hey, look, we're up with the times. He have a gay character there! Look at how gay this main character is! We have this gay main character that is gay."

My fear though is that with the current social climate this is exactly what would happen. Trek should be willing to go against the current conservative/liberal social trends.

If we can shame bigots out of existence let's get that done.

I really hope you can see the self-contradictory nature of this statement.

bigot [big-uh t]
noun 1. a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

One can live in hope!

Hope you saw my post to you, above,
uniderth. Would love to get more of your thinking!

 

[eyeresist]

In a few decades, LGBT rights will be treated the same way. That's why some people are so desperate to stop it now, they know it's a lost cause and this is their last chance.

By the time of Star Trek, it should a completely outdated concept to most people. Like how we still have Flat Earthers, but they're a punchline.

Agreed. Trek has shown prejudice - of a futuristic sort, e.g. against certain species, against artificial beings, against the genetically modified. These are supposed to be the emergent issues of the time (although some might come along a lot sooner than portrayed).

If Star Trek is going to show prejudice against LGBTBBQ, why not also deal with the pressing issue of Protestant/Catholic conflict, or have a British character who keeps referring to his American shipmates as "uppity colonials".

 

[Awesome Possum]

bigot [big-uh t]
noun 1. a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

By that logic, being against slavery is bigoted because some people really believed in it.

I'm sorry, I'm not going to respect someone who is against other people having rights.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

"More prominently" would infer that LGBT have been featured before. There has to be someone (preferably more than one) of a different sexual orientation in the new series.

How about a will they/won't they between the new gay Captain and transgender XO?

 

[T'Girl]

I would hope a gay character would be handled like Uhura or Sulu were handled. There was no extra attention paid to their ethnicities were different than anyone else's.

Problem there is we can tell that Sulu is East Asian and that Uhura is of African ancestry by simply looking at them. With a LGBT character that wouldn't work, because there is be no visual external difference. In some fashion it's going to be necessary to tell the audience that the character is gay, or bisexual, or transgender.

How does a society where all forms of life and diversity are celebrated even produce a person who is intolerant of others?

On more than a few occasions, we've seen Vulcans exhibit intolerance towards Humans, being Human isn't a matter of choice, in The Neutral Zone we saw overt bigotry of one group of Humans toward a other group of Humans simply because they were different. With the exception of his immediate friends and co-works, there's a obviously a lack of acceptance of Commander Data.

Ferengi are different, let's all make fun of them.

Awesome Possum, the society you're describing doesn't exist in Star Trek. The intolerant person you spoke of would be produced through their own life experiences and perceptions.

If we can shame bigots out of existence let's get that done.

Only have the diversity you agree with? There is a wide gap between acceptance and tolerance, it easy to accept those who think just like ourselves, tolerance takes some work. We can exercise free association, but so can others.

Yes, society can have a measure of control over a individuals actions, but should never control what goes on in their thoughts.

 

[eyeresist]

If we can shame bigots out of existence let's get that done.

Only have the diversity you agree with?

Should a tolerant society tolerate bigots? I'd say not. Of course it's a paradox, but a tolerant society should not tolerate those who are opposed to and working against its basic principles. It makes as much sense as a Buddhist tolerating the human immunodeficiency virus on the grounds of nonviolence.

 

[Mudd]

Pretending that one doesn't understand the political and social context in which the word "tolerance" is used with regard to racial, sexual and other kinds of discrimination and unfairness is a pretty tired rhetorical stunt at this point. It's a gambit that's predictably played by someone just about every time an LGBT discussion starts about Star Trek, and it's so transparent at this point that IMO it should be treated as trolling.

 

[T'Girl]

But since it's in no way, shape or form "trolling" then no.

 

[JoeZhang]

But since it's in no way, shape or form "trolling" then no.

No Dennis is on the money, these tiresome games about tolerance are obvious to anyone with half a brain.

 

[Mudd]

But since it's in no way, shape or form "trolling" then no.

No Dennis is on the money, these tiresome games about tolerance are obvious to anyone with half a brain.

Well, not the first three thousand times.

 

[T'Girl]

No Dennis is on the money

I disagree, YMMV.

Should a tolerant society tolerate bigots? I'd say not.

Can a open society actively oppose dissenting viewpoints and un-"popular" speech? If simply labeling a a individual or group as bigot or saying that they was engaging in a undesirable philosophy, this gives the group engaging in the labeling process considerable amounts of power, politically and culturally.

The power to effectively shut down multiple lines of thought, shut down any one really who deviates off their chosen beliefs and advocacy.

To this, I'd say not.

 

[somebuddyX]

I hope so. It'd be nice if, let's say they have a bunch of minor characters, that a couple of the main and minor characters are different human gender or sexual identities or what have you representing the entire spectrum, but also honest to the positives and negatives in relationships. I'd also like to see some married couples whether gay or straight and with wedding rings, maybe even the captain as married even. I think particularly I'd like someone a bit like Jack from Torchwood but toned completely down from wanting to fuck anything that moves but more wanting to date anything that moved.

 

[borgboy]

Showing support for a bigoted character goes against everything Trek should stand for and would violate the utopian ideals of Trek. A homophobic person should never be allowed to get thru Starfleet any more than a racist or xenophobe. There's absolutely nothing in Trek that supports that.
I don't think bigotry should be tolerated. Do you really think Trek would be remembered for it's social progress if Uhura's presence on the bridge was "balanced" by a racist? Would forcing Uhura to get along with a racist really be seen as progressive?
But then many people think there are special rules to how they can treat gay people different from everyone else.

 

[hux]

The fact that I even need to answer this is proof that this is something our society needs.

We should tolerate intolerance because it demonstrates our tolerant society and helps us avoid a mind bending paradox when discussing the meaning of the word tolerance?

What if I'm intolerant of intolerance? Will I explode causing a tear in the space-time continuum?

Assuming I won't, I'm gonna stick to thinking that homophobes are massive dick-heads who I have no respect for.

Basically it boils down to being respectful of people even if they have views that differ from yours.

I will respectfully tell them that they're fucking bigoted idiots. Problem solved.

 

[Mudd]

The fact that I even need to answer this is proof that this is something our society needs.

No. The fact that you even need to answer this is because you've posted something that's clearly mistaken at best and evil at worst.