Watch: John Cho Gets Political In Funny Or Die Viral Video October 5, 2010
by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Celebrity, ST09 Cast, Viral Video/Mashup/Images , trackback
It seems that Star Trek celebs doing Funny or Die viral videos is the in thing. This week it is John Cho, Star Trek’s new Sulu, in a satirical PSA about the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy. Check it out below.
John Cho in Funny or Die DADT satire
John Cho kicks off this satiral PSA against repealing the militaries Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy, along with other actors including Sarah Silverman (who appeared in Star Trek Voyager).
Loading ...
Comments»
I forgot Sarah Silverman was in Voyager.
Hopefully, I’ll forget again.
He is already following in Takei’s footsteps.
Good for them, it’s about time this stupid policy is overturned!
I have not formed an opinion on this, but here we go again with a bunch of Hollywood types, most of whom never finished college or served in the military, trying to educate us on social and government policy. I really prefer my favorite stars and sports heroes to just shut their mouths concerning politics and religion — be they Susan Sarandon on one end to Mel Gibson on the other end –but that is just me.
I’ll second that thought MJ! I can form my own opinion and educate myself without the aid of self proclaimed expert celebrities!
I’m with you as well, MJ. Well said.
No issue with the PSA, but was that supposed to be funny?
Thanks for deleting my comment Anthony. I think I’m beginning to detect a political bias on your website now and it’s unfortunate that you have to have one. You have stated that you don’t want to be political and yet time and time again you have posted political articles that are clearly pro left. I do not wish to start a political argument, but your hypocrisy warrants exposure. So what if some of us engage in political discussion, it’s our first amendment right to do so.
#4
Well put, MJ.
I don’t want celebrities telling the military how to do its business any more than I want politicians or military leaders telling artists how to do theirs.
#8. I would prefer we both not have political articles like this on this website as well as not allowing political postings like the one you reference which was deleted. So I think you are both wrong, and two wrongs don’t make a right.
7 – ditto. nailed it.
Just curious, are there any celebrities who actually are against homosexuality. I’d like to see that. I hate that all our popluar people are so stupid.
Probably going to delete this, huh?
@4 MJ “I have not formed an opinion on this, but here we go again with a bunch of Hollywood types, most of whom never finished college or served in the military, trying to educate us on social and government policy. I really prefer my favorite stars and sports heroes to just shut their mouths concerning politics and religion.”
They have as much right to an opinion as you do. Unlike you, at least they’re thoughtful enough to form one. You obviously never learned to think in college.
4,5,6
Totally agreed! Celebrities usually get political when they think its cool to do so, not realizing that they live in a different world (not physically, just culturally and economically) than the rest of us. Celebrities who issue political PSAs end up talking down to regular folks making them out to be morons (though I suppose a lot of today’s television and film audiences are idiots, but that is another topic for another day). The stars end up putting themselves on a pedestal. And we see what happens to them when they do, i.e celebs who tell normal people to quit driving because it contributes to global warming while flying all over the world in their private jets and driving gas guzzling Hummers and Lambourghinis.
When good men and women with essential skills, such as fluency in Arabic, are dismissed because of their sexual preference, we’re all less safe. The military in our republic must answer to civilians: our elected federal officials. So in effect, all voters, through our representatives, have a say in military policy on who should be in its ranks. It is our military so it should mirror our nation. Only the intolerant would want to exclude gays who are otherwise physically and mentally qualified to serve.
How can bigots be Star Trek fans? Some one explain it to me.
#15
Well, technically the military doesn’t have an outwardly, aggressive policy of excluding homosexuals; it’s only when someone asks or someone tells that it becomes an issue. But, having said that, the military does have (and presumably always had) a macho, hetero-centric culture within its ranks. Doing away with don’t ask, don’t tell could cause more problems than it prevents. Wasn’t that the Clinton administration’s original intent? To essentially force it into being a non-issue?
#13: “They have as much right to an opinion as you do.”
Sure they do. I would just prefer not to here their opinion.
“Unlike you, at least they’re thoughtful enough to form one. You obviously never learned to think in college.”
Perhaps I do have an opinion on this, but I have enough class and common sense not to bring it up on a Star Trek fan website. Thanks so much for the personal attack.
#16. I agree completely. Logically, ST fans and bigots should be mutually exclusive. Maybe just some trolls here me thinks.
They should just replace “don’t ask, don’t tell” with a policy of “shut up about your personal life, only discuss Star Trek.”
Seems to work around here. Most of the time….
