Brannon Braga Explains Why No Gay Characters On Star Trek: Not Forward Thinking January 24, 2011
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Trek Franchise, Trek on TV , trackback
Today many TV series have gay characters, including William Shatner’s sitcom $#!* My Dad Says and Ron Moore’s Battlestar Galactica spin-offs. But there has never been a gay character on Star Trek, and in a new interview veteran Star Trek writer/producer Brannon Braga explains why that is and why he thinks things would be different today.
Braga on why no gay Star Trek characters
Over the years Brannon Braga grew from a WGA intern on Star Trek: The Next Generation, to the co-creator and show-runner for Star Trek: Enterprise. In that time he ended up with more writing credits than any other writer. Braga is now working on Steven Spielberg’s new time travel series Terra Nova. At the recent TCA press event, the LBGT site AfterElton talked to Braga about gay characters in science fiction and specifically on Star Trek. Here is an excerpt:
AE: I’m very much a fan of Star Trek but unfortunately none of the series ever included a gay character. You were involved with writing two of the movies and produced or executive produced for The Next Generation, Voyager and Enterprise. Can you speak to why that never happened?
BB: It was a shame for a lot of us that … I’m talking about the Next Generation, Deep Space Nine and there was a constant back and forth about well how do we portray the spectrum of sexuality. There were people who felt very strongly that we should be showing casually, you know, just two guys together in the background in Ten Forward. At the time the decision was made not to do that and I think those same people would make a different decision now because I think, you know, that was 1989, well yeah about 89, 90, 91. I have no doubt that those same creative players wouldn’t feel so hesitant to have, you know, have been squeamish about a decision like that.
Braga went on to say that Star Trek did deal with gay issues "metaphorically" noting a Dax episode in Deep Space Nine’s (likely "Rejoined"), and that the issue wasn’t due to science fiction being more male oriented, but due Star Trek being a "syndicated family show".
Read more of Braga’s interview at AfterElton.com.
It is true that there have not been any outright gay characters in Star Trek, but during Braga’s tenure he is right to say that some episodes did venture into some LGBT "metaphors", such as TNG’s "The Host" and "Outcast", DS9’s "Rejoined" and "Profit and Lace". Here is an interesting video compilation for some of these episodes.
POLL: Time for a gay character on Star Trek?
Loading …
Thanks to Scott Lukas Williams for Youtube compilation
Comments»
Make all that Kirk/Spock slashfic canon in one scene!
Trek should take a page out of Doctor Who and just display it as a part of life. No big deal, no super emotional story about someone struggling with their lifestyle choice.
Who says there was no gay character in Star Trek? It’s like looking at a bus load of people and declaring there’s no gay people in there because what? Nobody is standing up, raising their hand and saying “I’m Gay!”?
Of course there’s gays in Star Trek, but the great thing about it is, it’s not a big deal. This is the future. Nobody cares if you’re gay, straight, bi, bi species, bi Vulcan or bi Klingon. In the future, all of this is not an issue. So nobody talks about it. It’s a NON issue.
Is Brannon Braga still talking? Last I heard every single sci fi show he touches gets cancelled. Enterprise? Threshold? Flash Forward? And he blames sci fi rot or whatever? Perhaps it’s time he looks at himself and perhaps admit to himself he’s probably better doing something else? I’m just saying.
As a gay Trek fan, to see representation in the spectrum of equality that Star Trek is, would be marvelous. It’s a shame that Star Trek couldn’t have been more inclusive, but understanding reasons why they did so makes sense. Sexuality was still a sensitive subject on television, and few shows were able to tackle it successfully (Will and Grace being one). But, if we had a new Star Trek series today, I believe that there would be gay characters because society has loosened up.
“People can be very frightened of change.”
Sure, Captain Kirk was talking about politics there, but isn’t this just as much a political issue as anything else?
I say try a Sulu/Chekov pairing next film.
Kirk and Spock have been gay for 45 years, depending on which fanzines you were reading.
And let that person be a Captain with a real live spouse.
That would be cool.
The Great Bird of the Galaxy did not rule this out for Kirk and Spock, why should we?
Gene made Kirk and Spock bisexual, so it’s not like there has been no talk about it in ST so far.
I’m disheartened to see that the no’s are at 29%. We have a very long way to go it seems and if Trek fans can’t get there then perhaps we never will.
