Do you think LGBT characters will feature more prominently?

[Capn Nick]

If you followed the link above, you would know...

The gay bomb was real.

American scientists tried to build one for the army.

They failed.

It is real, but it didn't work.

By the way, the best part of that link was when they were discussing other potential bombs and talk about flatulance bomb and include this sentence:

"The plan was to make an enemy so smelly they could be quite literally sniffed out of hiding by their opponents. It was also considered damaging to the enemy's morale."

It's like the time the CIA plotted to kill Castro with an exploding cigar. Wacky.

 

[borgboy]

I had heard about that years ago, but since it didn't work, it's hypothetical.
There's a plot bunny for some fiction there, the gay bomb works better than expected and turns the whole world gay. It would be an improvement in many ways as there would be no unplanned pregnancies or unwanted children and thus should result in a smaller population, thus resolving many problems of limited resources.

 

[Guy Gardener]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

There's also Pink Kryptonite, but that's not so well known outside of comic book nerds.

 

[Awesome Possum]

genetic science will cure every illness in the future, even cancer. Perhaps you should stick to homeopathy

Being gay isn't an illness and is seen in many different species. It likely serves some purpose to the continuation of the species that we aren't fully aware of. Really any opposition to it is found is only found only in religious fundamentalists which actually does cause harm to the species as a whole. Perhaps we should eliminate them from the species.

 

[borgboy]

From what I've read, in the past as gays were less likely to marry and have children, they contributed more to the collective family than their heterosexual brothers who had wives and children of their own to provide for. So the result is that the children of their siblings had better care and resources.
I can see how that works with my own family. I'm a caregiver for my partially disabled parents and 93 year old grandfather, and I've often acted as almost a third parent to some of my nieces and nephews, helping with child care, being the go to tutor for school work, etc.
There's also been a study showing that women with gay brothers are more fertile and more attractive to men and have more children statistically than women without gay brothers, suggesting that the "gay gene" comes from the mother and is linked with other genes that are making them more fertile and appealing to men.

 

[cultcross]

From what I've read, in the past as gays were less likely to marry and have children, they contributed more to the collective family than their heterosexual brothers who had wives and children of their own to provide for. So the result is that the children of their siblings had better care and resources.
I can see how that works with my own family. I'm a caregiver for my partially disabled parents and 93 year old grandfather, and I've often acted as almost a third parent to some of my nieces and nephews, helping with child care, being the go to tutor for school work, etc.
There's also been a study showing that women with gay brothers are more fertile and more attractive to men and have more children statistically than women without gay brothers, suggesting that the "gay gene" comes from the mother and is linked with other genes that are making them more fertile and appealing to men.

Realistically, there must be a selective advantage to the 'gay gene' if such a thing exists because otherwise by its very nature it would have been eliminated from the gene pool long ago. The idea that gay men helped more at home in the past is a possible social truth but doesn't explain how the gene would then be passed on. The latter theory you suggest is one of the strongest ideas I've seen - that a generic combination that makes men gay makes women more fertile or something similar which would select for that combination in the next generation. The reverse obviously would apply for gay women. However, given the apparent spectrum of human sexuality and gender, I suspect the full explanation is vastly more complicated.

 

[Destructor]

There are actually more mysteries about how genes work and 'balance' each other out than we have been able to currently explain.

So for example, during the postwar 'baby boom', a LOT more male babies were born than the usual ration would have indicated. We're not sure why.

The odds that you will be gay go UP the more siblings you have who are older than you. We don't know why this is, but it is a fact, and does align nicely with the 'carer gene' hypothesis- if your older siblings are the 'breeders', maybe non-breeders will be born to balance out the birth rate and help care for the existing children. We don't know the answer because we don't actually understand this area of genetics very well.

All I know is that if we don't get a gay Captain under Bryan Fuller, I'll be annoyed.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

All I know is that if we don't get a gay Captain under Bryan Fuller, I'll be annoyed.

Or at least the First Officer. Though ideally I'd like to see both as non-heterosexual, a lesbian Captain and a gay XO.

 

[cultcross]

The odds that you will be gay go UP the more siblings you have who are older than you. We don't know why this is, but it is a fact, and does align nicely with the 'carer gene' hypothesis- if your older siblings are the 'breeders', maybe non-breeders will be born to balance out the birth rate and help care for the existing children. We don't know the answer because we don't actually understand this area of genetics very well

There are suggestions that the younger sibling mystery may have to do with the increasingly effective immune response of the mothers body with subsequent pregnancies affecting the hormone levels during gestation for each sibling compared with their forebears. Seems to be a few gaps to plug on that one but it's an interesting idea. I wonder if the answer will be found in epigenetics, the reason why two genetically identical cats can have different coat colours, as there are cases of identical twins where one is gay and the other is not.