:D
#20 — WELL SAID VULTAN !!!!! :-))
Vultan, this is a Star Trek site. You want politics, there are plenty of political sites. (I’d say the same to Funny or Die.)
“So in effect, all voters, through our representatives, have a say in military policy on who should be in its ranks.”
Indeed. And the voters, through their representatives, haven’t seen fit to repeal the policy, stupid or not.
I’d wonder if you’d say the same about Prop. 8.
Oh great, a Prop 8 debate now. Thanks so much Anthony for posing this great “Star Trek News” article…Scotty, beam me out of here…
I did laugh at the vid though. Very amusing. Cos its true. Or it isn’t. To be honest I’m not sure if they were being satirical of being serious.
(hows that for fence sitting? :-D )
#22
Funny how you single me out for making this site political (which gives us an article about a very political topic no less), then you proceed in opining about Prop 8.
With hypocrisy like that you’d fit right in with the Washington crowd.
25 posts and no one had done it yet, so…
Kirk: Spock, this whole “Don’t ask, don’t tell policy” Starfleet has certainly puts us in a difficult spot. What do you, with your logical mind, think we should do?
Spock: mfffmmwermffmfsrc-kk-omff-wuzz-fferrrrff!
Kirk: Brilliant, as always, Spock. Now, are you going to spit or swallow?
#16 Yes, let’s ban the Bigots and all who disagree with us.
Who made actors experts on social issues and politics? Let them do what they do incredibly well, act, and not use their celebrity status as a forum unless they are subject to the same scrutiny and labels as “bigots” (your mean spirited label, not mine) Star Trek is about tolerance not name calling.
8:
The First Amendment doesn’t apply here. This is a voluntary forum on a for profit website for the expression of ideas within certain agreed-upon guidelines, one of which is to keep blatantly partisan opinions to one’s self, and off the boards.
Well, as a veteran I can tell you that DADT has done nothing but harm to the U.S. military.
When faced with going to war, you don’t care who the guy next you is attracted to. You care about whether or not he knows his job.
All that stuff about gays undermining unit cohesion and destroying trust is crap.
Vultan, I don’t think I was responding to you, but to the guy who said the people should decide. I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy.
Ugh, Sarah Silverman… the epitome of the vapid, unintelligent, talentless D-Listers who think they are “with it”. What’s really amusing is that Democrats enacted this policy to begin with, starting with Woodrow Wilson’s “blue discharges” in the 1910’s. Gosh, facts are such a drag!
Good Job Bill Clinton! *rolls eyes*
This comment will probably be deleted.
great stuff, mister cho. personally, i think straight male soldiers who sleep with ugly women should be banned from the military. i can’t stand the thought of fighting alongside someone who would mate with a butt ugly slag.
To #31.
Totally agreed! I also cannot stand Sarah Silverman.
@ 29. D.Chris
Thank you for the well-informed comment and for your service to the country.
@16 Jackson Lake “How can bigots be Star Trek fans? Some one explain it to me.”
The inclusive message of Star Trek is the antithesis to the beliefs these posters espouse.
@16 So yeah, I don’t understand it either. So many TOS episodes dealt with controversial topics. So do they have a problem with those episodes too because they expressed a point of view? Or maybe these posters only absorb Star Trek on a very basic level, then continue with their uninformed, intolerant, and self-absorbed existence.
@ 2. MJ – “He is already following in Takei’s footsteps.”
That’s a thinly disguised snide remark verging homophobia.
@27 I’d like to ban the bigots because they’re just about hate and intolerance. Different opinions are welcome if they can remain civil, something we’re rapidly losing in the good ol’ US of A.
Good for them. If someone has celebrity that doesn’t mean they have to zip their lips. We do have the ability to turn off, not read, not click.
If one doesn’t want to hear an opinion, don’t. But they certainly have the right to express it in any form they choose.
37 — WOW!!! Hey Einstein, read what I said. Takei is a supporter of Gay rights, and now Cho is. Duh! Do not drag me into your Crossfire style debate here.
i’d still fornicate with Sarah Silverman regardless of her percieved intellect.
Im not sure that video was ‘funny’ but it certainly nails the political point…
but the few gay/lesbian/T-girls i’ve met in my travels as friends, uh, they weren’t into pink tutu’s (more like Transam’s and other fast sh*t)
and again, it would serve you well to know how your senators & reps voted… cause id be more than happy to vote for his/her replacement in Nov…
Wow! I think #29 said it best. A lot of the people I know who are enlisted in the military as well have no problem with their fellow soldier being gay – they’re more concerned about having someone there who is well-trained, intelligent, and who is going to watch their back.