I totally agree with 3, here. Who’s to say there have never been any gay characters in Trek? Most gay people I know you wouldn’t ever guess they’re gay. People have no frakking idea that I am until I offhandedly mention that I’m going to dinner with my boyfriend.
To define yourself by a single characteristic is simply… illogical. I’m a self-described nerd long before I’m gay. The fact that there is an entire culture centered around one’s sexuality is simply baffling to me.
I don’t know how many “straight-pride parades” there are, but it seems illogical to base an entire way of life around a sexuality.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to see if I can’t score tickets to E3 while I watch Battlestar Galactica.
9:…what?
Gays in trek? Sure. I have no problem with that.
BUT, do not over do it!
I’m sorry, but a lot of times, the character becomes like a stereotypical gay, and then seems more like they are making fun of gays.
I watched one webispode that had a gay, and it was just too painful to watch because it was too overdone…
Well it’s not technically “canon”, but in the Titan novels we come to find out Lt. Hawk from First Contact had a relationship with Keru, a male member of of Titan’s crew. Keru is deeply affected by Hawk’s assimilation and death, and we see that play out in the development of his character.
Also, we’ve had T’Prynn from the Vanguard novels who had a relationship with the female Klingon double agent.
A good start, to be sure, but we do have a little ways to go. I agree with the above poster who said they should take the Doctor Who approach and just treat it as part of every day life, without turning into an existential quest about someone struggling with their identity.
Before anything else Star Trek was a TV show and had to think of its ratings. They have to consider how many viewers will not want to watch if there are gay characters vs. how many will be more likely to watch if there are. Also, like mentioned before, most of Star Trek was on TV when society was a good deal less accepting of gays. I think its a difficult task to have gay characters in a show, especially Scifi, and not have it be off-putting to a chunk of your audience. So far the only show I’ve seen to pull it off was Galactica. You had two guys that had feelings for each-other, that were together, but it wasn’t in your face. They were both human, both flawed, so it worked. I don’t think they should be pushing gay makeout sessions, though. Just being realistic that wouldn’t go over too well with a lot of the TV audience. Nothing wrong with having a gay character or couple, as long as they’re not just thrown in there as gay characters. It shouldn’t define them.
10: How enlightened of you to embrace those whom you disagree with.
I like the idea of a gay community being casually seen in the back ground, as described in the above article.
although I myself am a young gay male I cannot say adding it directly into a story line would sit well with me. my fear is the subject matter would seem forced. we’ve got over forty years of trek and then *BAM* gays everywhere! lol
i know there is a sensitivity factor involving homosexuals, and being that i am directly affected i can understand the yearning others in the LGBT community must feel for equality in all facets of life, but come on guys its star trek! if we want gay t.v. watch Queer as Folk.
Well, I’m a gay man and I cast in the background of the episode of “Deep Space Nine” called “Trials and Tribble-ations” as Enterprise ensign #4 (and yes, I was a gold shirt, so i got to live) so I can assure you that there has been at least one gay crew member on the Enterprise!
16. – I was just trying to make a point but you helped better than anything I typed. LLAP
That’s the one thing that always bugged me about the Mirror Universe episodes… the only time you saw any gay / bi / whatever stuff was when you had eeeeevil skanky counterparts like Intendant Kira.
Not that watching Nana Visitor vamp it up wasn’t fun, but if you think it through, the unfortunate implications become pretty unpleasant.
I really think that the gay community freaks out a little too much when TV shows don’t include openly gay characters. They gave SyFy a low rating on their scale because they didn’t include gay characters on most of their scripted shows. I just don’t really think its a big deal either way. If a show has gay characters, great, good for them. If not, its just as good of a show. I don’t want shows to start having “token” gay characters just to appease some people. And we have to realize that its going to be years before America becomes comfortable with gay characters showing lots of affection on TV. So I really don’t think that an openly gay character is needed in Star Trek outside of passing reference. But I wouldn’t have a problem with it.
Forget the gay main character. How about just a minor character…or a guest star? How about an episode where a married couple come onboard (maybe scientists or something) and they just happen to be two men? Or two women? Then it would be understood that homosexual relationships just aren’t a big deal in the future.
I mean, that’s all they really had to do, yet they refused to even go that far. They refused to do it for TNG, DS9, VOY, and they refused even for Enterprise. By the mid-2000s homosexuality wasn’t a controversial topic for TV, and yet they STILL refused. The furthest they ever dared go was a bit of girl-girl titillation for the fanboys.
