Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!
Fair enough, I guess. Representation matters little to me personally as well. But I can recognize that that’s because the cis male, white, hetero perspective has historically been overrepresented, to a point where I simply never could have longed to see myself represented in media, simply because cis white hetero characters written by cis white hetero writers are everywhere and media used to be presented almost exclusively through that narrow lens. You say you’re not identifying with characters in media by way of their ethnicity, sexuality or gender, but rather with who they are as characters. And yeah, I totally get that, I really do. But rarely are people discriminated against because of their character traits or how they act. Certainly not on a systemic level. So I think we’re comparing apples to oranges here.
So even though *I* certainly don't feel like it matters to me, I absolutely see that it matters to so many other people and their experiences. And as a social being I just empathize with that. Their wellbeing matters to me, for its own sake, but also because I share a world with them and their wellbeing is always going to influence my wellbeing.
That's easy enough for you because Star Trek was created for a English Speaking audience primarily in the US.
If you were in any Asian Country, you'd primarily see Asian Characters of their respective nationality as the primary perspective.
Any "Foreigners" would primarily be 'Guest Characters' or 'Background Characters'.
e.g. Samurai Sentai Shinkengers as the 33rd Super Sentai Series
It has a Primarily Japanese Cast of Super Heroes, with a guest Foreign Character of that week.
And Guest "Foreign Characters" are INCREDIBLY rare in Super Sentai. You don't get more than a handful throughout multiple decades.
Same with characters of their respective ethnicity/nationality in their country with media from their country.
One of the best parts of TOS was exploring the various Nationalities of Earth, by having characters represented from them.
But given the 200+ nations on Earth, there should be alot more represented then what we've seen so far.
So many Nationalities/Ethnicities that aren't even represented or misrepresented.
e.g. having Garret Wang play Harry Kim, a Chinese-American actor portraying a Korean Character.
e.g. having Linda Park play Hoshi Sato, a Korean-American actress portraying a Japanese Character.
This is not to even mention some of the more complicated multiple ethnicities and multi-cultural backgrounds that people have IRL that can be delved into, but they chose not to.
e.g. Isa Briones who played Soji in ST:PIC, she's part Filipino, part Sweedish/Irish.
None of that ethnic/national background was ever mentioned or brought up or included into her character. Even if it was part of her "Background" for her human persona/identity that she had to live falsely under while not knowing who she really was.
Despite it being "Easy Pickings" to show representation of her ethnic heritage on both sides.
Especially hybrid multi-ethnic backgrounds starting to become the norm in the future.
Chloe Bennet, famous for portraying Skye/Daisy Johnson/Quake in "Marvel's Agents of SHIELD" has faced racism in Hollywood.
Last week British actor Ed Skrein, who is white, made news for quitting a project where he was cast as an Asian-American character in the reboot of the comic film Hellboy. Skrein's decision is the latest addition to an ongoing conversation about "whitewashing." Audiences as well as performers have started to challenge the casting of white performers as non-white ethnic characters.
Skrein's decision to step back from the role in Hellboy prompted Chinese-American actress Chloe Bennet, who stars in Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. TV series to speak out. That's because Chloe Bennet was born Chloe Wang. She says she changed her name because it was the only way she could improve her job prospects in Hollywood. But when Bennet praised Ed Skrein on social media for his decision to step away from his role in Hellboy, somebody on Instagram challenged her on the decision to change her name. As part of her response Bennet wrote:
"Changing my name doesn't change the fact that my blood is half Chinese, that I lived in China, speak Mandarin or that I was culturally raised both American and Chinese. It means I had to pay my rent, and Hollywood is racist and wouldn't cast me with a last name that made them uncomfortable. I'm doing everything I can with the platform I have to make sure no one has to change their name again just to get work."
Bennet spoke with NPR's Michel Martin about her decision to change her name, her experience as an Asian American actress in Hollywood and her organization Represent. Us. Now., created for Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders that aims to boost and organize the Asian-American community in politics and in the media.
Generally speaking, the lack of LGBTQ representation was pathetic and inexcusable. It wasn't the times or the studios or the networks (which wasn't even a concern for TNG and DS9 as syndicated shows with no network to worry about), as the OP correctly points out lots of shows included gay characters way before TNG even started. It was simply the franchise deciding they weren't going to do it.
There was also the long standing rumor that the studio nixed the Garak/Bashir flirting scenes but as BillJ points out in post #10 Ira Steven Behr said they never asked if Garak could be gay, so it was the writers stopping themselves because they assumed it wouldn't be allowed? Why not ask? Why not just do it without asking? Why self censor because of an assumption without ever ever giving people the chance to say yes or at least not say no?
