Do you think LGBT characters will feature more prominently?

[martok2112]

This is not intended to incense, so with that.... here goes:

I don't think that one can be anti-LGBT, and necessarily be "bigoted".

A person's values system may differ, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they will express hatred toward whatever it is that they oppose.

Look, I'm a pretty conservative guy. But I've always said that there's a little liberal in every conservative, and a little conservative in every liberal. As values and acceptance changes, so to does the mentality and ideology of those supporting them. When said change becomes a long-time fixture on society, and most everyone has accepted it, or tolerated it, then it becomes the new norm. Trying to force change on that status quo, and suddenly, those who were liberal minded before now become the new conservatives.


To try and highlight my earlier point that one can be Anti-LGBT and not be bigoted:

Anti-LGBT thinking: "I'm still not comfortable with this whole homosexuality thing, but, it's not like I can go back in time and banish it or send 'em all back to the closet, so, world... roll on, and more power to ya'. I'll be along in my own time."

Anti-LGBT Bigoted thinking: "Send 'em all back to the fucking closet and let them shove their dicks up each other's asses all they want, long as I don't gotta fuckin' see that shit! The only good (epithet excluded) is a dead (epithet excluded)! I was glad to hear about that (epithet excluded) boy that got beat to death! It's one less in the world!"

It's the same thing with any ideology or walk of life. You can have religious bigots, atheist bigots, racial bigots, etc. To oppose something does not mean you cannot tolerate and/or respect it.

Religious bigotry: "Convert and repent, or we'll kill you and send you to your rightful master in hell!"

Atheist bigotry: "People who still believe in a God are fucking stupid!"

Racial bigotry: (epithets, racial slurs, and general hatred abounds.... nothing that can be printed here, even for demonstrative purposes)

I'm still trying to play catch up with the world. As I've said before, it is a slow process, and I'm not going to do anything to accelerate it. I'll take it at my own pace, and anyone that tries to force acceleration of change on me by thinking that they're going to shame me for my position, or by trying to act like they are so much better a person than I am is not going to meet a nice guy.

When I meet a person, (except for the frequent, worthless bum that inhabits the areas where I work) I take them as met. I don't stop and consider "OMG, are they LGBT?!" Most of the time, one doesn't even really notice it unless they are flamers or paraders who make it blatantly obvious that they are. If they are, it doesn't make a difference to me, as long as they do not try to make me feel uncomfortable for having even been in their presence.

I'm still not entirely sold on "accepting" certain aspects of LGBT. By that, I know that there are many sexualities represented in LGBT culture. I didn't say I reject it all. There aresome things I'm still not comfortable with.... but it doesn't mean that I hate those things that I am uncomfortable with. Many years ago, I wouldn't have even considered tolerance. But, that was many years ago, and I'd like to think I've gotten a bit wiser as I've grown older.

Every walk of life has its bad apples. Straights, gays, lesbians, fans, white, black, red, yellow... green. For some folk, it only takes one bad apple to ruin the whole barrel. I try not to let one bad apple color everything for me. If we accentuate the positives and eliminate the negatives (to paraphrase a famous old song), I think that change is more readily accepted... or at least tolerated.

I've made no bones about it. I'm still at the tolerance stage. Live and let live. You do your thing, and don't try to force it on me, and I'll do the same.

While much of the world is leaning toward acceptance, I think it is safe to say that a greater portion of it leans toward tolerance, at best. At this point, that is probably a far better outcome than LGBT can expect in this day and age. Eventually, the entirety of the world may think nothing of it.... but for now?

Rallying for change is one thing. As long as one doesn't get militant about it, then try for as much change as you can get. And I say that to both the straight and LGBT sides of this issue.