Really pathetic, Trek.
@18: Really? That must have been awesome! :)
Actually, that makes two — David Gerrold also cameoed in “Trials and Tribble-ations”:
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/File:David_Gerrold_cameo,_DS9.jpg
And even wearing a red shirt, he survived until the TMP era ;) :
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/File:David_Gerrold_and_William_Shatner.jpg
People cringe at the “space hippies” on their way to Eden or the “Black on the left side” racism of “Last Battlefield”. If there had been “gays” on any of those series it might make the shows almost unwatchable today because those characters would have been the stereotypes from that given time. As I recall, the 1960’s era gay stereotype would be offensive by today’s standards, and the stereotype from the 1980’s was not much better! I agree that there were probably many gays in Trek, it’s just that in the future, it will be such a non issue! It will be an understood and accepted part of sexuality.
I read somewhere… I believe it was Roddenberry’s biography… that when TNG was first starting out, one of the writers, who was gay, wanted to write a gay character into the show. Roddenberry was at first happy with this idea. Then he read the treatment and hated it. This was after all the mid ’80s and it was difficult, even for a gay writer to not have what it was like to be a gay man in the ’70s and ’80s still in his head. Gene said he didn’t like it because it was too over the top and had the characters speaking in “code.”
When he was addressed personally on this subject, he said that in the 24th century, no one would care about who’s gay and who’s not. He mentioned that any one of the characters could have been gay… it didn’t matter.
Now of course, we’ve seen almost all of our staple characters in Trek in relationships. With the exception of what’s mentioned above (skirting the issue), those characters have always had relationships with members of the opposite sex. The only real exception I can think of here would be Sulu… who, was mentioned to have a daughter. Of course, that does not necessarily mean that he is not gay. Dax, also could have been considered bisexual.
…and that’s it. There have been some books, I believe that have some content. Jeri Taylor’s “Pathways” comes to mind… but even then, it didn’t feel right. It still seemed like homosexuality was this closeted taboo in the 24th century.
One of the things Caprica did really well was both address and accept homosexuality in a way that didn’t make it a big deal. I had no idea that Sam, Joseph’s brother, was gay until he brought his husband home for a family dinner, and everyone was perfectly okay with it. That’s what I’d like to see in trek. Gay characters in relationships that are true with no special attention brought to them because of society’s evolution
I was really happy when gay-mariages were legalized up here in Canada. Hopefully the star trek sequel might introduce us to a gay character on the Enterprise. I think boborci is a Executive Producer of the movie. He’s the creative control. So he should try his best to include a gay character.
Gay characters seems to be insulting to gays in most cases. Those in the gay community may disagree but it seems to come off as patronizing to me.
…?
Did you link the wrong YouTube video by mistake?
TNG’s “Outcast” was about a sexually ambiguous relationship, which was a more subtle and sophisticated approach to the issue in that it allowed the audience to more easily identify with Will Riker becoming enamored with a personality without regard to the gender of the person to whom it belonged. This was a much more enlightening and thought-provoking treatment than simply having an relationship between two people of the same sex.
But, in any case, I just don’t think that most of the TNG viewers were sitting at home wishing for more gay characters just for the sake of diversity, and that’s why there weren’t more gay characters. It’s as simple as that.
And these days, there are so many gay characters on TV and in movies that if Star Trek were to do it, it would just seem like a fashionable decision.
If they come up with a great character that happens to be gay, sure run with it. Otherwise, it’s just throwing a gay into the mix to placate the gay fans.
The lack of inclusion of gays in Star Trek has been the series’ biggest failure in my mind. Some posters mentioned that there could have been many gay characters in the background or in scenes, and just because they didn’t say they were gay didn’t mean they weren’t. That would be a believable argument if it weren’t for the overwhelming number of episodes featuring romantic and/or sexual relationships in the Star Trek universe, and in every single one of them, it was a male/female relationship (whenever they stretched those limits it was by making one of the characters gender-neutral, or saying the character was a different gender in another life such as with Trills) so really there were no same-sex relationships seen on screen in however many hundreds of hours of Star Trek that’s been made. With such a well established pattern it ceases to be a coincidence that “no gays were seen on screen” and becomes a rule that they simply don’t exist in this universe. I don’t see how you can watch the entire Star Trek series and not reach that conclusion. The absence of any evidence of a single gay character highly conspicuous in a franchise of this magnitude.