I respect that and understand your reasoning, but would argue that had Beverly reacted differently, showing the ability to still feel attraction to Odan, even if now in a body of the opposite sex, it would have made for an infinitely more powerful moment. Crusher — a heterosexual character on an early 90s show — saying she can’t engage with someone because they look female now is simply the least imaginative, most expected and safest way they could have played that out. It challenges exactly zero expectations and norms and portrays her exactly the way a heteronormative audience would predict she reacts in that situation
I agree with everyone who’s saying that romantic attraction is certainly tied to sexual attraction and that I would never hold it against Crusher that she had to end it there with Odan. But still I would have found it more interesting and powerful if they had played against that and made what she had with Odan transcend looks and appearances.
Had Beverly simply stated that she's not attracted to women and she sees no way this relationship could work that would have been honest and perfectly fine with me but she (or the writers really) danced around the subject and had her talk about "change" and if I remember correctly she also pretended it wasn't a personal problem but humanity not being used to this and that was just groanworthy, it almost felt like they had a "Don't say gay" sign in the writers room.
So many Nationalities/Ethnicities that aren't even represented or misrepresented.
e.g. having Garret Wang play Harry Kim, a Chinese-American actor portraying a Korean Character.
e.g. having Linda Park play Hoshi Sato, a Korean-American actress portraying a Japanese Character.
But apparently all us Asians are so interchange-able to Caucasian Execs that we can just be thrown in willy nilly.
While you make some good points I'm not sure this is one of them because how is this different from casting british Patrick Stewart as french Picard or Irish-canadian James Doohan as Scottish Scotty? Or an austrian actor and british actress as Worf's ukranian adoptive parents?
Asians and europeans are pretty interchangeable when it comes to playing different nationalities, that's not a big concern in my opinion primarily because ethnicity and nationality are not the same thing.
Had Beverly simply stated that she's not attracted to women and she seen no way this relationship could work that would have been honest and perfectly fine with me but she (or the writers really) danced around the subject and had her talk about "change" and if I remember correctly she also pretended it wasn't a personal problem but humanity not being used to this and that was just groanworthy, it almost felt like they had a "Don't say gay" sign in the writers room.
Well, you assumed wrong. I’m a German-speaking viewer living in Germany, with English as the second language. Used to be the only time I saw Germans on television or in movies was as Oktoberfest-loving Bavarians or fucking nazis.
I feel like I either must have worded the post you quoted confusingly or you misunderstood me, because I barely disagree with anything you’re saying.
Had Beverly simply stated that she's not attracted to women and she seen no way this relationship could work that would have been honest and perfectly fine with me but she (or the writers really) danced around the subject and had her talk about "change" and if I remember correctly she also pretended it wasn't a personal problem but humanity not being used to this and that was just groanworthy, it almost felt like they had a "Don't say gay" sign in the writers room
Since a picture is worth a thousand words...
This is Beverly a moment before meeting the third host, a mixture of excitement and happiness. At this moment you do not seem to be affected by the terrible human fallacy of not being able to manage change
This is her after finding out that she is a woman. She is not surprised (understandable), sad (very understandable) or disappointed (very very understandable). This is an expression of sheer terror. This is an expression of "Oh my god Picard is now a borg" level panic.
Yes, a very "enlightened humanity" reaction. I don't know if it was the actress, the director or the script, but this is a textbook homophobic reaction.
This is an expression of sheer terror. This is an expression of "Oh my god Picard is now a borg" level panic.
Yes, a very "enlightened humanity" reaction. I don't know if it was the actress, the director or the script, but this is a textbook homophobic reaction.
Put so succinctly, but yes. And it’s one frame from a whole sequence of frames that makes up a moving image. Easy to choose the least flattering, or most should one wish.
I don’t think it looks like sheer terror and the performance as a whole is more nuanced than that.
Here’s the whole ending, for those (like me) who are curious to watch it again:
And yes, it’s a pretty weird choice to make her talk about it as a “human failing” instead of just owning up to her personally not being able to get past the change. It would have been such a good opportunity to at least throw a tiny bone to the LGBTQ+ audience and acknowledge that of course there actually exist human beings that could absolutely live with this kind of change, even if she couldn’t.
It’s pretty heartbreaking to see Beverly coldly dismiss Odan saying they still love her. I get that it must be super weird to suddenly see you lover look totally different, but come on, it’s still the same person in there! The one you shared experiences with, talked to, laughed with, trusted. I think this would certainly play much differently if this wasn't just some romance-of-the-week, but some relationship that had went on for much longer. Many romantic relationships have a heavy focus on sex and physicality at the beginning. So I suppose the writers’ thinking might have been that their relationship did not go deep enough yet.
It’s also disingenuous to have her go on about “I can’t keep up. How long will you have this host?” when the idea of the Trill wasn’t that they changed bodies at every chance they got. Maybe my understanding of them is influenced by what we later learn about them during Deep Space Nine, but I didn't feel that’s how they presented it in the episode.