Back on topic about Star Trek:
I think the issue has long since passed the point where Trek could make any relevance about it. There are many other shows have already taken up the point on that, and have brought the issue into its due light. For Trek to do so would just seem like too little too late, in my very humble opinion. I think most of the world would be like "So what? Big deal." Those who have pushed for this kind of change in Star Trek would still jump up and down for joy, but that would only be for the Trek microcosm, since the greater world has already been exposed to the subject matter in other shows. I don't think the taste of victory would be quite as sweet for them as it would if Trek would've pushed those boundaries many years earlier. I do not say this to rain on any parade they may have, should Trek eventually start to bring the issue more to the foreground of its show. I do believe it is a certainty though.

It doesn't mean that Trek shouldn't do it. But I don't think it should be treated like the "big deal" that many LGBT supporters of Star Trek would hope it was. At this point, yes, Trek can do this, but it'll be an "also ran" in the great race of social commentary, human condition, and general awareness that other shows have already covered.

I hope that I have not come across as brazen or harsh about my views on this matter.

 

[borgboy]

I think it's obvious that more LGBT bigotry is allowed on the boards than other kinds of bigotry. I can't imagine a long discussion going on that we should have racist main characters for example. As a gay man I'm really proud to see how far we as a society have come on this issue. Western society has advanced for gay people more than I ever thought I'd live to see. But it still can be exhausting and upsetting to have to debate people over my basic equality as a human being nearly every time gay topics come up, and to be reminded how many people still see me as damaged goods or less than. I often times won't bring up a gay issue in forums because I just don't want to go thru the negative side. A gay character in Trek may be an also ran by now, but I still believe that good representation in stories are important to both reaching people's minds and hearts, and also gay kids (and adults too) need gay role models. I grew up in a very conservative rural area and I know that not having any gay role models to counter the overwhelmingly homophobic atmosphere of my upbringing was really damaging.
The point has long passed for Trek to break new ground with gay characters in media, but gay men in sci fi are still pretty rare, and we don't need a huge deal made out of the character as a token. Nobody wants that. But a regular main cast character who is gay would still be great, and could be important in it's prominence.
If they had the courage to actually have a gay captain, or more than one gay regular character, that would be more noteworthy.

 

[martok2112]

I think it's obvious that more LGBT bigotry is allowed on the boards than other kinds of bigotry. I can't imagine a long discussion going on that we should have racist main characters for example. As a gay man I'm really proud to see how far we as a society have come on this issue. Western society has advanced for gay people more than I ever thought I'd live to see. But it still can be exhausting and upsetting to have to debate people over my basic equality as a human being nearly every time gay topics come up, and to be reminded how many people still see me as damaged goods or less than. I often times won't bring up a gay issue in forums because I just don't want to go thru the negative side. A gay character in Trek may be an also ran by now, but I still believe that good representation in stories are important to both reaching people's minds and hearts, and also gay kids (and adults too) need gay role models. I grew up in a very conservative rural area and I know that not having any gay role models to counter the overwhelmingly homophobic atmosphere of my upbringing was really damaging.
The point has long passed for Trek to break new ground with gay characters in media, but gay men in sci fi are still pretty rare, and we don't need a huge deal made out of the character as a token. Nobody wants that. But a regular main cast character who is gay would still be great, and could be important in it's prominence.
If they had the courage to actually have a gay captain, or more than one gay regular character, that would be more noteworthy.

We are in agreement.
Or as the French may say: "D'accord!"

I thought I had it bad as one who loved science fiction, living a part of my life in a small hick town that was largely redneck, backwards assed... constantly getting picked on, berated, and beat up just because I loved Star Trek, Star Wars, and anything involving space. But I realize that there are those who likely had it far worse because of their walk of life in a larger setting where even tolerance was not even a consideration.

 

[fireproof78]

This is not intended to incense, so with that.... here goes:

I don't think that one can be anti-LGBT, and necessarily be "bigoted".

A person's values system may differ, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they will express hatred toward whatever it is that they oppose.

