I see you were threatened with a ban because you’ve been warned before not to reiterate your opinions about something you see in Trek that you don’t like.
To be constructive for the sake of the moderator team here. I’m new to these forums and your position isn’t a retread to me. I want to see opinions from those fans with whom I agree AND disagree. It’s the only way to hash out anything meaningful.
Having milquetoast conversations with everyone who agrees with you doesn’t lead to anything new or exciting.
You're not new to these forums, either the BBS itself (you've been here four years) or the Discovery Forum, because you immediately tagged in to take up
Kpnuts' cause the moment he was gone, while spouting the same hateful "PC, SJW, virtue signaling, pushing an agenda, tokenism" rhetoric ad nauseam and also claiming to be gay (even if it's true) as if that's some sort of shield from accusations of bigotry. You were clearly waiting in the wings to back him up by spouting the exact same nonsense.
Kpnuts wasn't reply banned from the thread for expressing an unpopular opinion. He was reply banned because that's literally
the only opinion he ever expresses in threads like this, and he does it so relentlessly that it drives out all other conversation, derails the thread, and discourages LGBTQ people from posting especially but also others who do actually want to talk about the characters and the importance of representation, which is clearly his intent. Every time a person of color or an LGBTQ person or a woman is cast he says it is ramming an agenda down "our" (he appoints himself as the norm) collective throats. Every time a woman achieves something onscreen over a man or says something disparaging to a man it is not just a hit against that particular character but against all men in his mind, because he is driven by pathetic defensiveness and fear.
As a moderator, I loathe when these threads come up now, which is really sad. Not because it bothers me to hear about the casting of LGBTQ or POC or female characters, which is great, but because it means having to deal with more pathetic people who think a person's very existence or identity being represented onscreen after so many decades of under-representation and scorn is somehow political or a sinister agenda being shoved down people's throats. I don't want to have to give out warnings or reply bans, it gives me a knot in the pit of my stomach. But then when I hear trans posters who I consider friends and who have never said a harsh thing to anyone talk about how they're going to have to take a break from the board while Discovery Season 3 is coming up because they can't handle all the bigotry in the forum it makes me feel guilty because no one should have to feel unwelcome here just for being who they are.
I don't understand why you have to be so selfish and try to actively ruin things for other people. You are under no obligation to watch the show if it troubles you. If LGBTQ or POC or women characters bother you so much, feel free to see yourself to the door. You aren't making conversation less milquetoast because you aren't expressing anything original, courageous, constructive or intelligent, despite how you pat yourselves on the back for it. It's the same sad refrain of small people with small ideas trying to hold other people back since time immemorial, and will be looked upon just as harshly by future generations.
There is plenty to disagree about on Discovery without questioning someone's right to exist and be represented, so quit trying to pattern yourself the defender of open-mindedness and free expression, because you're the exact opposite of that.
ETA: Upon review, even though you have been registered since 2016 (while posting nothing before now), the fact that you only started posting in this specific thread immediately after
Kpnuts' ban, and used the exact same rhetoric and tactics as he did, leads me to believe that you are either a long term dual left in waiting for later use, using a dynamic IP, or that you are someone coordinating with
Kpnuts. Either way, I'm giving you a
reply ban from the thread as well.
ETA 2:
my point is that this will be tokenism. I’m a gay man and I felt Culber and and what’s-his-name were also token. Characters that felt like they were there to make a statement first. Burnham felt that way to me also, to a lesser degree. All of these “first for Trek” things that aren’t really and usually weren’t well researched when they took their cultural brownie points and ran with it to the press for the PR.
And now someone’s going to come here and try to pass the notion that this isn’t tokenism. That it isn’t to placate .02% of the population to grab a viewer who isn’t there and won’t spend money keeping Trek alive for the next 50 years.
Because that’s not good storytelling and needing to see yourself “represented” in your entertainment is narcissism in the extreme. If that’s what you’re asking when you’re watching something then you really should seek a counselor or a psychologist to speak to.
So, to clarify, it's not just the trans and non-binary characters being cast who we haven't even seen yet so have no basis on which to judge the quality of their writing or characterization that bother you, it's just casting of any minorities or LGBTQ people in general you object to, because Burnham and Stamets got very full character arcs as main characters and weren't tacked on by any means.
How is this anything other than pure bigotry when you single out almost everyone who isn't a straight white cis male for scorn, regardless of whether they've even appeared yet or whether they were given fully fleshed out roles or just bit parts?
Then you accuse people who want to see representation onscreen of narcissism and needing psychological help.
Warning for trolling.
Comments to PM for everyone else.
