BitKeeper Posted May 21, 2005 Share Posted May 21, 2005 You think less of Romulans and Vulcans? I think the Vulcan species is highly respectable in Star Trek. well, i think less of romulans, and vulcans aare related to the romulans... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p4p4b34r Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 You think less of Romulans and Vulcans? I think the Vulcan species is highly respectable in Star Trek. well, i think less of romulans, and vulcans aare related to the romulans... i blame the romulans for everything bad that has ever and will ever happen.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 Accoriding to New Scientits. Gays may have been a genetic mistake. Scientits... that's a good one ^^. Mayhap you could quote us some of these New Scientist peer-reviewed papers to back up your claim? ^^ Actually, far from being a 'genetic mistake', it seems that studies involving rat populations show that rates of homosexual couplings rises as overpopulation increases... meaning it may simply be a natural mechanism to help curb overpopulation. 'New Scientits', instead of ruling it a mistake, see it as a population control mechanism that occurs in nature. That can never happen beacuse Straight people will always outnumber benders. Plus gay people are not naturally produtive so them killing straight people would be so stupid not even homer simpson would do it. People will kill people regardless of sexual preference... and killing people is stupid, period... regardless of prefenences in partner, favorite card game, or ice cream flavor. As far as the productivity issue goes... does that really matter? Our population is growing so fast as it is, we shouldn't really be bothered by things that limit that growth so simply and without killing, maiming, or neutering. Edit: An interesting quote from an ancient Greek writer: "All irrational animals merely copulate, but we rational ones are superior in this regard to all other animals. We discovered homosexual intercourse. Men under the sway of women are no better than dumb animals" Edit 2: Found the reference for the rat study... Kirsch & Rodman, 1982. Also, there are other studies that have observed same-gender mounting in primates (considered common, actually), cows, sheep, dolphins, birds, and even fish (only as far as courting in the case of fish... given the way they fertilize their eggs). It's a magazine i can't get a qoute of it unless i wantto spend ages typing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 What is it? 'Down with Gay Trash' magazine? A more risque version of the Enquirer? Just the magazine name and page number is enough ^^ Compared with the bulk of evidence for so many species doing it, there HAS to be some positive reason for it if only as one of many natural population control mechanisms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zerotop Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 First of all wow :) 11pages hehe Anyway i liked the quote "homosexuality doesn't exist in the future." Not for the obvious reason but in the future we wont be labeling people for this or that. Straight people or gay people (put in whatever) will be seen with same eyes and mind. Thats at least is a future i hope we will have. And as someone said having people that is not straight on movies and tv shows is a important step to that future. Im honest enough to say that im not 100% for gay rights but i do know that im wrong in having those emotions and feeling against homosexual people. But most important about portaying homosexual people is to show not everyone talks with the nuts clipped and walking like a girl. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BitKeeper Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 First of all wow :) 11pages hehe Anyway i liked the quote "homosexuality doesn't exist in the future." Not for the obvious reason but in the future we wont be labeling people for this or that. Straight people or gay people (put in whatever) will be seen with same eyes and mind. Thats at least is a future i hope we will have. And as someone said having people that is not straight on movies and tv shows is a important step to that future. Im honest enough to say that im not 100% for gay rights but i do know that im wrong in having those emotions and feeling against homosexual people. But most important about portaying homosexual people is to show not everyone talks with the nuts clipped and walking like a girl. :) yha thats because you can geneticly alter teh kids to bo normal :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 Accoriding to New Scientits. Gays may have been a genetic mistake. Scientits... that's a good one ^^. Mayhap you could quote us some of these New Scientist peer-reviewed papers to back up your claim? ^^ Actually, far from being a 'genetic mistake', it seems that studies involving rat populations show that rates of homosexual couplings rises as overpopulation increases... meaning it may simply be a natural mechanism to help curb overpopulation. 'New Scientits', instead of ruling it a mistake, see it as a population control mechanism that occurs in nature. That can never happen beacuse Straight people will always outnumber benders. Plus gay people are not naturally produtive so them killing straight people would be so stupid not even homer simpson would do it. People will kill people regardless of sexual preference... and killing people is stupid, period... regardless of prefenences in partner, favorite card game, or ice cream flavor. As far as the productivity issue goes... does that really matter? Our population is growing so fast as it is, we shouldn't really be bothered by things that limit that growth so simply and without killing, maiming, or neutering. Edit: An interesting quote from an ancient Greek writer: "All irrational animals merely copulate, but we rational ones are superior in this regard to all other animals. We discovered homosexual intercourse. Men under the sway of women are no better than dumb animals" Edit 2: Found the reference for the rat study... Kirsch & Rodman, 1982. Also, there are other studies that have observed same-gender mounting in primates (considered common, actually), cows, sheep, dolphins, birds, and even fish (only as far as courting in the case of fish... given the way they fertilize their eggs). It could just be about LOVE you know... ...sometimes, it's just that simple! c4 B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 Ahh... but LOVE is probably an evolved mechanism to promote reproduction... and a VERY nice one as well ... wouldn't have