Gay Trek.

[Tolver]

http://www.webpan.com/dsinclair/trek.html

 

===

 

"In the fifth season [of Star Trek: The Next Generation] viewers will see more of shipboard life [including] gay crew members in day-to-day circumstances."

Gene Roddenberry, to The Advocate, 1991

 

 

"My attitude toward homosexuality has changed. I came to the conclusion that I was wrong. I was never someone who hunted down "fags" as we used to call them on the street. I would, sometimes, say something anti-homosexual off the top of my head because it was thought, in those days, to be funny. I never really deeply believed those comments, but I gave the impression of being thoughtless in these areas. I have, over many years, changed my attitude about gay men and women."

 

Gene Roddenberry, to The Humanist, 1991 (full interview)

 

"I'm sorry I never had a homosexual relationship, because I know there must be many joys and pleasures and degrees of closeness in those relationships."

 

Gene Roddenberry, in Gene Roddenberry; The Last Conversation (by Yvonne Fern, 1994)

 

"It is entirely fitting that gays and lesbians 'will appear unobtrusively aboard the Enterprise - neither objects of pity nor melodramatic attention.'"

 

Leonard Nimoy, letter to the Los Angeles Times, November 6, 1991

 

"It would be very appropriate if the upcoming Next Generation movies made it their business to have gay characters."

 

Patrick Stewart, to The Advocate, August 22, 1995

 

"I've approached [berman] many, many times over the years about getting a gay character on the show--one whom we could really love, not just a guest star. Y'know, we had blacks, Asians, we even had a handicapped character-- and so I thought, this is now beginning to look a bit absurd. And he said, 'In due time.' And so, I'm suspecting that on Enterprise they will do something to this effect. I couldn't get it done on mine. And I am sorry for that."

 

Kate Mulgrew, to Out in America, August 2002

 

"I was surprised at the question, because I had just assumed that over the course of the years that it had been addressed. I was surprised it was even an issue. (..) I haven't heard anything coming down the pipeline, but I would be in favor of it. I would hope it would be handled in a great way. It would be wonderful, in my opinion, if it was not such a huge issue, but was just there."

 

Scott Bakula, to Metrosource, January 2002

 

===

 

The rest of the article is very in-depth, and worth a read. As a gay man I find myself having mixed emotions on this issue. On the one hand I love Star Trek and feel as though it advanced society towards more aceptance of minorities, but find myself disapointed in that the series did not go far enough.

 

Gays are an invisable minority that is hard to represent, but then Star Trek had no trouble shedding light on dim subjects that deserved to be enlightend.

 

In this one aspect do I feel that Star Trek failed us all with their lack of a gay character.

 

Tolver.

 

[StevenofNine]

OK, so Star Trek addresses oppression, racism, war, distribution of wealth, economics, ecology, environmentalism, love triangles, deception, lies, familial ties, sexism, multiculturalism, bias of any kind you'd like to name, and you're complaining because they don't have enough to say on homosexuality?

 

Who cares? It's a sci-fi show.

 

Hell, I don't remember any homosexuality on Doctor Who, in 27 some years of the show, so we shouldn't watch?

[piepie]

It's a Sci-Fi show, yeah, but it's the one that's major focus is humanitarianism and issues regarding the morality and ethics of a race trying to better itself. It's essentially Saved by the Bell or Doctor Quinn in space.

I don't think homosexuality should be an issue in their universe. Racism (between humans that is) is an utter non-issue, even though it still affects us today, but they don't make episodes where racism between humans is the main issue. They do, however, make episodes about xenophobia on alien races which reflects the racism issues of today, so I suppose episodes featuring interspecies relationships not being tolerated is an abstraction of homophobia.

You don't see a whole lot of onscreen straight relationships in Star Trek anyway. I can recall 6, and most of the time you only see their professional sides. There's probably room for a gay relationship, and there should be as long as it's treated respectfully, but I think the interspecies relationships is a reasonable substitute for the moment and focus more on the issue of xenophobia, which is very prevalent today.

 

 

 

Having said all that, the Trek universe can be seen as quite xenophobic - many of the alien races involved tend to be monocultural and shown in a rigid development - one attitude and ethics (on the whole), one religion, even one style of clothing, where as Earth appears to still have a range of these.

[piepie]

There has been some homosexual moments, but, typically they had to be titilating lesbian kisses. That's no bad thing, but it's shallow and by no way addresses the issue.

[StevenofNine]

Yes, alien cultures tend to be homogenous, dress the same, have strictures, etc., that we don't have... because they're used as artistic tools to demonstrate our failings, not because they're portrayed through Xenophobia.

 

 

[piepie]

I don't understand. Are you saying a monocultural society is preferable to a multicultural one?

[Pella]

One of the reasons that i loved DS9 was that they had the scifi equivalent of a transsexual character: Dax

[StevenofNine]

I don't understand. Are you saying a monocultural society is preferable to a multicultural one?

 

No, I'm saying that cultures are WRITTEN in the shows as literary devices. If you portray a monocultural society, and demonstrate it's failings, it's a useful way to comment on the failings of our own.

 

In the 60s you couldn't get away with writing out-and-out stories about how racism was bad. You'd get all the racist morons up in arms. But you could write a story about how half-black half-white aliens fought over which side should be white and how it was better. You could slip an argument in that people thought was absurd, and accepted it, and that planeted a seed that combatted their own bias.