I don’t have any problem with this being posted on Trekmovie.com – this site posts anything that is Star Trek relevant – I don’t think they have any agenda beyond that. If some of you believe this site is left leaning, maybe it’s because Star Trek itself is left leaning. Clearly the show, in all of its incarnations, has said again and again that judging people based on their lifestyles/cultures/appearance is wrong.
Why are the elderly so hateful?
39. And I have a right to take lightly and ignore movie stars and sports heroes, many of whom have never finished college, try to lecture me on politics, be they on the left or on the right. I also have the right to point out their lack of qualifications to be taken seriously in the public forum on major issues. I prefer to develop my views based on reading in detail on the issues…and I recommend reading credible newspapers (I read the LA Times and WSJ daily) to get the real details that those “news entertainment” shows on Fox, CNN and MSNBC, as well as nearly all political web blogs, leave out. Heaven help us, but we are seeing an entire generation of people who get their understanding of the world primarily from TV news and web blogs. Sorry, but I refuse to accept fast food news and fast food celebrity opinions on important issues of the day.
Your “preference” does not supersede the rights of others. Actors – whether it is John Cho, Mel Gibson, or anybody else – retain all of their rights as citizens. Like the rest of us, they do have lives outside of their job. And despite your protestations to the contrary, nobody’s forcing you to watch the PSA. Anthony didn’t hold you hostage, did he?
You clicked on the link of your own free will. You watch television of your own free will too. If you don’t like what’s being said on TV, there’s one sure way you won’t hear any of it:
Turn it off.
Cho should work on his acting skills.
His same mopey frown just wears on my nerves.
hahahahaha so many people are arguing about this on a Star Trek fan website! Heaven forbid they put up videos opposing this one on here… That wouldn’t be fair I guess.
XD
People (whatever their profession may be) standing up to be a voice for those who have done nothing wrong but have been restricted for it is not a political issue.
It’s a basic moral one. It’s an issue of empathy.
It amazes me that so many of the posters, Trekkies even, can so easily empathize with fictional aliens but can’t do the same for their real-life fellow human beings.
Sorry to say, for may soldiers “not telling” doesn’t work. :-/ Many have been kicked out regardless of “not telling”.
Even if it did, why should any soldier who has enough stress on his/her plate keeping this country safe, have to have the additional stress of keeping something he/she should be happy about a secret, lest they lose their job, when others don’t?
Anyone who has a problem with repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” or hearing about it and calls himself a Trekkie is a hypocrite.
John Cho and others who participated in this video are awesome for doing this. :)
You tell ‘em Harold.
#45. Wouldn’t you agree that I have an equal right to comment on it and point our their qualification or lack thereof, don’t I? It sounds like you would prefer a world when no one challenged a media star’s opinion and everybody just turned off or avoid media links that contained information that they didn’t like? If an actor or sports hero had a massive public forum to spout their political or religious beliefs, then is is certainly disingenuous for you to tell me, on single citizen on these message boards, to “go away”. What a hypocrite!
50-
You said you didn’t want to hear it.
I advised you on the manner in which you could avoid hearing it.
Anything else you want to do is up to you. As for not having the financial resources to buy advertising and flood the airwaves with your own messages, that’s not any of my concern. Free speech means you get the opportunity to say what you want without government interference. It doesn’t mean you have a “right” to the same numbers of viewers as Fox, CNN, or NBC.
@ 40., 44. & 50. MJ
What you wrote is either deliberately or inadvertently ambiguous. If that’s what you meant why didn’t you write that?
John Cho is a UC Berkeley grad who taught high school English.
MJ, what are your qualifications for having no opinion on the issue at hand (DADT), but having the opinion that celebrities should not share theirs?
What are you so angry about?
Can’t DADT also apply to heterosexuals? I’m sure there’s plenty of gay soldiers who’d rather not hear about troubles with the “old lady” and the kids back home. Like I said before, everyone would be better off not talking about their personal lives and stick to the important issues—like Star Trek!
A bit off-topic here, but a friend of mine is an Iraq War veteran. He once told me that when their convoy crossed the Iraqi border from Kuwait he broke out his Empire Strikes Back soundtrack CD and played the Imperial March on a loudspeaker as they entered the country. Hooah! Eat your heart of darkness out, Apocalypse Now! That’s how American nerds roll. :D
I am reminded of the Ron Howard Twilight Zone episode, apropos given the state of arrested development of the loudest of those crying for “tolerance and acceptance” — really immature self indulgence via tantrum — on fear of terrible and swift punishment.