If you combine the overwhelming lack of evidence of any gays with some of the more heterosexist episodes like TNG’s “Justice,” or, multiple TOS episodes, you have a pretty well-established notion that male-female relationships are the only ones that exist in the future. There’s a reason it would be startling and distracting to add a gay character into Trek now after so many years, as some posters have noted. It would clearly work against the fictional social order that has been established over the last 40 years.
Oh, and thanks to CarlG above for pointing out Intendant Kira’s sexuality. She’d make a great counterexample, except… it’s the mirror universe, where everything that’s right is wrong and vice-versa.
At best, gay people don’t exist in the Star Trek universe (through the miracle of futuristic technology and medicine I’m sure). At worst, they’re closeted and shamed into silence to an even greater degree than they are today.
I really like the idea, that in the 23/24th century homosexuallity is not an issue. I would really like that. I also like what someone else said here: There MIGHT be such relationships in the background, and no-ones talking about it because it is not an issue.
But this is just my opinion: I for myself do not want to watch a male couple making out on TV. That just creeps me out, sorry…
A female couple on the other hand….. ;-) wow I really loved “rejoined”…;-)
I have no problem with Gays or Lesbians or Transgendered or Crossdressers in Trek. But it should not or ever be a main focus. The main Focus should be on a great story and the Enterprise and the friendships of the Crew. Weather it be a Ship or Station. LGBT should be there but not in a big way. In the future it is just Accepted that Terrans and Aliens have Gay People.
I don’t mind if current social issues are included in Trek, just as long as they don’t hit us over the head with them. Just find the right balance between gung-ho, strange new worlds action/space exploration and social commentary and… well, everything will be fine.
But please don’t let Trek devolve into “a very special Blossom.”
Captain Jack Harkness seems work very well.
Sometimes on Doctor Who and Torchwood, jokes are made about his promiscuity and it works because the rest of his characterisation is honest and truthful. If this happens in ST, it may be seen as undermining the purpose of reflecting modern life truthfully.
There has to be a balance, it cant always be depicted in a quiet, respectful sombre way which is certainly what any of the Trek shows would have done in the past. It needs to be depited kindly brightly happy and outragously.
knowing him he would have screwed it up somehow like he did with alot of other things so its a good thing they didnt let him do it.
and I agree commodore it shouldnt be the main focus for the most part otherwise it would just seem like gaysploitation for the sake of gaysplotation,
there are exceptions of couse based on my opinion but I wont state them here for fear of a rebuttal seeing as of now its still a hot topic in the press with the military policy towards it.
This obsession with the gay community demanding that they be represented in every venue possible drives me nuts. There are plenty of shows featuring gays, either for drama or comic relief. When I find shows that I like (Caprica for instance) that try to shoehorn in a homosexual subplot, it usually is executed in a clumsy and disjointed fashion that detracts from the quality of the show. It seems like it is done more to placate fringe groups or show off to the world how “open-minded” and “progressive” they are compared to the rest of us apes.
I support the idea that the captain, of perhaps a new series, is gay and has his partner living on board with him.
But yes, Kirk and Spock had an ambiguous relationship.
I guess I should revise my above comment to say gay *humans* don’t exist in Star Trek. Shortly after I posted, I remembered Pel from the DS9 episode “Rules of Acquisition.” Dax suspects she is in love with Quark, but is surprised upon learning she’s female. (Dax had clearly had a positive attitude toward her when she thought Pel was a male and still in love with Quark.) I think that moment was generally overlooked by most people (myself included!) as the subtlest hints that maybe it’s okay to be gay in Star Trek…
at least if you’re wearing putty on your face and have pointed teeth.
[I would have posted this earlier but my Internet went dead on me for several hours.]
Generally speaking, I find depictions of sexuality pretty stilted on Star Trek, from TOS to Enterprise. It’s like there’s a “don’t ask don’t tell” policy about all matters sexual (except for some episodes of TOS, where it was sometimes sophomorically overt). In that light, it’s not really surprising that homosexuality, while undoubtedly present behind closed doors, never gets shown.
In contrast, Star Trek XI seems to have a more comfortable, natural approach to sexuality, so maybe we’ll get something simple and easy thrown in down the line — two men or two women sitting together in a way that looks “close” (and yet still “proper”) in the mess hall or whatnot.
