Will homosexuality FINALLY be canon in Star Trek after this movie? There hasn't been one gay character in Trek yet (Jadzia and the other trill don't count because they're not women, just stinky worms.) Enterprise was made in the 21st century and still didn't include one gay character even once! It could be something subtle like two men kissing in the background or a female character saying "my WIFE wouldn't like it!" if Kirk comes onto her. But there should be a gay character. Maybe captain Robau.
Gay character at last?
- Thread starter MadBaggins
- Start date
- Status
Not this conversation again... 
No.
I'm tempted to close this damn thing. I really am. In fact, might still.
One more reason not to see this movie.
Scotty looks the happiest, if that's what you mean.
But I'm sure after meeting Scotty, Porthos is definitely not gay if the spoilers are true
Not this go-round, it would seem:
http://trekmovie.com/2008/07/15/orci-kurtzman-no-gay-characters-in-star-trek/
http://trekmovie.com/2008/07/15/orci-kurtzman-no-gay-characters-in-star-trek/
Merde...here we go again. If you want Gay trek, make a fan film with nothing but gay characters...BAM...there you are, gays in trek.
Well, I for one am a little disappointed in the quick dismissal of this subject. Yes, it's a very tough issue to tolerate and handle with care in forums like this, but this is Star Trek. Difference should be welcomed, not "I'm tempted to close this damn thing."
Sure you can say that books have gay characters in them, but that's not really an honest substitute thanks to this whole canon nonsense. Anything that's not on film, whether it be games with the official cast, books, audio novels with the actual cast or non-paramount associated fan-made films with veteran Star Trek writers attached are thrown away as non-canon and forgotten. That line of thinking sounds like gays shouldn't be in anything that matters in Star Trek which doesn't really fit into what Star Trek is trying to reflect.
Sure you can say that books have gay characters in them, but that's not really an honest substitute thanks to this whole canon nonsense. Anything that's not on film, whether it be games with the official cast, books, audio novels with the actual cast or non-paramount associated fan-made films with veteran Star Trek writers attached are thrown away as non-canon and forgotten. That line of thinking sounds like gays shouldn't be in anything that matters in Star Trek which doesn't really fit into what Star Trek is trying to reflect.
Last edited:
Thing is, though, it has been asked and answered with respect to this movie. If it is a general question perhaps a different forum would be more appropriate.
IMO of course.
IMO of course.
Not this conversation again...
I agree. I have nothing against gays, but this whole "gay character in Star Trek" is getting very old fast. Who really cares if there is a gay character in the franchise? Does it really make it any better then it already is? I don't think so. There has already been a gay actor, so let's through in a gay character too. Lame.
Well, my dismissal of it was entirely as a factual matter. Asked and answered, you know?
Most people know that for over three decades there's been a significant line of thinking to the effect that Kirk and Spock were gay. Now, where's Samuel T. Cogley's "bath" avatar when we need it?
Believe me. This is not a 'quick' dismissal. We have only had this exact same conversation about 5,058,309 times now.
And after a while, it gets incredibly stale.
There are only so many times you can walk down the same tired road. Especially when that road has a very large "DANGER - EXTREMELY ROUGH ROAD AHEAD" sign posted at the entrance.
The dismissal doesn't have anything to do with the gay issue itself.
The problem, at least for me, is that this exact same subject has been talked in about a million different threads, with the exact same million responses for countless years on this and other forums.
Gay or straight, i have no problem with either. Put them in Star trek, I don't care.
I'm just sick of the same dead end internet conversation over and over and over and over........ and over again.
Nardpuncher
Rear Admiral
Hey, not only must Star Trek combat homophobia, but what about you comment on Trills? "Stinky worms"? That didn't sound very considerate. 
Sure, but that one looks more like Kirk's helping Spock to the old porcelain command chair after a bad night on Rigel.
Maybe he'll considerately hold Spock's ears out of the way.
Maybe he'll considerately hold Spock's ears out of the way.
I'm not trying to rock the boat, and I'm not gay, but I agree with the disappointment, and frankly found the response by a moderator up-page a bit disgusting. The OP didn't try to troll for gay sex or anything, they simply asked a pretty straight-forward question about an aspect - as valid as any other - of the upcoming movie and future handling of Trek. I'm not sure what the drama is.
Back on topic, I prefer to think that there have already been "gay" characters in Trek - but by the time of the future shown, sexual labels like that are no longer used. Essentially, everyone is potentially bi, and just has preferences that, naturally, probably still generally tend to follow reproductive, biologically driven perogatives - but no one is hung up about it if they don't.
Or, put another way, If Scotty (for example) never had sex with another male, it would be because he never met a male he felt attracted to or thought he was in love with, not because he's "straight" or "gay".
It would be nice to see some confirmation of this somewhere, though. I'd less like to see a gay character, per se, and more like to hear Kirk explain to McCoy that he knows the (male) captain of another ship pretty well because they used to date - without any strange looks from McCoy about "teh gay". Or something similar.
- Status