 

[TwoJakes]

but doesn't explain how the gene would then be passed on

Consider red hair, only one percent of the population has red hair, but four percent carry the gene. So men and women who are not themselves gay, would have the "gay gene" and pass it along to their offspring.

Given that gays occur around he world in all population groups, it's probably a standard aspect of everyone's DNA.

 

[borgboy]

There are suggestions that the younger sibling mystery may have to do with the increasingly effective immune response of the mothers body with subsequent pregnancies affecting the hormone levels during gestation for each sibling compared with their forebears. Seems to be a few gaps to plug on that one but it's an interesting idea. I wonder if the answer will be found in epigenetics, the reason why two genetically identical cats can have different coat colours, as there are cases of identical twins where one is gay and the other is not.

It seems difficult to get truly accurate stats on the orientation of twins, because there are going to be some people who will lie or repress about being gay because of social pressures. I'd think more twins would both be gay than the studies show because the study requires self identification, which is going to be an unreliable source at times.
I have heard the whole thing of younger siblings being more likely to be gay only refers to older brothers. It's not at all absolute of course. For example, I'm gay and have a younger brother who is straight.

 

[Destructor]

Given that gays occur around he world in all population groups, it's probably a standard aspect of everyone's DNA.

The answer is this issue needs more research. It's difficult to carry out definitive studies because the very question 'are you gay?' is so loaded (and, in my opinion, is not a binary question) and in some cultures dangerous to even answer. So we don't necessarily know how many people are attracted to the same sex across cultures because so many cultures (even our relatively enlightened Western culture has risks of danger or isolation for declaring same sex attraction) that it's hard to know what makes one same or opposite-sex attracted.

I would like it if the Captain was gay because, with the exception of Enterprise, Star Trek has usually ramped up it's progressivism series by series. I was deeply disappointed when Enterprise discontinued this tradition- Archer would have been a great choice to be a gay Captain.

But, sadly, I'd also be happy if they just acknowledged that gay people were a thing in the Star Trek universe and that was just fine with everyone, the way we've always imagined the utopian future to be.

 

[TwoJakes]

with the exception of Enterprise, Star Trek has usually ramped up it's progressivism series by series

TNG was pretty much the only "progessive" series, and then only when Picard was in serious blow hard mode.

The less progressive Star Trek is, the better.

 

[Destructor]

TNG was pretty much the only "progessive" series, and then only when Picard was in serious blow hard mode.

The less progressive Star Trek is, the better.

I meant more that after Picard, it seemed logical, progressively, based on the inclusive principles that Star Trek seems to be based on, that the next Captain would be black, and he was. As soon as he was, I said: "Then the next Captain will be a woman.", and she was. And as soon as Voyager aired, I said: "Well then, progressively, the next captain will be a gay white man." and... he wasn't. But he should have been.

 

[TwoJakes]

it seemed logical, progressively

Black senior officers date to the first season of Star Trek. NBC sent out a letter to it's producers (prior to Star Trek) informing them that NBC wanted more inclusion of Blacks in NBC's programming.

 

[Destructor]

Black senior officers date to the first season of Star Trek. NBC sent out a letter to it's producers (prior to Star Trek) informing them that NBC wanted more inclusion of Blacks in NBC's programming.

A Captain is different- they are the face of the show, they are the primary character. If DS9 had a white male Captain, it would have said something about Star Trek's vision of the future, how far it was willing to go in the depiction of that future. It would have sent a message- the wrong message, IMO.

Fuller has already stated that his dream Captain would be Angela Bassett- so again you see the progression from: White Man -> Black Man -> White Woman -> Black Woman. Now if the Captain of the new show was ALSO gay, well, that'd be amazing. But if she's straight and she has a first officer who is a gay white man, well, I think I'd be pretty happy with that, too.

 

[borgboy]

I'd be thrilled with a black female captain and gay male first officer, with good diversity among the rest of the cast.
There really should be a fair male/female split. Even Voyager had three women and five men. TNG after Tasha left only had two main female characters, and DS9 and Enterprise also only had two female main characters for the whole series.

 

[Tiger Devil Dog]

I wonder if there's any room left over for a straight white male amongst all this diversity

 

[Clym]

I'd be thrilled with a black female captain and gay male first officer, with good diversity among the rest of the cast.
There really should be a fair male/female split. Even Voyager had three women and five men. TNG after Tasha left only had two main female characters, and DS9 and Enterprise also only had two female main characters for the whole series.

I'm surprised you would advocate such tokenism.

Casting actors just because they're black/female/gay/disabled/whatever is insulting affirmative action tokenism and reverse discrimination. People should get jobs based on their own merits and talents. It's PC gone mad

 

[Clym]

I wonder if there's any room left over for a straight white male amongst all this diversity

it's insane Cultural Marxism. Many companies now have a 'diversity quota', where they must employ a certain number of 'minority' employees regardless of suitability for the role