Look, I'm a pretty conservative guy. But I've always said that there's a little liberal in every conservative, and a little conservative in every liberal. As values and acceptance changes, so to does the mentality and ideology of those supporting them. When said change becomes a long-time fixture on society, and most everyone has accepted it, or tolerated it, then it becomes the new norm. Trying to force change on that status quo, and suddenly, those who were liberal minded before now become the new conservatives.


To try and highlight my earlier point that one can be Anti-LGBT and not be bigoted:

Anti-LGBT thinking: "I'm still not comfortable with this whole homosexuality thing, but, it's not like I can go back in time and banish it or send 'em all back to the closet, so, world... roll on, and more power to ya'. I'll be along in my own time."

Anti-LGBT Bigoted thinking: "Send 'em all back to the fucking closet and let them shove their dicks up each other's asses all they want, long as I don't gotta fuckin' see that shit! The only good (epithet excluded) is a dead (epithet excluded)! I was glad to hear about that (epithet excluded) boy that got beat to death! It's one less in the world!"

It's the same thing with any ideology or walk of life. You can have religious bigots, atheist bigots, racial bigots, etc. To oppose something does not mean you cannot tolerate and/or respect it.

Religious bigotry: "Convert and repent, or we'll kill you and send you to your rightful master in hell!"

Atheist bigotry: "People who still believe in a God are fucking stupid!"

Racial bigotry: (epithets, racial slurs, and general hatred abounds.... nothing that can be printed here, even for demonstrative purposes)

I'm still trying to play catch up with the world. As I've said before, it is a slow process, and I'm not going to do anything to accelerate it. I'll take it at my own pace, and anyone that tries to force acceleration of change on me by thinking that they're going to shame me for my position, or by trying to act like they are so much better a person than I am is not going to meet a nice guy.

When I meet a person, (except for the frequent, worthless bum that inhabits the areas where I work) I take them as met. I don't stop and consider "OMG, are they LGBT?!" Most of the time, one doesn't even really notice it unless they are flamers or paraders who make it blatantly obvious that they are. If they are, it doesn't make a difference to me, as long as they do not try to make me feel uncomfortable for having even been in their presence.

I'm still not entirely sold on "accepting" certain aspects of LGBT. By that, I know that there are many sexualities represented in LGBT culture. I didn't say I reject it all. There aresome things I'm still not comfortable with.... but it doesn't mean that I hate those things that I am uncomfortable with. Many years ago, I wouldn't have even considered tolerance. But, that was many years ago, and I'd like to think I've gotten a bit wiser as I've grown older.

Every walk of life has its bad apples. Straights, gays, lesbians, fans, white, black, red, yellow... green. For some folk, it only takes one bad apple to ruin the whole barrel. I try not to let one bad apple color everything for me. If we accentuate the positives and eliminate the negatives (to paraphrase a famous old song), I think that change is more readily accepted... or at least tolerated.

I've made no bones about it. I'm still at the tolerance stage. Live and let live. You do your thing, and don't try to force it on me, and I'll do the same.

While much of the world is leaning toward acceptance, I think it is safe to say that a greater portion of it leans toward tolerance, at best. At this point, that is probably a far better outcome than LGBT can expect in this day and age. Eventually, the entirety of the world may think nothing of it.... but for now?

Rallying for change is one thing. As long as one doesn't get militant about it, then try for as much change as you can get. And I say that to both the straight and LGBT sides of this issue.

Back on topic about Star Trek:
I think the issue has long since passed the point where Trek could make any relevance about it. There are many other shows have already taken up the point on that, and have brought the issue into its due light. For Trek to do so would just seem like too little too late, in my very humble opinion. I think most of the world would be like "So what? Big deal." Those who have pushed for this kind of change in Star Trek would still jump up and down for joy, but that would only be for the Trek microcosm, since the greater world has already been exposed to the subject matter in other shows. I don't think the taste of victory would be quite as sweet for them as it would if Trek would've pushed those boundaries many years earlier. I do not say this to rain on any parade they may have, should Trek eventually start to bring the issue more to the foreground of its show. I do believe it is a certainty though.