Where are the Cuban-refugee characters on Star Trek that the Cuban-exile community can relate to? Huh? There’s even a half-Cuban writer now in Bob Orci, and we STILL don’t have a single Cuban-refugee character. It must be a sign of the oppressive Paramount regime.
A Cuban-refugee character in the next Trek film!!
And not some Desi Arnaz, “Cuban Pete” stereotype!!
And after that, they should have a character with dwarfism and another with gigantism. And then they should have one with Multiple Personality Disorder. And then a hermaphroditic character. Oh, wait, they already did that. But they haven’t had a Mormon yet. They need to get a Mormon in there, even though Big Love already beat them to it, or else the Mormon Trek fans won’t feel accepted and understood. And then….
@41: Well, if there was ever a PHD for missing the point, you certainly would ace the course. Never mind the fact that being gay is more of a human factor than a political one, it’s also not limited to one country.
Also, have you not seen the episode Season 2 episode of Deep Space Nine titles Sanctuary? That deals with refugees.
We don’t know that there weren’t gay characters in Star Trek. For all we know, Sulu and Chekov were at it like rabbits off duty! Fact is, it wasn’t relevant to the story and the story comes first! I get fed up of mawkish ‘relationship’ scenes in shows just being there to add supposed character depth when it’s little more than token soap opera!
What does a gay character have to do with the story telling?
Why can homosexuals just be happy that they are being accepted instead of persecuted?
I was raised in a strict christian home and star trek would have made the no-watch list if there was an openly gay character in any of the series.
Why does star trek need to stop and point out a characters sexuality? How does this improve the story? How does separating and elevating one group of people over another represent what star trek is?
Those of you complaining and saying shame on Trek for now including a gay yet, give your head a shake. It’s a TV show, to entertain you, if you’re that bothered there isn’t someone exclaiming their sexuality… change the channel.
The trouble with gay characters on TV is you never see a shy one do you? They always conform to the endlessly confident, musical-theatre loving, dare-I-say-it promiscuous stereotype. All straight characters aren’t constantly behaving like rampant sex-o-holics. Doctor Who and Torchwood’s Jack Harkness is like that. Always switched on for an inappropriate remark like Roger Moore’s James Bond, if he were played by a out-and-proud gay guy.
Louis Spence in a spandex Starfleet uniform would probably the worst thing ever. Gay characters becoming the comic relief. I think that’s what a certain section of fandom are afraid of. I don’t think that constitutes homophobia per say. Just preferring it to be less in your face and a representation that has some degree of dignity.
If that poll is any indication, we have a long way to go from acceptance.
Thanks for crediting me for that YouTube compilation but the video you’ve linked is actually not one of mine. Mine is at:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX8MwpsZI6U
Hmmm….Looking back on TOS, I wonder if the writers managed to slip in a few deeply closeted GLBT characters, for example:
1. Trelaine
2. The very masculine chick with the deep voice in “Gamesters of Triskelian”
3. The Andoran ambassador in “Elan of Troyus” might be gay or bi, although it’s kind of hard to tell with Andorans
4. What about those bickering tall dark-skinned guys and the gold-dust twins in “Journey to Babel?” We assume that they are fellow diplomats or aides, but could they be couples? Sarek of course is accompanied by his wife so…who knows?
Maybe because it’s a brain disfunction and ST future is free of any human diseases? Why they don’t suffer from cancer? Why they don’t smoke cigarettes? Istn’t ST about showing our bright future?
I agree with 44 & 45
I know a lot of gays that dont act like they’re in a broadway play all the time, and you wouldn’t know it unless they did something deliberately gay or had a rainbow flag key ring or something.
Star Trek is literally “gay enough” with gay writers (like Tribbles writer David Gerrold) casually inserting their point of view into the show WITHOUT being deliberately obvious or insulting to anyone.
David Marcus was played by a gay man, and no one cared. Merritt R. Butrick played David as an average man. David could have been gay. He wasn’t married, had no kids, lived with his mother on a space station with a severe lack of women on it, etc.
Perhaps David, son of Kirk really was gay? Would that have been bad?Does it change the story at all?
NO. Neither Wrath nor Search changes its meaning at all if we accept David as gay.
William Ware Thesis was very very gay. Gene makes reference of learning to accept gays through WWT in his authorized bio. He says it in ONE sentence and never says anything about gays again.
That’s what gay acceptance really is. When no one ever notices it.
Think about how stupid it would be if everytime you saw a black person you made a big deal about it. Eventually you’d get your ass kicked.