(Have you seen the UK “green” commercial from 10-10?)
The rocks cry out.
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
#52. “What you wrote is either deliberately or inadvertently ambiguous. If that’s what you meant why didn’t you write that? ”
Huh? Sorry, but there are no hidden meanings in my postings that you were hoping for. Perhaps it is your view on this issue that is creating your own perception of what you would expect to see in my writings here if you made the assumption that I disagreed with you on this issue? (MEMO: ALTHOUGH IT GOES AGAINST MY PREVIOUS POSTS, I WILL SAY ONE TIME ONLY HERE THAT I FIRMLY SUPPORT GAY RIGHTS). I refuse to be drawn into a political debate on this issue given that I don’t think this is the appropriate place for this. This is a ST fan entertainment web site, not The Bill Mahr Show or Hannity and Colmbs.
Good for Cho — I am glad to hear that he has graduated from our great UC system (ALERT FOR THE VERY SENSITIVE — NO HIDDEN MEANING HERE — I HOPE ONE OF MY KIDS GETS INTO UC-BERKLEY). I would love to hear Cho’s opinion’s on the great novels of our time and on classic literature — things that he is an expert on.
I am mad because people are criticizing me for commenting on the qualifications of media stars to educate us all on political and religious issues. I have just as much right to do that as they have to pontificate, and as you have to willy nilly accept what they say as fact.
@55
Well, MJ.
At least he’s not on the fence about this.The only qualification one needs in order to speak up on this moral issue, is to be a human being who cares that everyone be treated with equity.
It doesn’t matter what anyone’s profession or political stance is. The moral truth should be clear, especially for a Trekkie who has no problem fanboying for fictional aliens.
56 — Celebrities get a free pass to reach a lot of people to spout political and religious topics that they choose regardless of their qualifications on said topics. And what they said could be moral just as easily as immoral. I just refuse to give them this free pass, regardless of whether their views align with mine or not…sorry.
@MJ
“political and religious”
You keep using these words, when they don’t apply here.
This is an issue of denying people rights for no rational reason, except that what they do makes others uncomfortable.
Period.
It’s not “just as easily…immoral” to speak out against denying adults basic rights, when they’ve done nothing wrong.
You’re bitching because he made a video talking about this country’s hypocrisy, on a Trek forum. They can die for their country, as long as we don’t know that they’re gay.
I see nothing wrong with the fact that he stated the obvious, nor does his profession disqualify him from doing so.
I’m not giving you a “free pass” for being on the fence about this and I think you should really think about what you’re bashing MJ.
If this was really about morals, then people would not be fighting on either side for the right to decide who gets to go overseas and kill our fellow man in cold blood for the national security interests of the USA. I imagine you would say that war itself is immoral, so how does that add up in your argument…two immorals make a moral? DADT is surely immoral, but so is war itself.
One thing has nothing to do with other, MJ.
If you decide to become something, no one should hold you back because of some innate and benign part of who you are.
It as simple as that.
Both are morals that in an ideal world we should all follow and implement.
Well, Anthony, you certainly opened up a can of worms with this one.
I never served in the military, but I have a civilian corollary to this: I once worked with an openly gay videographer when I was in television. We were once assigned to cover a Major League Baseball game, and were told to wait in the locker room with the other media for the post-game interview with the winning manager. HIs reaction while in the locker room was disgusting to me, and I consider myself relatively tolerant and forgiving. However, I also have occasion to work with a very heterosexual male director of photography who is always commenting on womens’ looks and mannerisms – in full earshot of the women. That, too, is disgusting to me. I’d prefer people keep their drooling to themselves, especially in a professional setting (such as the military). If you can do your job professionally, I don’t care if you’re an alien in disguise. But keep your personal life to yourself when you’re doing your job.
Meanwhile, on a totally unrelated note, Roy Halliday just pitched a no-hitter against the Reds as the Phillies take game 1 of the NLDS, 4-0.
Actually, I”m all for the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. In fact, I wish I had this at my work place where we have this one guy who is going around asking the new hire males if the would have sex with him. He first gets to know you, then asks if you would want to have a friendly dinner. Then he pop’s the unexpected question. He’s done it with me and one other guy. It’s gotten to the point where I’ve had to warn the new hires for what to look for.