It doesn't mean that Trek shouldn't do it. But I don't think it should be treated like the "big deal" that many LGBT supporters of Star Trek would hope it was. At this point, yes, Trek can do this, but it'll be an "also ran" in the great race of social commentary, human condition, and general awareness that other shows have already covered.

I hope that I have not come across as brazen or harsh about my views on this matter.

I think that you expressed your opinion well.

 

[borgboy]

I think it's obvious that more LGBT bigotry is allowed on the boards than other kinds of bigotry. I can't imagine a long discussion going on that we should have racist main characters for example. As a gay man I'm really proud to see how far we as a society have come on this issue. Western society has advanced for gay people more than I ever thought I'd live to see. But it still can be exhausting and upsetting to have to debate people over my basic equality as a human being nearly every time gay topics come up, and to be reminded how many people still see me as damaged goods or less than. I often times won't bring up a gay issue in forums because I just don't want to go thru the negative side. A gay character in Trek may be an also ran by now, but I still believe that good representation in stories are important to both reaching people's minds and hearts, and also gay kids (and adults too) need gay role models. I grew up in a very conservative rural area and I know that not having any gay role models to counter the overwhelmingly homophobic atmosphere of my upbringing was really damaging.
The point has long passed for Trek to break new ground with gay characters in media, but gay men in sci fi are still pretty rare, and we don't need a huge deal made out of the character as a token. Nobody wants that. But a regular main cast character who is gay would still be great, and could be important in it's prominence.
If they had the courage to actually have a gay captain, or more than one gay regular character, that would be more noteworthy.

We are in agreement.
Or as the French may say: "D'accord!"

I thought I had it bad as one who loved science fiction, living a part of my life in a small hick town that was largely redneck, backwards assed... constantly getting picked on, berated, and beat up just because I loved Star Trek, Star Wars, and anything involving space. But I realize that there are those who likely had it far worse because of their walk of life in a larger setting where even tolerance was not even a consideration.

Yeah, keep in mind I was gay and a sci fi nerd in rural Tennessee and Kentucky surrounded by Bible thumping Republican hunting enthusiasts.

I want to add that the area I grew up in was also very racist. My family was very racist. But because of Star Trek and the X-Men, as well as just being exposed to different ideas because I read a lot, I learned from a young age not to be prejudiced. My best values came from Star Trek, the X-Men, and books, not my family, church or school. Unfortunately, because homosexuality was such a taboo topic at the time, I was older before I learned not to be homophobic, because no one around me, including Trek, taught me that being gay was ok. So role models are important. Even if gay characters are more commonplace in comedies and drama, sci fi is still sadly behind the times in positive gay representation. When sci fi is "brave" and does gay characters it's almost invariably hot lesbians to appeal to their target hetero male fan base.
There are a few examples that buck the trend. Adama's uncle in the short lived Caprica was a great example (unlike Battlestar Galactica, as much as I loved it, their bi male character only showed an interest in men in a few webisodes, never on the episodes on tv). Jack Harkness of Torchwood is a fun character but he's not the best role model. He's not even really gay he's "omnisexual" or something and would have sex with anybody or anything. He'd have sex with a sentient goat if the goat consented. And his boyfriend Ianto denied even being bisexual, saying that Jack was just an exception for him.
I've been really disappointed that even the new Trek movies couldn't manage a small gay representation. Eternal optimist that I am, I'm hopeful the new Trek series will have a gay regular character and do it well, but I'm also used to being let down by Trek in that area.
It's worth mentioning that the Trek novels have been much more progressive with diversity.

 

[martok2112]

This is not intended to incense, so with that.... here goes:
--------------------------------
(look upthread if you wanna see my big speech )
--------------------------------
I hope that I have not come across as brazen or harsh about my views on this matter.

