Everybody knows this guy was Star Trek’s first gay character.
I don't think Trelane was gay OR straight, I don't think he really had a mature conception of sexuality...YET: after all, he was only a child.
Lack of LGBT characters and the "magic bullet"
- Thread starter V
- Start date
I don't think Trelane was gay OR straight, I don't think he really had a mature conception of sexuality...YET: after all, he was only a child.
Are you seriously arguing that pointing out the racism of others is itself racist? That any discussion of race at all is racist? That's just... I don't even...
Sisko is right. There was institutional racism against black people in Las Vegas, 1962. It was perpetrated by white people, but Sisko never mentions that because what bothers him is the whitewashing of history in Vic's program. History that he is not only familiar with, but has actually lived through as Benny Russell.
I wonder -- if it was O'Brien who was pissed off because of a holosuite program set in, say, the year 1850 in Ireland, which gave no mention of the Irish Potato Famine and made out like everything in Ireland in 1850 was hunky-dory, would you be so up in arms about him being "racist" for identifying with the 19th-century Irish? Would you claim he was being racist against the English, because of their historically piss-poor response to the famine? (Even if O'Brien never mentioned the English?) Somehow I doubt it.
Don't try to invoke Roddenberry to me -- it doesn't impress me. If he'd still been alive, he'd have been royally pissed off at Deep Space Nine for featuring the Dominion War and Section 31, and probably would've declared it "of dubious canon" like he did STV and STVI.
Censors are not the problem, it's the audience. Shows that are pitched at a female audience have no problem with gay characters, male or female. The female audience isn't going to tune out because of that. They might actually like the show more.
A sophisticated audience, such as Mad Men's, isn't going to tune out because of a gay character. (Ironically, I stopped watching when they dropped Sal, the sole gay character, but that was more because he was the only character I found interesting in any regards.)
The real problem comes when you're aiming a show at a young male demographic. That's where the homophobia will hurt the ratings. Space opera and sci fi in general is more vulnerable to this phenomenon than a show about sleazy suburban housewives or young doctors in love, or some prestige production on HBO.
Notice though, that North American Indians in other trek episodes have used almost the exact same language, in fact even more graphic;
I noticed a lot heat (from other sites) directed at Sisko, but these other episodes say the same thing with no notice or discussion at all.
When you relate this to the LGBT issue, and showing it, this is an example of Trek approaching the subject and the strong reactions it causes.
Because of the reactions, there's possibly a chance Trek won't try to do it again, though this is just a guess.
I noticed a lot heat (from other sites) directed at Sisko, but these other episodes say the same thing with no notice or discussion at all.
When you relate this to the LGBT issue, and showing it, this is an example of Trek approaching the subject and the strong reactions it causes.
Because of the reactions, there's possibly a chance Trek won't try to do it again, though this is just a guess.
That's not a reason, it's an excuse. Did young males tune out of "Oz" because of Beecher & Keller? Did young males stop watching "Doctor Who" when they introduced Captain Jack? Maybe a few did, but not enough to be important.
Y'know, I bet that when "Hogan's Heroes" started broadcasting, the suits would've kept telling the producers "You can't make Kinch a black guy! You can just kiss the whole South goodbye! Your show is going to fail and fail hard!"
The current poll on trekmovie.com is whether there should be a gay character in upcoming Star Trek. Here are the results:
45% + 14% + 42% = 101%
Hmm... there are certain flaws in this poll...
Gay character in next Star Trek movie or TV series?
- Yes (45%)
- maybe/unsure (14%)
- No (42%)
Total Votes: 2,681
45% + 14% + 42% = 101%
Hmm... there are certain flaws in this poll...
Not at all. It's just that the percents are rounded upwards. Anyways, 42% is kinda scary. Young male homophobes is right.
So then I can be bigoted against Muslims because they invaded my ancestral village in southern Portugal in the eighth century?
Please, Sisko "position" on this matter is side by side with Stile's hatred of the Romulans in Balance of Terror, and at least Stine was channeling something from only one century back, not Sisko's four and a half centuries.
When exactly in Sisko's mind did caucasians become them.
