Do you think LGBT characters will feature more prominently?

[borgboy]

I think there's some confusion over the terms gender fluid and sexually fluid.
Gender fluid means a person may identify more as male or female at different times.
Sexually fluid means that you have attraction to both men, women and possibly non binary gender people.
Garek is pretty obviously sexually fluid, not gender fluid.

 

[T'Girl]

I politely suggest that you don't understand pansexuality. It isn't that they are attracted to ALL genders or sexual identities

Actually that is my understanding.

... especially since LGBT History Month is in October

In America, the month of June in LGBT Pride Month, LGBT History Month is in Britain I believe.

Gender identity is separate from sexual or romantic orientation. I'd guess USS Triumphant is talking about Jadzia Dax.

Unless we're talking about Garak's personal gender identity being in a constant state of flux. Which isn't unknown. Garak's perception and self-awareness of his own gender would change periodically.

Garak's behavior and demeanor toward Julian over time did change, sometimes from episode to episode.

 

[borgboy]

June is Pride month. Oct 11 is National Coming Out Day - and apparently the month of October is LGBT History Month in Britain, which I wasn't aware.
We're gradually taking over the whole calendar, so a gay character can be on new Trek year round.

 

[USS Triumphant]

I actually was talking about Dax. Not Jadzia Dax or Ezri Dax. Just Dax. The symbiont. Similarly, for TNG I was talking about the symbiont in Odan - but it occurred to me after that I could have been talking about more than just Odan: Lal, for instance - at least briefly.

Sorry not to have cleared this up sooner, but I was enjoying the Garak assumption and wanted to see a little more of where that would go before I chimed in.

 

[eyeresist]

It was inexcusable that Enterprise didn't have a gay character, especially when they tried to do a poorly thought out "gay metaphor" with telepathic rapists on Vulcan.

That was an AIDS metaphor, not a gay metaphor. Best not to confuse the two.

Most of your examples of gay characters on TV were examples of the "gay best friend"/camp comedy syndrome. Only Willow was a whole character.

 

[borgboy]

It was inexcusable that Enterprise didn't have a gay character, especially when they tried to do a poorly thought out "gay metaphor" with telepathic rapists on Vulcan.

That was an AIDS metaphor, not a gay metaphor. Best not to confuse the two.

Most of your examples of gay characters on TV were examples of the "gay best friend"/camp comedy syndrome. Only Willow was a whole character.

TPTB at Enterprise described that episode as their "gay episode", which was an AIDS metaphor, absolutely. But TPTB were the ones who confused that issue, I was just following up on it.
Willow was a great character, as was Tara. But sci fi has long been more comfortable with gay women than men.
I'd argue that Ellen's character on her self titled sit com was a pretty well developed character. She was on a sit com, but she was the lead.

 

[USS Triumphant]

I politely suggest that you don't understand pansexuality. It isn't that they are attracted to ALL genders or sexual identities

Actually that is my understanding.

If you want to express it as an ideal maybe. But realistically, even if people are pan and have not closed themselves off to relationships with people of any particular gender or sexual identities, they will still have preferences on other bases that can mean they have a type. Maybe they prefer people with a strong sense of humor, maybe they prefer blondes, maybe they find they connect better with people who embrace the "feminine" aspect of their personalities regardless of their gender identification (by which I mean, for instance, creative nurturing men or women).

The idea that pan means that a person has no preferences at all implies that they are just as open to a relationship with an ax murderer (for example) as they are with anyone else. That's just not real.

(I'm friends with several self-identified pansexuals - some of which have a clear 'type' in the people they date, anyway. It just isn't based directly in sexual or gender identity.)

 

[eyeresist]

TPTB at Enterprise described that episode as their "gay episode", which was an AIDS metaphor, absolutely. But TPTB were the ones who confused that issue, I was just following up on it.
Willow was a great character, as was Tara. But sci fi has long been more comfortable with gay women than men.
I'd argue that Ellen's character on her self titled sit com was a pretty well developed character. She was on a sit com, but she was the lead.

Fair enough.
I don't think Trek has ever been radical in exploring hot social issues. Anyway, despite some speculation about pansexual characters, I think the point is that a modern Trek that refuses to include queer characters will look not merely conservative, but actually old-fashioned.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

I'm fond of the idea that Trek could approach the subject by going beyond the current pop culture cliches straight to an assumed universal pan-sexuality - where the idea of people worrying about sexual orientation and gender taboos is weird and even pretty funny. Like looking at sepia-toned photographs of people riding enormous bicycles while wearing huge impractical dresses for "propriety".

I was thinking the same though I am under no illusion that they would ever do it. It'd be interesting to see a Trek which took all the big ideas and cranked it to ten but I imagine it will play like all the others right down to the composition of the bridge crew.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

But sci fi has long been more comfortable with gay women than men.

It always appears to me that is true of all television, but then again since many men find lesbianism to be arousing and the much sought after demographic is males between 18 and 39 then it makes sense.

 

[JohnnyTenToes]

A bit off-topic, but still staying on the issue of sexuality. How about a pedophile crew member? Could make for an interesting character, and something that hasn't been done too much.

 

[BillJ]

A bit off-topic, but still staying on the issue of sexuality. How about a pedophile crew member? Could make for an interesting character, and something that hasn't been done too much.

Why? Trek is suppose to be an optimistic view of the future.

 

[Taylirious]

How about a cannibal?

 

[BillJ]

How about a cannibal?

Or a cannonball...

 

[JohnnyTenToes]

A bit off-topic, but still staying on the issue of sexuality. How about a pedophile crew member? Could make for an interesting character, and something that hasn't been done too much.

Why? Trek is suppose to be an optimistic view of the future.

For the dramatic opportunities it could provide

 

[BillJ]

A bit off-topic, but still staying on the issue of sexuality. How about a pedophile crew member? Could make for an interesting character, and something that hasn't been done too much.

Why? Trek is suppose to be an optimistic view of the future.

For the dramatic opportunities it could provide

Yeah... I don't see that happening.

 

[JohnnyTenToes]

Me neither. But it would be something new.

On-topic, I have a feeling they're going to go with a transgender captain, but in a way that it's not made a big deal in STs future, but will be subtly referenced and well handled hopefully. It will of course be a big deal in the media, so that's some publicity right there

 

[USS Triumphant]

Why? Trek is suppose to be an optimistic view of the future.

For the dramatic opportunities it could provide

Yeah... I don't see that happening.

I agree that it won't happen. But if you add that the character is a self-aware pedophile who actively maintains treatment because he/she doesn't want to act on their impulses, then it certainly *could* make for a very interesting character, and not necessarily one that conflicts with the idea that Trek shows an optimistic future. I mean, obviously, it would be better if people with that condition could be cured, but even the idea that in the future it could be controlled and that people around the person with the condition would help them - the way a lot of people try to help alcoholics now - rather than shaming them into hiding a condition that needs treatment would be better than what happens now. Certainly would make for a controversial character, at any rate. (Probably to the degree of getting the show yanked.)

(I wish to emphasize upon rereading what I've just written that I am not in any way arguing for sympathy for pedophiles who have actually hurt children. Only for people who have not, but who have noticed the impulse in themselves and are afraid to seek treatment because of how they would be labelled.)

 

[sojourner]

Me neither. But it would be something new.

On-topic, I have a feeling they're going to go with a transgender captain, but in a way that it's not made a big deal in STs future, but will be subtly referenced and well handled hopefully. It will of course be a big deal in the media, so that's some publicity right there

Don't hold your breathe on that.

 

[JoeZhang]

Why is this in a thread about LGBT characters? Let's not backslide into old slurs and prejudices.