Gay Crew members
- Thread starter Guardian452
- Start date
Lets see, it's based off of experiences that people in the United States have had and U.S. history. What else would it be based off of. The U.S. is not some copy of other countries. We are our own country.
My point of saying that we shouldn't copy other countries laws is that which one would you like to copy, there are so many. Some have far looser laws than the U.S., like canada. Others have very restrictive laws, like Iraq. If people think we should do something simply because another country does, they should remember that lots of countries have laws that are even more restrictive than ours, should we concider immitating them, simply because they are another country and have different laws than we do? No, we shouldn't, we have to make and change laws because we want to, not to copy others.
My point of saying that we shouldn't copy other countries laws is that which one would you like to copy, there are so many. Some have far looser laws than the U.S., like canada. Others have very restrictive laws, like Iraq. If people think we should do something simply because another country does, they should remember that lots of countries have laws that are even more restrictive than ours, should we concider immitating them, simply because they are another country and have different laws than we do? No, we shouldn't, we have to make and change laws because we want to, not to copy others.
I think it's fair to subject all countries to the same objective scrutiny across the board otherwise you can look like hypocrits. Guantanamo Bay springs to mind. If you are objective, it allows even-handed criticism of all countries' policies.
Well you would be wrong, unless you count UK history as US history.
Yeah - much of Africa and India is rampantly anti-homosexual because the British moved in and criminalised it! What a proud history.
kkozoriz1
Fleet Captain
Let's see then. Perhaps the US should stop encouraging countries to be more democratic. After all, they should do something because they want to, not because someone is pointing out that their system is unfair.
The US should also stop opposing other countries use of torture (of course, the US still believes that it's ok for them to torture).
Add to the list, supporting women's rights, environmental standards, religious freedom, the list goes on.
Once the US stop asking other countries to change their ways, often at gunpoint, I'll stop calling the US on their hypocrisy. Deal?
Ahem.
Remember when this thread was about Star Trek?
Keep the discussion Trek-related, please.
Remember when this thread was about Star Trek?
Keep the discussion Trek-related, please.
Well..
Star Trek kind of put it out there that in its universe, there is no bigotry against same sex relationships in the future.
Or at least that human beings are not bigoted.
So someone interested in that claim would expect to watch and see if they would actually place an openly gay member in the cast or as a guest appearance.
TOS sure as hell wasn't going to do something like that.
Trek's heart is definitely in the right place, but in practice it's something of a failure-there's probably too many censors that are against it, and the fear of too much shock value to certain viewers.
So all Trek can do is hint at it, and even then most of the time it's with female to female sexuality which is less threatening, even a little erotic to some viewers.
Like the TNG episode where a member of a genderless race discovers that she is a "she", which is a taboo amongst her people..
That episode was supposed to be an analogy (back then) to how our society reacts to same sex relationships..
Star Trek kind of put it out there that in its universe, there is no bigotry against same sex relationships in the future.
Or at least that human beings are not bigoted.
So someone interested in that claim would expect to watch and see if they would actually place an openly gay member in the cast or as a guest appearance.
TOS sure as hell wasn't going to do something like that.
Trek's heart is definitely in the right place, but in practice it's something of a failure-there's probably too many censors that are against it, and the fear of too much shock value to certain viewers.
So all Trek can do is hint at it, and even then most of the time it's with female to female sexuality which is less threatening, even a little erotic to some viewers.
Like the TNG episode where a member of a genderless race discovers that she is a "she", which is a taboo amongst her people..
That episode was supposed to be an analogy (back then) to how our society reacts to same sex relationships..
I don't understand why female sexuality is more accepted than male sexuality. I never understood hot the world got that view point, or why anyone has that belief today.
It's almost like female sexuality is more like something to play with.
Men might even find it a turn on.
You can see it in the DS9 mirror universe episodes.
Lot's of female /lesbian sexuality in them. Kira acted very seductively towards women, and Ezri sort stated she wasn't into men, thought not directly.
Even then in TNG, it was handled somewhat awkwardly.
The Trill episode were Crusher met the the new host for her boyfriend was a woman, and she slinked back when she saw her..
When the Trill used Riker as a host, Crusher still went as far as to sleep with him as long as the host was there.
Crusher obviously couldn't handle it when she saw the new host was a woman. She seemed eager to meet the new host before that.
Men might even find it a turn on.
You can see it in the DS9 mirror universe episodes.
Lot's of female /lesbian sexuality in them. Kira acted very seductively towards women, and Ezri sort stated she wasn't into men, thought not directly.
Even then in TNG, it was handled somewhat awkwardly.
The Trill episode were Crusher met the the new host for her boyfriend was a woman, and she slinked back when she saw her..
When the Trill used Riker as a host, Crusher still went as far as to sleep with him as long as the host was there.
Crusher obviously couldn't handle it when she saw the new host was a woman. She seemed eager to meet the new host before that.
Yet society doesn't seem to care if Women are threatened by girl/girl relationships. Or if they want to see men/men relationships.
It's not about being threatened, men get to see not one girl having sex, but two. And without the intrusion of having to look at a guy who isn't them.
It's a win, win, win situation.
I know, like big deal-
.... isn't that cute?-Crusher likes her Trills to be male and manly.
Of course the people of Trek have to have some preference here or there...
But, still, that why sometimes Trek puts its foot in its mouth, when it has all the crew members say they are way beyond being bigoted, but the earlier episodes weren't going to take that risk with something like a serious same gender relationship.
Why couldn't Crusher had just come out and said, " Hey, sorry, I'm only attracted to men?"
......"Nice lips though"...
Maybe she was just trying not to hurt Kareel's feelings.