You’ll say “That’s the exception, not the rule” but it’s simply true – straight guys don’t like the idea of someone of the same sex oogling over them. There’s a reason the policy is there. Granted, you may feel that it’s outdated but there are many straight men out there who feel awkward being approached by gay men and hesitating before taking a piss at the urinal that is adjacent to the bathroom stall with the one inch gap between the wall and the stall partition. Believe me, we have all caught him staring. If you’re in the military, you need to focus on your job at hand and feel that you can have brotherly camaraderie with your teammates, not feeling as if they are looking you over. There’s a difference. If you say there’s not, you’re lying.
62. I don’t agree with you at all (I think I would start laughing if I were approached as you have described), but I would make the observation that your opinion is probably vastly predominant by most of those in our military today — especially soldiers on the front lines. I said “in and ideal world” in my post above, and we are not in an ideal world. We fight wars and our soldiers are typically homophobic…that is the reality of the situation. I trust the President, Congress and the Joint Chiefs of staff to make changes to this policy when warranted in the future…I would not presume that I have enough wisdom to make the call here.
63 — news flash back at you…he is really large these days, so large that I cannot take him seriously as Captain Kirk, old or young.
please ignore my post 64 — wrong article. sorry.
Joel I don’t know what on earth is with your workplace policies but what that guy is doing is sexual harassment and you should report him so that someone in management can deal with him – but it’s beside the point whether he is gay or not, I’m female and if any male or female coworker was doing this to me it would be totally unacceptable also.
So really whether a man freaks out more over another man coming onto him doesn’t really matter, either way it is unacceptable behaviour that should be prevented by policy and investigated if it does occur.
I’m in the military (non-US) and our laws against gays serving were repealed more than a decade ago. As usual the same arguments were made as against DADT and in the long run nothing bad happened in the least.
Sexual harassment covers inappropriate conduct, it’s not like allowing gays to serve suddenly allows them to be approaching fellow soldiers for sex!!
As for people freaking out at even serving in the same unit as a gay soldier, well tough, you have to learn to get along with people some day.
The Archie Bunker Rule of Bigotry:
“On a given controversial issue, the closer my opinion aligns with that of Archie Bunker, the greater the chance that I am a bigot”
Please, friends, apply this rule to Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and find out if you are a bigot. If you are indeed a bigot, please change your opinion on the subject and join the rest of us in the 21st century.
Also, John Cho is cool. My girlfriend used to work out in the same gym as him.
@63
“straight guys don’t like the idea of someone of the same sex oogling over them.”
Insecure, closeminded, straight men have issues with this. A secure man who has nothing to fear treats it just like any other unwanted advance.
It’s not any worse because “it’s gay”.
@ 64
“We fight wars and our soldiers are typically homophobic…that is the reality of the situation.
Ask many real soldiers and they won’t care if the soldier beside them is gay. They care if he has his back in a life or death situation.
“…I trust the President, Congress and the Joint Chiefs of staff to make changes to this policy when warranted in the future…I would not presume that I have enough wisdom to make the call here.”
All evil needs to triumph (and continue) is for good people to stand idly by and do nothing.
Once upon a time blacks were not allowed to serve in the military either. Women were not allowed to vote.
In the future we’ll look at this time and wonder how we could be so close-minded. We’ll wonder why we didn’t act sooner.
Anthony, if you’re reading this, I really think you ought to post the most recent “It Gets Better” video featuring one of our own.
Seriously, the acceptability of the kind of thinking I’ve seen here is what leads kids to kill themselves.
Trekkies, fans who love freaking cyborgs and Vulcans, grown men who learn fictional languages, and cheer on interspecies romances, should be waaaay beyond the kind of bigotry I’ve seen on this board.
How you all can reconcile these things, I really do not know.
That’s the way to bring people together– put down people who disagree with you.
Way to go Funny or Die.
67.
He’s not reporting it because he made it up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0OeSs870ys
#68. “Also, John Cho is cool. My girlfriend used to work out in the same gym as him.”
Reminds me of the funny line by the Darth Vader spoof character in “Spaceballs;” Luke, I am your fathers, sisters cousins best friend.
#69. “All evil needs to triumph (and continue) is for good people to stand idly by and do nothing.”
So Barrack Obama, the Democratic Congress and Obama’s military appointments are “evil”. Sorry, but I voted for Obama and the Democrats and I am not buying into this.
#67. “Seriously, the acceptability of the kind of thinking I’ve seen here is what leads kids to kill themselves.”
Over the right to go to war where many will get killed it would seem.
Morally, I am against DADT, but I am enough of a realist to trust Obama and company to decide when in the future it is best to make the necessary changes to this Clinton policy.