Considering Sisko had a New Orleans background, an interest in history and a collection of African art, I didn't see this as particularly out of character to reject what he saw as a gross perversion of history. Having said that, I think he was overblowing it a bit-- and realized it later on.
Ah, but here's a better question: "If there is a gay character in the next Star Trek movie or TV series, will you deliberately avoid watching it?"Anyways, 42% is kinda scary. Young male homophobes is right.
Well, Doctor Who is a very different type of show, and the UK, from what I gather, is a lot more liberal than USA.
Has anyone seen red letter media's (awesome) review of the 2009 Star Trek film:
http://www.redlettermedia.com/star_trek_09.html
He talks about how they made every male character obviously heterosexual, by having him say something about a woman nearly as soon as he was introduced, and that Spock was partnered with Uhura so the mianstream audience wouldnt think he was gay. Obviously the 2009 movie was not what most people on here would call great trek, but it does raise that point that if you want somethig to be successful, you sometimes have to play to the ratings.
On the other hand, I personally believe that if we're ever going to have another decent Trek series, its going to have to really reinvent itself. If gay and bisexual characters were introduced it might make people think of Star Trek as relevant again; the initial gamble might actually result in more ratings. Although I supposed this would be no better than using no gay characters, since you would still be going for ratings.
Not at all. It's just that the percents are rounded upwards. Anyways, 42% is kinda scary. Young male homophobes is right.
Why? Based on how Star Trek has handled relationship drama of any type up to this point, I would be inclined to vote between 'No' and 'Undecided'. I would also be inclined to vote 'No' if it was simply a case of tokenism.
Just because someone votes 'No' doesn't make them a 'homophobe'. You guys are as bad as George Bush's 'if you're not for us... you against us' bullshit.
Not at all. It's just that the percents are rounded upwards. Anyways, 42% is kinda scary. Young male homophobes is right.
Why? Based on how Star Trek has handled relationship drama of any type up to this point, I would be inclined to vote between 'No' and 'Undecided'. I would also be inclined to vote 'No' if it was simply a case of tokenism.
Just because someone votes 'No' doesn't make them a 'homophobe'. You guys are as bad as George Bush's 'if you're not for us... you against us' bullshit.
um, the respondents are saying they DON'T WANT LGBT characters in Trek. What other way to read that is there?
If the question was "should there be a Jewish character in Star Trek?" and a large chunk of responders said no, would you be saying that's not necessarily anti-semitic?
The question didn't even ask HOW the LGBT character would be presented, so you can't use the " maybe they just didn't want it to be all about their orientation" excuse.
I'm all for nuance and complexity in the way issues are presented, but when someone asks another person "hey are you cool with gays in your school/favorite t.v. show/ club/church, whatever," and that person's response is no, I don't think there's much room for nuance there.
Lets just have a series full of people and if they have romantic encounters, have some of them be hetero and some of them be homo and don't even mention the fact this is going on, just say "Ensign Mann and Ensign Masculine are enjoying their date I see," "Yes, so are Yeoman Woman and Yeoman Chap". The novels have it bang on in my opinion, every so often a character's spouse will be mentioned, and they'll be same sex and 99/100 the story will just move on and not go ZOMG!!!1!!! HE'S GAY!!! LOOK WHAT WE DID!!!!!
Oh and about Reid, probably would have been the most acceptable choice for you Americans, "Oh, well he's British" Here's a radical idea...Archer is gay, hear me out, you have baddie of the week trying to tempt Archer with his hareem and Archer just laughs and says "You've got a lot to learn about Humans clearly" and the guy says "Why, because you have ideas of respecting women" to which Archer replies "That too, but I was referring to the fact you think we all have ideas about women." And all the starfleeters laugh with their captain at the baddie's faux pas and the baddie fumes and starts shooting people.
Simple!
Oh and about Reid, probably would have been the most acceptable choice for you Americans, "Oh, well he's British" Here's a radical idea...Archer is gay, hear me out, you have baddie of the week trying to tempt Archer with his hareem and Archer just laughs and says "You've got a lot to learn about Humans clearly" and the guy says "Why, because you have ideas of respecting women" to which Archer replies "That too, but I was referring to the fact you think we all have ideas about women." And all the starfleeters laugh with their captain at the baddie's faux pas and the baddie fumes and starts shooting people.