 

Writing and audiences are somewhat more sophisticated, now, but the in extremis argument is still a powerful tool. Monocultural societies are a good example of this.

[piepie]

Ah I see what you mean, each race being a projection of an aspect of humanity along with it's corruption, yeah?

I'm sort of ambivalent, I forget why parts of Star Trek aren't all that develop in one respect, because they're inface making a point at another leve, so I end up judging it superficially, do'h.

That could be a problem when it comes to writing up a more well rounded race of aliens. It would make the Trek universe more plausible, but it could lose the message.

[karimw786]

There was that one episode where Riker falls for a member of a non-gendered species, so it's not as if the issue has never come up.

 

Also, the cogenitor episode with Trip...

[Guest c4evap]

As a gay man I find myself having mixed emotions on this issue. On the one hand I love Star Trek and feel as though it advanced society towards more aceptance of minorities, but find myself disapointed in that the series did not go far enough.

 

Gays are an invisable minority that is hard to represent, but then Star Trek had no trouble shedding light on dim subjects that deserved to be enlightend.

 

In this one aspect do I feel that Star Trek failed us all with their lack of a gay character.

 

Tolver.

 

OK. I agree with you that it is a shame Star Trek did not have a gay character...but to say gays are an invisible minority is crazy. Minority yes, invisible no. Just turn on the TV. Heck, that's what the christan right is screaming about...that there's too many. Gay rights are in the forefront of the news...gay marriage...etc. Invisible...no. Try being a transsexual. Talk about invisible. We still don't have the rights gays (and others) have.

 

c4 B)

[Ulysses]

erm before i say this please dont take this the wrong way.

 

I for one would be against a gay character in the series, mainly due to the fact that its not just adults that watch the shows but also childern.

[Vektram]

erm before i say this please dont take this the wrong way.

 

I for one would be against a gay character in the series, mainly due to the fact that its not just adults that watch the shows but also childern.

 

Even more reason why there should be some, it should'nt focus on it, maybe reprimand a couple for being to public with thier relationship (like with Paris and B'Ellanna). What's wrong with educating children about how everyone should have equal rights no matter what race, gender or sexual preference? A lot of the people at my school think that being gay is wrong but they usually grow out of that by 9th year. This would not be the case (at least not as blatently) if they'd been watching TV shows that promoted equality when they were younger.

 

Young minds are impressionable, why do you think everyone is in a huff about vido game violence? If kids watching Trek saw a straight couple get told off for flouting thier relationship, then a gay couple it would help them understand that it's ok to be gay and we'd all be happier.

 

:D

[elderbear]

erm before i say this please dont take this the wrong way.

 

I for one would be against a gay character in the series, mainly due to the fact that its not just adults that watch the shows but also childern.

 

Thus, the gay characters should act as appropriately as the breeder characters. It would be a great way to teach kids that in an advanced and enlightened future, gender will be the least important component of love. So, yes, the fact that children would watch the show would make it very important to have a gay couple onboard.

[Ulysses]

lmao maybe I am just old fashioned in my views or having alot to do with the miltary lmao...anyway i better not say anymore as my views my upset some people...each to there own lol

[Soulreaper]

I liked what the cast/crew stated in those letters / interviews.

 

How strange that it hasn't really been adressed yet?? or maybe I've missed an episode where they do?

 

I concur with Elderbear, set love free!

 

 

[GeneralLee]

Perhaps in the "Trek Future," homosexuality does not exist anymore, for earthlings.

[piepie]

Homosexuality happens throughout nature, not just humans. I can't understand why it wouldn't exist then, they wouldn't "cure" something like that unless it proved counter constructive to people

[BorisP]

 

You know. Homosexuality is associated with ill health. Many homosexuals become lopsided. This causes mental and health problems that limit their abilities compared to straight people. Many homosexual people have a crippled arm, leg and are blind in one eye. That is where the legend of the cyclops originated. Gays only have one working eye so Homer called them Cyclops in his novel.

 

Why would Star Trek, which is about the future, about hope, about better lives for all of us, depict a lifestlye that can lead to a person becoming mentally and physically crippled?

 

Should Star Treak have a heroin junkie character? A crank snorting character? They are real people after all right? We want representatives of all aspects of human life in our positive Star Trek series. Right? Those are good role models for our young children. Correct?

 

By the way. Thanks for starting the topic. I got hassled by a crowd about this topic, 2 or 3 threads about this topic were closed and the big giant "don't feed the trolls" post was pointed at me in relation to this topic.

 

Now that you have opened this thread, and elderbear is participating in it with no threats, no accusations of "troll" and no thread closing, it must be OK for all board members to enter the thread and give their opinions.

 

Right? Free and open to all board members to voice their opinions.

[vyper]

Erm... wtf mate? Anyway...

 

Trek has dealt with it in a way - I do believe Jadzia Dax was once attracted to a wife from a past life in one ds9 episode. TNG dealt with it with Crusher falling in love with a Trill only to have a female host take over then the male one died.

 

It's there, it's just not blatent.

 

Besides which, it's still mainstream television and people generally think of the entire world as being like them - and the majority of the viewers are straight, ergo.... what we have in trek.