#73
“Morally, I am against DADT”
At least you’re no longer on the fence.
…but you trust political leaders to simply make this happen “in good time”. Meanwhile, those being treated unfairly will just have to wait.
And those who are affected by the acceptability of this kind of thinking, will just have to keep losing their jobs, feeling like less of a person, and dying. While our politicians do this “in good time”.
One last thing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM6xbW1DZyM
Well you all tricked me into sharing my politics here, so congrats. FYI — I voted against Prop 8 here in California. Again, I elected Democrats — so if they are not comfortable overturning DADT, then I would have to support that; when Obama thinks the policy should be changed, I will support that as well.
Sorry, missed this and had to address…
@73
#69. “All evil needs to triumph (and continue) is for good people to stand idly by and do nothing.”
So Barrack Obama, the Democratic Congress and Obama’s military appointments are “evil”. Sorry, but I voted for Obama and the Democrats and I am not buying into this.
Oh please.
You very well know, good people can and often do or support bad things, like our politicians and you, and others who have commented that seeing John Cho support simple human fairness is somehow an offensive “political” issue that shouldn’t be on a Trek board.
…When it’s really about people not having the balls to stand behind their bigotry and using an aversion to politics as an excuse to not reveal that, even when it’s patently obvious.
And this…
#67. “Seriously, the acceptability of the kind of thinking I’ve seen here is what leads kids to kill themselves.”
Over the right to go to war where many will get killed it would seem.
WTF does that even mean? … How is this a competition thing?
Being hindered from the decision to choose go serve one’s country as proud gay person is tied to kids killing themselves, because those who believe one’s sexual orientation should be hidden perpetuate the idea that kids should feel ashamed of their sexuality.
…Other kids shame these kids and you get a situation like we’ve had, with kids taking their lives.
Kids are dying in the war everyday too. The world is not perfect and the military is a different deal in my opinion. I will continue to support Gay Marriage, but I prefer to trust the Democratic administration to work with the military apprpriately to determine when and how the policy is changed. You can write post after post here, but I am not budging on this issue.
“…When it’s really about people not having the balls to stand behind their bigotry and using an aversion to politics as an excuse to not reveal that, even when it’s patently obvious.”
Thanks so much for the personal attack. I refuse to name-call back at you and will always respect your opinion.
ALL, THIS IS EXACTLY WHY WE SHOULD NOT BE HAVING THESE TYPES OF DISCUSSIONS AND ARTICLES ON THESE BOARDS. THIS IS TREK SITE. I AM GOING BACK TO MY POLICY OF NOT DISCUSSING POLITICS BEFORE SOMEONE ELSE INSULTS ME PERSONALLY FOR NOT AGREEING WITH THEIR VIEW THAT THEY ARE SO CONVINCED MUST BE THE CORRECT ONE. I HAVE LEARNED MY LESSON.
@63 Joel “straight guys don’t like the idea of someone of the same sex oogling over them.”
First, gays are no different as human beings than straights. Gay men and women have as much self-control, or lack of, of their “oogling” as straighst.
I couldn’t be more straight, but because I have had many gay male friends throughout my life, I’m not insecure or absurd misconceptions about them.
Joel, please tell us how you feel around Latinos, Blacks, or Asians?
I think the point most of you are missing is that “actors” use what they see as a position of influence to…drum roll, please…influence others, as though an association with a potential viewer’s favorite actor (or the characters they play) give them some unique insight on all matters political, when it is actually the opposite.
Many in that business (some i’ve had as friends over the decades) live in a very isolated world where myopic viewpoints (no matter the subject) are pushed as universal truth, while they (in actuality) end up practicing the very kind of close-minded behavior they accuse many in the general population of embracing. One cannot fully understand the complexities of a culture when one lives with or works withing an exclusively one-sided reality.
That is the problem with many in the entertainment business–particularly over the past 20 years–too many attempt to preach or shame the masses about whatever issue is “all important” to them. Cho, Silverman, et al, are no more qualifed to instruct the general population than the random person actually living amongst the “regulars,” but they feel a camera and an ever-fleeting relationship with the media elevates them to judge from “On High,” when such a belief could not be more removed from truth.
Usually, PSA’s are subliminal attempts for the actor to get the audience to vote for the party he/she supports. And usually the actor is a liberal who votes Democrat. Its why so many people are fed up with actors pushing their political agendas.
Yeah, subliminal…
How can Star Trek fans get upset at a Star Trek actor lobbying against discrimination and bigotry?? If John Cho is using his fame as an actor to advocate for a minority that is currently being discriminated against, that does not make him “pushy,” that makes him a HERO. He *should* be using his platform for a good cause. The fact that he is a straight man advocating for gay rights makes me admire him.