it any other way, either ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elderbear Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 I just finished watching TNG 5x17 - The Outcast One of the ONLY episodes of Star Trek to ever deal with issues of sexual identity & orientation. Roddenberry promised to introduce a gay character soon after but after his death the idea was shelved by Rick Berman The Outcast It's a powerful parable. If you haven't seen it in a while, watch it soon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 i have a question for the gay members of the site. i support the idea of havin a gay crew member on one of the starships and would hav e liked to have seen it happen. my question is this how would a gay crew member be portrayed? would he/she appear outwardly gay in terms of behaviour or simply be seen in the character development to be havin relationships and discussing romantic issues. i know there is a lot to elaborate on so will wait patiently if someone is kind enough to answer. just a thought tho. can anyone imagine graham norton in charge of reisa? could be a holiday and an ep of ds9 no one would forget in a hurry :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elderbear Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 how would a gay crew member be portrayed? Maverick, you ask some of the best questions! As soon as I read this one, I realized that having a "token gay," while being PC, would be tokenism. Think of how Joss Whedon portrayed lesbians in Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Firefly - nobody butch - just pretty women loving each other. If the issue really weren't a big deal (as some have claimed), then there would be gay crewpeople and civilians/aliens. We'd get a look at love in all its many splendoured dimensions - plus a few we haven't even imagined yet ... I think there is more value in asking the question (and having everybody, regardless of gender identification or sexual orientation) think about it. Let's expand the question: How would queer characters be portrayed? (And I use "queer" with the greatest respect, desiring to expand the boundaries of the question beyond just GLBT). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolcat13 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 well it looks like Dr Who will pick up where Roddenbury left off . A gay or at least a bi sexual male companion of the Drs has been introduced.Though those traits have yet to be established they are supposed to be . So with the excellent work that RTD has done with the show I am sure that we will get a tasteful addition of a gay sci fi character . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soulreaper Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 That's interesting; I'm following the debate since I currently have nothing to add - I wait with great anticipation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 i have a question for the gay members of the site. i support the idea of havin a gay crew member on one of the starships and would hav e liked to have seen it happen. my question is this how would a gay crew member be portrayed? would he/she appear outwardly gay in terms of behaviour or simply be seen in the character development to be havin relationships and discussing romantic issues. i know there is a lot to elaborate on so will wait patiently if someone is kind enough to answer. just a thought tho. can anyone imagine graham norton in charge of reisa? could be a holiday and an ep of ds9 no one would forget in a hurry :D I don't think they would show a gay character prancing around the decks. Hopefully they would handle it better than that. Like you said...just showing them "to be havin relationships and discussing romantic issues." Personally...it doesn't matter to me if they have a gay character or not. There are plenty of other TV shows I watch that have no gay characters and I never even give it a thought. Gays are well represented in the media today. Their issues are front and center. They have their own TV shows with more coming this fall. I would prefer a transsexual character instead since I think the gay thing has been done to death on TV of late. But perhaps my take on it is a bit slanted seeing how I'm a transsexual woman myself. c4 ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcazant Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 You think less of Romulans and Vulcans? I think the Vulcan species is highly respectable in Star Trek. well, i think less of romulans, and vulcans aare related to the romulans... That's pure prejudice. Because they are related to the Romulans does not make them less respectable. They've evolved into different races. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbbb Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Please no more gay trek, DS9 was bad enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbbb Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Remember, gay Trek is gay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Remember' date=' gay Trek is gay.[/quote'] Neither one of your last two posts here make any sense. Spit it out (no pun intended)...what are you trying to say??? c4 B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtbox Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 The reason there are so few (if any) gay characters in scifi is because, in order to get the point that someone is gay across to the viewers, they can't seem to do it any other way than ram the point home in a completely unsubtle fashion. I can only think of two TNG gay moments. The Most Toys and the ep (forget the title) where Beverly Crusher falls for a Trill. I'd love to see a gay hero (queero? nah!) for a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 The reason there are so few (if any) gay characters in scifi is because' date=' in order to get the point that someone is gay across to the viewers, they can't seem to do it any other way than ram the point home in a completely unsubtle fashion.[/quote'] I agree. All the writers would have to do in order to demonstrate that a particular character is gay would be to simply show him holding hands with another man. That would get the point across without ramming the point home. They must think we are all idiots and wouldn't get it. But what if the writers didn't ram it home but instead toned it down...consider this...how long would the gay community be content with only that level of intimacy? After all, hetros are shown kissing, fondling, etc. Just a thought... c4 :thinking: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts