There are countless reasons why the issue has not been addressed in the past, none of them good.

If anything, RB and BB made so many excuses “why we can’t do that” that when a movie/episode is finally made that includes any gay characters, the media hype will be so intense that it will be uncomfortable for everyone on both sides of the issue.

There are countless reasons why this should be done, and won’t be done so easily… sad thing is, it should be so easy, but won’t be because it is such an emotionally charged issue… and because it has been delayed for sooooo long.

Someone in this thread said TREK fans are basically very conservatve… I don’t think it’s safe to make such generalizations; I don’t think we fans are so easy to categorize,,, but then really, who is?

Sad thing also is that no matter how it is finally done, it will not satisfy everyone (look at “ST: PII’s Blood and Fire” as an example — note: I felt B&F was emminently satisfying, but look forward to Pt II to see the resolution that I hope makes all the scrutiny all the more worthwhile).

On another note:

I don’t know if James Cawley is “in here” or not, so I would find it interesting his view on this, fans too:

Question: Do you consider Star Trek Phase II’s stories to be canon? Why or why not do you think this?

Of course, if it’s not–as various members of the production team have implied–then I withdraw the objection. :)

//My main point was that there’s no reason to really push and have for instance “A Very Special Episode of Star Trek” where they deal with a homosexual relationship just to show everyone…”Look we’re trying to show this!”//

Oh, I absolutely agree. That’s why I’d like to see a main character (or at least a peripheral one who is in a fair number of episodes) in a long-term relationship with someone of their own gender. Nothing that will beat us about the head and face with an “IMPORTANT MESSAGE”, but just normal spousal interaction. If they ever plan on making another television series (or sequels to this film), I hope they consider it…

That’d be the simplest answer, I s’pose. There’s already some pretty clear evidence that things are happening at different times, and there’d been rumor of different continua already being part of the movie, so different time jumps may be happening anyway. Is there any sense, even, of the order (from, say, Nero’s point-of-view) in which the various attacks (Kelvin, Earth, Vulcan) take place? Or are we to assume that he jumped back to 2233, failed at that time, and then just waited for the next 3 decades to try again? It seems like more’s going on, and that leaves room for “correction”.

A lot of this is part of the fundamental weakness of time travel storytelling, anyway, unless it’s very well focused. “Assignment: Earth”, “City on the Edge of Forever”, and “The Voyage Home” demonstrate reasonably well-focused time travel storytelling. “Generations” did not. To wit, if a problem isn’t resolved at Temporal Point B, why not just jump back to Point A and try again?

Even from a dramatic standpoint (never mind the logic of time travel), if the sort of destruction this movie is hinted to be showing goes “uncorrected”, then it would seem to be a story of surviving in the wake of tremendous failure. (I think that, for Spock, the loss of Vulcan would be every bit as important as the loss of Kirk, and probably more so.) I just have this feeling that’s not the story these folks want to tell. “Yeah, the characters get together, but their homes have been destroyed…” A kicker for me was the attack on Earth, too. Is Earth also going to be destroyed? I just keep feeling there’s more going on here. And I also just don’t believe that the entire production team is engaged in the sophistry of “we can say that canon is intact because we’re talking about an alternate timeline”.

As I’ve said, I could be wrong, but I think there is a resolution of some sort, whether it be through more temporal shenanigans or whether Nero is just prevented from being successful at multiple points in the timestream. But if I am wrong, if there is no resolution, then this will be the first Trek in 45 years that I will just plain reject. I’m still hoping, though, that I’m not wrong, and that they haven’t been misleading us to that degree about how much they plan to throw away of Trek’s world.

I see your point.

My point was that I don’t really care for the romantic aspects at all. Regardless of the flavor.

Balance is key and you are right that there should be some if you have the other.

My main point was that there’s no reason to really push and have for instance “A Very Special Episode of Star Trek” where they deal with a homosexual relationship just to show everyone…”Look we’re trying to show this!”

I would be much more accepting of it coming up casually just as other relationships would. It’s when it’s main painfully obvious that it deviates from what the show should be about and that’s seeking out new life and new civilizations.

The cleverness of Star Trek was that Gene Roddenberry employed futuristic settings and flashy technology to disguise the fact that he was tackling relevant social issues and inter-personal relationships. The explosions and the aliens were fun, but they were really just a means to an end.
It’s not the “fornication” that’s at all relevant. It’s the human connection. True, Star Trek has never been particularly adept at portraying romances, but if it’s going to give screen time to male/female interaction, then it would be nice to see the dynamics of at least one male/male or female/female relationship as well.