Have you all forgotten that Nichelle Nichols was asked by Martin Luther King Jr. himself to stay on the original series of Star Trek? Have you forgotten that the groundbreaking kiss between Kirk and Uhura was seen as promoting a pro-miscegnation agenda at the time? Was THAT too political for some of you?
I swear, Gene Roddenberry has got to be spinning in his grave at some of these comments.
# 63 Joel: “You’ll say “That’s the exception, not the rule” but it’s simply true – straight guys don’t like the idea of someone of the same sex oogling over them.”
Welcome to the experience of almost every woman on earth between the ages of 10 and 85. So I hope that you argue just as fiercely against your fellow straight men who make women feel uncomfortable too. Almost every woman I know started receiving crass sexual comments from men and boys around the age of 11.
Why don’t you post what Gene said on tape regarding accepting others. It’s out there and more Trek related than what’s going on here.
If you have time outside of arguing with each other start this video at the 3:20 mark and learn what you should have from all those Star Trek episodes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZrRY-SLAig
84. I am not upset at him. I just choose to take lightly and dismiss “ANY” actors promoting political causes, be they conservative, moderate or liberal. And I also choose to help remind everyone I know that these people aren’t qualified to have a public platform on these issues. This is irregardless of the issue. Hey actors — “I am laughing at the superior intellect.”
86. That is a great message! Thanks!
I thought the video was silly, not that funny at all.
The reason the John Cho video got posted here is because he is a Star Trek actor, in the same way that news about Karl Urban’s other movies or the fact that Tom Hardy (Shinzon from Nemesis) and Chris Pine are working on a movie together, are reported here. They belong to the “Trek world”. Anyway, that’s the way I see it. Thank you, Anthony Pascale, for sharing this information about these Trek actors with us.
I don’t which celebrities and actors have been speaking publicly about political or religious issues, but I assume that they are voicing their opinions about topical issues of the moment. That is surely their right. Nobody has to listen to them and nobody has to agree with their views necessarily. Perhaps they are just bringing an issue to greater public awareness, so that people can inform themselves of relevant facts and discuss/debate. Sometimes there can be important issues (if only to a minority) that generally get ignored by the media and public alike.
I’m not sure who is qualified to have a public forum on these issues. MJ, do those whom you would consider qualified, actually make statements or attempt to inform people on these issues? Are they asked? If not, why not? What is the media doing? In the case of the John Cho video, who would be qualified to speak on this matter or give an opinion, since some of you, MJ in particular, feels that John Cho and the others, are not?
In the case of religion, which celebrity/actor has given opinions on religious matters that you do not feel *they* are qualified to make?
People who do not have college degrees or similar are still capable of reading newspapers, books (fiction and non-fiction), or can follow a television documentary, listen to the news, be involved in religious and other activities, some of which may require commitment, thought, knowledge and skill. Are they not entitled to be able to express an opinion on a topic they may actually know something about, even though their educational qualifications and/or work they are employed to do may suggest otherwise?
Actually, I suspect that one or two actors may well have “superior intellect”.
89 –Keachick, I guess I don’t have the right to respond to you (I had spent half an hour writing a thoughtful response to your post), since my response here was deleted by trekmovie.com. Unfortunately, I guess I don’t get the same benefit as an unqualified entertainment celebrity would get here to cover their issues…see how the information balance is handled by the media here my friend. This is exactly the point of this — the starstruck media gives celebrities free passes to give us information on issues that they are not qualified to comment on.
Hi Anthony, if you are going to delete my post which covers actual debate on the issues and does not insult name-call or disparage anyone, then how about deleting #76 for labeling me a bigot and using an acronym to get in use of the F-word. Respectfully, MJ
@ MJ
77. MJ – October 7, 2010
Kids are dying in the war everyday too.
What part of “this is not a competition” don’t you understand? Gay kids getting bullied to death and kids dying at war are both awful abhorrent things.
This difference between you and I is I’m not making one or the other a moral priority, nor am I judging others for making a positive moral stand, simply because they happen to be actors.
78. MJ – October 7, 2010
“…When it’s really about people not having the balls to stand behind their bigotry and using an aversion to politics as an excuse to not reveal that, even when it’s patently obvious.”
Thanks so much for the personal attack. I refuse to name-call back at you and will always respect your opinion.
It’s interesting that you would assume that those “people” include you.