I think that you expressed your opinion well.

Thank you. Most kind.

I think it's obvious that more LGBT bigotry is allowed on the boards than other kinds of bigotry. I can't imagine a long discussion going on that we should have racist main characters for example. As a gay man I'm really proud to see how far we as a society have come on this issue. Western society has advanced for gay people more than I ever thought I'd live to see. But it still can be exhausting and upsetting to have to debate people over my basic equality as a human being nearly every time gay topics come up, and to be reminded how many people still see me as damaged goods or less than. I often times won't bring up a gay issue in forums because I just don't want to go thru the negative side. A gay character in Trek may be an also ran by now, but I still believe that good representation in stories are important to both reaching people's minds and hearts, and also gay kids (and adults too) need gay role models. I grew up in a very conservative rural area and I know that not having any gay role models to counter the overwhelmingly homophobic atmosphere of my upbringing was really damaging.
The point has long passed for Trek to break new ground with gay characters in media, but gay men in sci fi are still pretty rare, and we don't need a huge deal made out of the character as a token. Nobody wants that. But a regular main cast character who is gay would still be great, and could be important in it's prominence.
If they had the courage to actually have a gay captain, or more than one gay regular character, that would be more noteworthy.

We are in agreement.
Or as the French may say: "D'accord!"

I thought I had it bad as one who loved science fiction, living a part of my life in a small hick town that was largely redneck, backwards assed... constantly getting picked on, berated, and beat up just because I loved Star Trek, Star Wars, and anything involving space. But I realize that there are those who likely had it far worse because of their walk of life in a larger setting where even tolerance was not even a consideration.

Yeah, keep in mind I was gay and a sci fi nerd in rural Tennessee and Kentucky surrounded by Bible thumping Republican hunting enthusiasts.

I was lucky that when I moved from the little hick town of the redneck state I lived in (for thankfully a relatively short period of my life.... state remains undisclosed ) I really didn't have any trouble in any of the other states I lived in...which actually included a town just outside of Memphis, TN.

But yeah, it sounds like you had a lot more to deal with, given being gay, and loving science fiction, and given the demographic you cited. I'm glad you were able to get away from it. Hopefully, you do not find yourself in a similar situation now, or ever again.

 

[HIjol]

For a while there, someone of the LGBT persuasion was used for comedic relief. Hard to cram Paul Lynde into forehead of the week cap and treat it like a regular episode of Trek.

They could've just thrown a line in where one of the characters casually mentioned a boyfriend or girlfriend and not even have it acknowledged by the other crew members.

It's not like you have to have hardcore porn on the screen to establish someone's sexuality.

Squiggy, your post reminded me of how they handled Ronna and her girlfriend in West Wing, "Election Day: Part 1" -Season 7. They did it with class and sweetness and a natural part of the story line. Open and clear, without being "obvious" or salacious.

...finding a way for pro-LGBT and anti-LGBT people to be able to be respectful of one another and work together.

There's no reason to be respectful of anti-LGBT bigotry.

I agree there is no reason to be respectful of the state of being bigoted toward LGBT people. Not sure how we would handle being respectful of people that hold those views. Certainly respectful enough of the situation to try dialog or education or trying to find some accommodation or common ground, but, at the end of the day, if those that disagree are going to "Burn the Cross", well then, there are some laws and some consequences for that. Not saying the laws are strong enough, yet, but...there it is.

For Now.

I think it was Squiggy (apologies if I am mistaken) who suggested letting the bigoted generation die out.

 

[borgboy]

My family relocated to rural Oklahoma actually. Even though this can be a hateful state, I can see how times have changed with people. I'm private and quiet, and not really obvious, so I get by ok. Even in this notoriously homophobic area (our state represenative Sally Kerns made national news by saying gays were more dangerous to America than terrorists) things are better than they were twenty years ago.

 

[martok2112]

For a while there, someone of the LGBT persuasion was used for comedic relief. Hard to cram Paul Lynde into forehead of the week cap and treat it like a regular episode of Trek.

They could've just thrown a line in where one of the characters casually mentioned a boyfriend or girlfriend and not even have it acknowledged by the other crew members.

It's not like you have to have hardcore porn on the screen to establish someone's sexuality.

Squiggy, your post reminded me of how they handled Ronna and her girlfriend in West Wing, "Election Day: Part 1" -Season 7. They did it with class and sweetness and a natural part of the story line. Open and clear, without being "obvious" or salacious.

...finding a way for pro-LGBT and anti-LGBT people to be able to be respectful of one another and work together.

There's no reason to be respectful of anti-LGBT bigotry.

I agree there is no reason to be respectful of the state of being bigoted toward LGBT people. Not sure how we would handle being respectful of people that hold those views. Certainly respectful enough of the situation to try dialog or education or trying to find some accommodation or common ground, but, at the end of the day, if those that disagree are going to "Burn the Cross", well then, there are some laws and some consequences for that. Not saying the laws are strong enough, yet, but...there it is.

For Now.

I think it was Squiggy (apologies if I am mistaken) who suggested letting the bigoted generation die out.

Dialog, education, and common ground.... a lot of times, I imagine, it sounds easier said than it is done, isn't it?

My family relocated to rural Oklahoma actually. Even though this can be a hateful state, I can see how times have changed with people. I'm private and quiet, and not really obvious, so I get by ok. Even in this notoriously homophobic area (our state represenative Sally Kerns made national news by saying gays were more dangerous to America than terrorists) things are better than they were twenty years ago.

I will admit, there may have been a time in my life where I felt the same way as Rep. Kerns... but the logic I have come to embrace completely trashes the misguided sentiment that homosexuals are as "dangerous as terrorists". She might be thinking that homosexuals are rotting the country out from within.... yet, their contributions to society suggest anything but. Some of my favorite musicians are gay/lesbian: Elton John, Pete Townsend, Melissa Ethridge, and the contributions they've made to my chosen profession (singer on Bourbon St. in New Orleans, LA) have been far more outstanding than some jumped up politician to the world stage.

 

[HIjol]

Squiggy[/B], your post reminded me of how they handled Ronna and her girlfriend in West Wing, "Election Day: Part 1" -Season 7. They did it with class and sweetness and a natural part of the story line. Open and clear, without being "obvious" or salacious.



I agree there is no reason to be respectful of the state of being bigoted toward LGBT people. Not sure how we would handle being respectful of people that hold those views. Certainly respectful enough of the situation to try dialog or education or trying to find some accommodation or common ground, but, at the end of the day, if those that disagree are going to "Burn the Cross", well then, there are some laws and some consequences for that. Not saying the laws are strong enough, yet, but...there it is.

For Now.

I think it was Squiggy (apologies if I am mistaken) who suggested letting the bigoted generation die out.

Dialog, education, and common ground.... a lot of times, I imagine, it sounds easier said than it is done, isn't it?

My family relocated to rural Oklahoma actually. Even though this can be a hateful state, I can see how times have changed with people. I'm private and quiet, and not really obvious, so I get by ok. Even in this notoriously homophobic area (our state representative Sally Kerns made national news by saying gays were more dangerous to America than terrorists) things are better than they were twenty years ago.

I will admit, there may have been a time in my life where I felt the same way as Rep. Kerns... but the logic I have come to embrace completely trashes the misguided sentiment that homosexuals are as "dangerous as terrorists". She might be thinking that homosexuals are rotting the country out from within.... yet, their contributions to society suggest anything but. Some of my favorite musicians are gay/lesbian: Elton John, Pete Townsend, Melissa Ethridge, and the contributions they've made to my chosen profession (singer on Bourbon St. in New Orleans, LA) have been far more outstanding than some jumped up politician to the world stage.

Ho, Friend martok!