I’m not sure I would go that far. It’s not homophobic to find someone from the opposite sex not sexually attractive. They just spent the whole episode establishing how much Beverly loves Odan. And so in this moment she’s supposed to suddenly realized that she won’t be able to continue this love. And I’d argue the horror in Beverly’s face is just meant to convey that. I’m sure it’s not meant to show how Beverly somehow thinks women can’t find women sexually attractive on a general basis, which certainly would be a homophobic stance. At least that’s my read of that particular scene.
And since we’re focussing on acting choices, I think if you look closely you will see that Beverly isn't twitching even slightly or pulling away her arm in disgust when Odan kisses it. Her face looks more like it’s trying to say: “Huh, that feels weird, but not unpleasant. I wish I could bring myself to continue this.” That last shot makes her look like there’s definitely some longing inside of her.
Now I want to read the fanfic follow-up where Beverly decides to give this a try after all.
Yes, a very "enlightened humanity" reaction. I don't know if it was the actress, the director or the script, but this is a textbook homophobic reaction.
"Not my thing" is not homophobia, any more than a typical gay person hates or fears straight people.
It would have been majorly ballsy for them to have Beverly decide she didn't care what gender Odan 3.0 was. But maybe a bit problematic, back in 1989.
By having her say what she said, they were trying to be circumspect. Honestly wondering, how would the gay community at the time have reacted if Bev had just out and said what she meant?
The suits threw "Blood and Fire" in the bin and David Gerrold left then there was no one there to champion stories about gays at the time. The story was a bit over the top and needed a rewrite but once it was a bit less soap opera they could have at least had the first gay couple in Trek in 1987 and then someone would have come along and built on it. I don't blame the TNG writers because they were a young crew trying to get 26 episodes on the air each year, a lot of them inexperienced, and from stories from Ira and Ron stepping outside the status quo was such an uphill battle. Maybe DS9 should have tried with one if it's secondary characters like Nog but I think definitely in Enterprise they should have tried. People say Reed but I remember thinking Mayweather.
Anyway, shout out to the Starfleet Academy comics and books for introducing the first Trek gay characters in 1998: Yoshi Mishima, Jayme Miranda and Moll Enor. Yoshi was a badass.
I understand that they were running out of time in the episode, but from the clip I posted upthread it also struck me how they gloss over the fact that Beverly was the one who had to do the operation on the new host. If this was a realistic situation that would probably have been really hard emotionally. I know this could never have been on the minds of the authors at the time, but it’s basically like she’s performing sexual reassignment surgery on her own lover. In the episode they just cut away and show her again hours after the surgery, but if this were real this must have been really difficult.
Phobia in Greek literally means "fear" and what Bevervely feels is fear. Homophobia isn't just expressed by people with torches and pitchforks screaming "LET'S BURN THE F@@@@ING FA**GOTS!!!" It is on a spectrum and reducing it to only its most obvious manifestations does a disservice to all the LBGTQI+ people who suffer countless microaggressions every day. Being a gatekeeper on what is true "homophobia" I think is not the best thing to do.
Yes, but she didn't want to say it openly so as not to make herself look like a bigot and closed-minded and therefore she placed the responsibility on all of humanity.
Phobia in Greek literally means "fear" and what Bevervely feels is fear. Homophobia isn't just expressed by people with torches and pitchforks screaming "LET'S BURN THE F@@@@ING FA**GOTS!!!" It is on a spectrum and reducing it to only its most obvious manifestations does a disservice to all the LBGTQI+ people who suffer countless microaggressions every day. Being a gatekeeper on what is true "homophobia" I think is not the best thing to do.
I would generally say "homophobia" is a poor word, often overused and incorrectly used.
In this case... it might actually be more accurate, but I think it also loses alot of the negative connotation. Being afraid of something isn't bigoted or shameful in anyway.
Crusher had just "lost" someone she loved... kind of twice... and now the person she loved was an incompatible lover to her. You know what? That's scary. She has every right to be scared in that situation. Dare I say that was a... human reaction.
As this discussion goes on, it becomes more and more necessary to remind that... it's actually ok not to be gay. That shouldn't be a shocking thing.
People are really hung up on the whole "it's human" line... but... it's alittle bit of a "Jesus Goddamned Christ" moment. That's how actual people talk. They generalize. She didn't, literally mean "ALL OF HUMANITY, THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY NO WEIRD GAY PEOPLE, ONLY CIS HETERONORMATIVE PEOPLE", she generalized "humans", because that's her experience and a majority of people are similar to her.
It would have been super akward dialouge to have her saying something like, "I personally am not attracted to women, although you might find it of interest that slightly less than 10% of the human population is attracted to the same sex, it's unfortunate that in this situation I do not fall in that percentage of people"...
Yes, but she didn't want to say it openly so as not to make herself look like a bigot and closed-minded and therefore she placed the responsibility on all of humanity.