Simple!
http://trekmovie.com/2011/01/24/bra...characters-on-star-trek-not-forward-thinking/
Gay character in next Star Trek movie or TV series?
I would love to see the response to that kind of question. If Trek introduced a gay character it's not like they would be including graphic bedroom scenes with them (though I would think that if it was a lesbian couple introduced there would be an uproar that such a scene wasn't included IMO).
They so do. It's mentioned and the story continues, without any big thing being made about it.
I would have had Mayweather down as the gay officer, it might actually have made him an interesting character.
I like how in Doctor Who, by the 25th Century (where Captain Jack is from), humanity seems to be almost completely bisexual. Maybe Trek should head that wat too
Agree with you there. Voyager started to get stale and that continued into Enterprise. If there is ever to be a new series, it would need to take risks and chances with its characters and stories.
Even assuming there were no internal studio politics, I honestly believe RDM's explanation of why Next Gen has no LGBT characters: the writers were under so much pressure to "get it right" because "this is Star Trek" that they felt no script lived up to it.
So their response to avoid “not going far enough”, was to go nowhere at all? Gee. What a great way to uphold Star Trek philosophy.
There was a lot of pressure that if they made an LGBT plot, it would have to be "big". And I can understand Braga's point in the link above: what were they going to do, invent a character purely to be "the gay one?" Anymore than they made Captain Sisko as "the black captain"? Or La Forge was "the black guy" on TNG? That's silly. That’s not silly. Scotty was the “Scottish one”. Worf was the “the Klingon guy”. Tuvok was the “Vulcan”. How is that any different?
But by that point they were under a plot of pressure, and *ANY* LGBT plot would be treated as "wow, the first time Trek did a gay character!"....only to be criticized for not going far enough. People are going to complain no matter what you do or don’t do, or how enjoyable the end result is. Trekkies/Trekkers should know this as much as anyone.
From what I’ve read here it seems they tried too hard and as a result they failed. Pity. Ro Laren in particular could have been gay with no damage to anyone.
So their response to avoid “not going far enough”, was to go nowhere at all? Gee. What a great way to uphold Star Trek philosophy.
There was a lot of pressure that if they made an LGBT plot, it would have to be "big". And I can understand Braga's point in the link above: what were they going to do, invent a character purely to be "the gay one?" Anymore than they made Captain Sisko as "the black captain"? Or La Forge was "the black guy" on TNG? That's silly. That’s not silly. Scotty was the “Scottish one”. Worf was the “the Klingon guy”. Tuvok was the “Vulcan”. How is that any different?
But by that point they were under a plot of pressure, and *ANY* LGBT plot would be treated as "wow, the first time Trek did a gay character!"....only to be criticized for not going far enough. People are going to complain no matter what you do or don’t do, or how enjoyable the end result is. Trekkies/Trekkers should know this as much as anyone.
From what I’ve read here it seems they tried too hard and as a result they failed. Pity. Ro Laren in particular could have been gay with no damage to anyone.
refer back to my point about how there's no specific way to "present" a gay character. It seems like the argument is that either their orientation has to play a large enough role where it comes to define the character or it's merely "tokenism," but I don't see why that's the case.
Why is it different for a gay character than it is for an Asian/Black/Female, whatever character?
It all comes back to the capability of the writers'. Star Trek has always been absolutely cringe-worthy when dealing with sex, the sophistication has always been on the level of Animal House.
Even The Original Series had those 'roll-eye' moments when featuring Uhura from "Captain, I'm frightened" to the line from 'The Savage Curtain' about her being a "charming negress"
Berman and Braga were like teenage boys when dealing with sexuality. I could see it now... "Heh-heh, like that dude is gonna kiss that other dude. Heh-heh.".
And Star Trek 2009 did no better handling the romance between Spock and Uhura.
So find some capable writers then we'll talk.
Similar threads