Agreed in spades, and I wasn't suggesting those things so much as solutions per se, rather as avenues for trying to reach some sort of respectful state with what many perceive as disrespectful beliefs, and then, by association, projecting disrespect to the belief-holders...if that makes sense.

 

[martok2112]

Squiggy[/B], your post reminded me of how they handled Ronna and her girlfriend in West Wing, "Election Day: Part 1" -Season 7. They did it with class and sweetness and a natural part of the story line. Open and clear, without being "obvious" or salacious.



I agree there is no reason to be respectful of the state of being bigoted toward LGBT people. Not sure how we would handle being respectful of people that hold those views. Certainly respectful enough of the situation to try dialog or education or trying to find some accommodation or common ground, but, at the end of the day, if those that disagree are going to "Burn the Cross", well then, there are some laws and some consequences for that. Not saying the laws are strong enough, yet, but...there it is.

For Now.

I think it was Squiggy (apologies if I am mistaken) who suggested letting the bigoted generation die out.

Dialog, education, and common ground.... a lot of times, I imagine, it sounds easier said than it is done, isn't it?

My family relocated to rural Oklahoma actually. Even though this can be a hateful state, I can see how times have changed with people. I'm private and quiet, and not really obvious, so I get by ok. Even in this notoriously homophobic area (our state representative Sally Kerns made national news by saying gays were more dangerous to America than terrorists) things are better than they were twenty years ago.

I will admit, there may have been a time in my life where I felt the same way as Rep. Kerns... but the logic I have come to embrace completely trashes the misguided sentiment that homosexuals are as "dangerous as terrorists". She might be thinking that homosexuals are rotting the country out from within.... yet, their contributions to society suggest anything but. Some of my favorite musicians are gay/lesbian: Elton John, Pete Townsend, Melissa Ethridge, and the contributions they've made to my chosen profession (singer on Bourbon St. in New Orleans, LA) have been far more outstanding than some jumped up politician to the world stage.

Ho, Friend martok!

Agreed in spades, and I wasn't suggesting those things so much as solutions per se, rather as avenues for trying to reach some sort of respectful state with what many perceive as disrespectful beliefs, and then, by association, projecting disrespect to the belief-holders...if that makes sense.

Ho, Friend HIjol!

(dons the Zen monk robes)

GONNNGGGG!!!!!!

Solutions are an end to a journey of necessity. Journeys involve avenues. Sometimes, one must explore all avenues. But if all that the avenues lead to are the high, barbed containment walls of a closed mind, then there are choices to be made.

One can simply turn around, and let the isolated one sit in its own contentment, until it fades away into obscurity.

One can try shouting over the wall. One might be met with ignorance. Or one might actually be met with a willingness to listen.

One can try flinging mud and stones over the wall. But if that is the solution one chooses, then one has already lost.
One might also be met with equivalent (or greater) hostile resistance.

And now, let me leave you with final words of wisdom:
"Confusion say: Man who stand on toilet is high on pot!"

GONNNNNGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!

(gets out of the Zen monk robes and realizes he forgot where he put his change of clothes)

 

[Tim Walker]

This. It's essentially the same as saying "surely we can be respectful of the anti-Semitic people as well as Jewish people."

Well, Star Trek has had its share of racist characters that are still respected. I don't think it would be bad to have a character who was wrong, but then learned and changed. However, that mostly works with race (or rather, species) because it's such a safe topic. .

An excellent example is The Tuskeegee Airmen.

The bigot who eventually comes around...this could actually fit Treks optimistic bent.

 

[JoeZhang]

You know, I don't really have a "side" in this discussion, the new show can have a gay character or not, I'll watch it either way but to those who do I just want to say be careful what you wish for. Twenty two years ago, DS9 did an episode with a disabled character. "Melora", remember that? I was excited. I was a young guy who still bought into the whole "Roddenberry's Vision" bullshit, and thought, finally! I'll be represented in the future!". But, that episode could not have been more cliched or demeaning to disabled people if it tried. Even the episode's writer (a disabled man himself) disowned it.