87. MJ – October 12, 2010
84. I am not upset at him. I just choose to take lightly and dismiss “ANY” actors promoting political causes, be they conservative, moderate or liberal. And I also choose to help remind everyone I know that these people aren’t qualified to have a public platform on these issues. This is irregardless of the issue. Hey actors — “I am laughing at the superior intellect.”
So, Nichelle Nichols wasn’t qualified to take stand on racism, because she’s an actor? And her contributions to diversifying NASA and helping so many people finally feel like there were other possibilities for their lives were things she should have stayed out of?
History disagrees with you.
92. I choose to let you have the last work above since you are so convinced you are right. Congrats!
“Obama Administration Seeks to Suspend Ruling Against ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ .The Obama administration asked a federal appeals court Wednesday to freeze a judge’s ruling overturning the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy barring gays from serving openly in the military. Though President Obama opposes the military policy, his administration is fighting to keep the court system from interfering with a congressional effort to overturn it. In its filing, the Justice Department argued Wednesday that the court decision by Judge Virginia Phillips could disrupt efforts to carry out a repeal of the policy in an “orderly fashion.”
The administration says it wants the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco to take action on Wednesday. The White House has argued that a vote in Congress is the best way to permanently end the policy. “As explained in more detail in our stay motion and the attached declaration, if not stayed immediately, the district court’s order precludes the administration of an act of Congress and risks causing significant immediate harm to the military and its efforts to be prepared to implement an orderly repeal of the statute,” the administration’s request said. “The administration does not support (DADT) as a matter of policy and strongly believes that Congress should repeal it. The Department of Justice in this case has followed its longstanding practice of defending the constitutionality of federal statutes as long as reasonable arguments can be made in support of their constitutionality,” the filing said. The federal government is preparing arguments for the appeals court on why the ruling on “don’t ask, don’t tell” should not be left in place. In its court filing Wednesday, the government said allowing Phillips’ decision now “would create tremendous uncertainty about the status of service members who may reveal their sexual orientation in reliance on the district court’s decision and injunction.”
**** President Obama, I fully support your policy of carefully consideration on this issue and for a wise plan to work with the Military and Congress to phase in an end to DNDT in a sensible and carefully planned way that does not willy nilly disrupt our troops and our national security. Well done, Mr. President. MJ ****
93. MJ – October 20, 2010
92. I choose to let you have the last work above since you are so convinced you are right. Congrats!
LOL irony.
@94
Hmm, I guess you had more to say after all?
This totally disqualifies your so
disingenuouslygenerously choosing to allow me have the “last work”, right?Another reason I’ve heard ballied around is to ensure that any repeal of DADT is not undone by the next administration.
Also, though there is a slim possibility that Obama might read this as a Trekkie, it’s weird, awkward and strange that you’re addressing him.
Of course none of this has to do with nor does it undo the mass of homophobic fail you’ve brought into this thread, complaining about inappropriateness of a subject being brought up which you still so evidently enjoy posting about.
“Of course none of this has to do with nor does it undo the mass of homophobic fail you’ve brought into this thread, complaining about inappropriateness of a subject being brought up which you still so evidently enjoy posting about.”
What in the heck is a “mass of homophobic fail?” Is that a Nextgen techno-babble term like antimatter-matter transducer or gaseous anomalies? LOL
“Also, though there is a slim possibility that Obama might read this as a Trekkie, it’s weird, awkward and strange that you’re addressing him.”
I find that your comment here is akin to a mass of politicalphobic fail. LOL
@97
You gave people the opening to present their own homophobia, after you posted that you had no opinion, except that celebs shouldn’t give theirs, and also, this isn’t the place to discuss these things.
Bigots came out of the wood-work, heartened by that.
Prompting this comment:
16. Jackson Lake – October 5, 2010
How can bigots be Star Trek fans? Some one explain it to me.
Sure you changed your tune by the end, probably embarrassed by what you said/did and who was siding with you.
But the proof is upthread, man.
You can’t erase that.
98. Nice try, but no cigar. The article itself brought those low-life’s here. Apparently, some homophobics and bigots get real offended by videos like this. If anything, they probably reacted more to your posts of nonsensically instantly wanting DNDT canceled without any preparation, planning or phasing.
FYI — I was out protesting for people’s rights when I imagine you were still in your diapers. My opinion, stated previously, is that the president and Congress should phase out and eliminate DADT over time in a careful way as to ensure national security as well the safety of our military personnel. In this regard, I fully support the elimination of DADT, and expect that it will no longer be our policy by 2012.