I'd hate to see that happen again.

You are arguing against a strawman. Absolutely nobody expecting a LGBT character is wanting anything of the sort. What we are actually arguing is that Star Trek simply brings itself inline with modern TV.

That is to say there are LGBT characters and nobody comments on it and it is given no special focus - they are just there. Like in life.

 

[Sector 7]

As I have said for years on this board, gay characters can be tastefully done... and should be. Scene: Lt. John is in quarters he shares with his husband, Lt. Cmdr. Steve. John is worried about Alien of the Week causing a danger to Steve, a bridge officer. Steve holds him and comforts him, reassuring John that Captain Whatsit won't let that happen. RED ALERT sounds. CUT.

Wow, that was so easy that it should have been done years ago on Trek. There was no sex, but as a gay man, I realize, "Hey, we made it to the future! No one eradicated us."

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

As I have said for years on this board, gay characters can be tastefully done... and should be. Scene: Lt. John is in quarters he shares with his husband, Lt. Cmdr. Steve. John is worried about Alien of the Week causing a danger to Steve, a bridge officer. Steve holds him and comforts him, reassuring John that Captain Whatsit won't let that happen. RED ALERT sounds. CUT.

Wow, that was so easy that it should have been done years ago on Trek. There was no sex, but as a gay man, I realize, "Hey, we made it to the future! No one eradicated us."

This is just how it should be done. I fear that when they have a gay character they just become a stereotype or used in a cringe-inducing or insulting way. There doesn't need to be nudity or sex, but rather the depiction of the love, connection and relationship between two people.

It is long past the time Trek could be cutting edge with the inclusion of an LGBT character, so what they need to really focus on is the normality of non-heterosexual relationships.

 

[Squiggy]

Yeah, keep in mind I was gay and a sci fi nerd in rural Tennessee and Kentucky surrounded by Bible thumping Republican hunting enthusiasts.

Tennessee born and raised here. But I want to point out that Republican hunting was outlawed in the 90s.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Phlox was polyamorous, so that's not all that groundbreaking.
At this point a gay man in a committed on screen relationship is probably the most daring gay character Trek can do.

Phlox's polygamy was easy because he was the quirky alien. The way humans reacted to his sexuality was with uneasiness. Star Trek does a lot of things, but they disguise it under aliens. The closest character to being gay was Garak, another alien. The aforementioned racism was only towards aliens.

If they made a human polyamorous, that would be a much bigger deal. And I hate to say it, but gay people are much more accepted in the US than those who are polyamorous (or the other groups I mentioned). Making a gay character at this point isn't as big of a deal.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

A tolerant society isn't one where everybody agrees with everybody else, it's one where people peacefully and respectfully coexist with people they don't agree with.

Some people on both ends confuse tolerance with PC-ness. One side accuses everybody who disagrees with them of being hateful and the other accuses anyone who isn't hateful of just lying to be more PC. Tolerance should be considered a behavioral change, not a gesture of intellectual conformity. Just 'Treat people you disagree with just as kindly as people you agree with.'

If people started with just regarding everyone with respect, the intellectual change would happen organically rather than under threat of shame.

 

[Tim Walker]

Could Trek have a story in which a character has a sex change? (I'm referring to the hormones-and-surgery thing).

For casting I suppose you would want someone with a naturally androgynous appearance.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Could Trek have a story in which a character has a sex change? (I'm referring to the hormones-and-surgery thing).

For casting I suppose you would want someone with a naturally androgynous appearance.

As was said previously, medical technology would probably have advanced enough that people with this issue would be caught at a very early age, and that the advanced surgery itself would make these people indistinguishable as having previously been another sex.

This would probably be another instance where Trek would only be likely to explore it with aliens, if they explore it at all.