You make people feel happy and loved and accepted by NOT mentioning what makes them a little bit different.
Of course homosexuality would be no big deal in the 24th century world that Roddenberry created but we’re watching it now; in the 21st century. We’re thinking of gay characters in the same way that having multicultural crews and positions of power for women on Star Trek helped audiences to overcome certain misconceptions and find acceptance.
I think what *some* heterosexual viewers take for granted is that we see representations of straight sexuality literally everywhere we look: TV commercials, films, print ads, literature, everywhere. As a counterpoint to that, when gay characters finally started to emerge as regulars or guest stars on TV, they were often way over the top so they couldn’t fail to be noticed. They often pandered to the worst stereotypes and, frankly, only represent a fraction of the LGBT community. I would never want that for Star Trek.
I was a Star Trek fan long before I realized I was gay and it was because of the amazing storytelling! I would never want a story to suffer because a writer tried to shoehorn in a gay character or subplot. As I’ve said many times, I’d be thrilled to see two women or two men walk down a corridor holding hands! That’s all! It would just be wonderful to have some indication that LGBT people have survived the trials of 20th and 21st centuries to finally gain a measure of equality.
I think this is especially important for young people. It’s difficult enough for kids to figure out that they’re gay when we’re all socialized to believe everyone must be heterosexual. Genuine, loving representations of same-sex couples in media can make worlds of difference to those kids. Think about how seeing Uhura on the bridge of the Enterprise must have felt for young African-Americans in the 60s. It did what Star Trek does best; gave them hope for the future.
And now that I think about it here are a few more:
5. The fat guy in “Patterns of Force.” You know the one who’s so concerned about manhood and all that. And probably his friend also.
6. Alexander from “Plato’s Stepchildren” We don’t know what his sexuality is, but perhaps forcing him to ride Captain Kirk like a horse is Parmon’s rather cruel way of mocking the poor man’s sexuality.
7. Many Romulans are probably gay. Just think about it. Perhaps their solution to those long campaigns in space is similar to that of the Spartans. Men only come together with women to procreate, otherwise they enjoy only their own company. And if you think that’s bizarre, remember “The Enterprise Incident.” Here you have a beautiful female Romulan commander surrounded by wall to wall Romulan beefcake, and what does she do but fall for Spock!?! Why is she so hard-up? Because she’s surrounded by a ship full of gay men!
You know, back in the day before Gay Pride, gays were part of the scenery in many movies and plays; they just didn’t walk around with billboards on their head which said, “Hey everybody, look at how progressive we are! I am certified gay, lesbian, or whatever.” They were just there.
Gays in Trek are fine. But PLEASE don’t “Blood and Fire” us with a full-on smooch scene. In fact, the gay guest characters on real Trek have been fine (by me.) Call me old and horrible, but I don’t like to see guys go bump. On the other hand, two men discussing their emotional relationship is fine, and could make a good part of a Trek story. As much as I joke about it, I think it’s probably not best for Trek is we see Spock and Uhura cross the galactic divide full-on, either. The drama is in the relationship. The other is distracting, but really doesn’t add anything. Save it for your own favorite brand of pourn.
Hope I’m saying all that right. Not out to judge… just saying what my taste in TV/Film drama is.
I think I agree with the opinion that being gay would not be an issue in the 23rd and 24th Century as we have overcome our differences.
The IDIC philosophy applies.
Also in the Enterprise novels set after season 4 and chronically up to Romulan War, it is revealed that Trip’s brother has a husband.
Its still a sensitive subject, and a political lightning rod in America. I always thought the writiers tried to get away with as much as they can. For exmple, Ezri’s younger brother always struck me as being gay, the writers just simply didn’t make a big deal out of it. Ron Moore and Irea Behr did an awesome job on DS9 with breaking barriers as much as they could, but there’s only so much you can do when you’re governed by ratings and producers who want to play it safe. Look at Moore’s BSG and the success he had, broke every rule in the book and did an outstandingly.
Gay rights isn’t the big civil right’s compaign that Kirk and Uhura’s kiss fought against. It’s a simple fact of life that really shouldn’t mean a whole lot to anyone else…
I agree with # 3 ….. would be disappointing if in the future … the time of Star Trek still on discussing the problems of “different choices” of people in every way! .. I think that could be included gay characters who were living their lives so comfortable with himself and without the trial of others … since that time people would accept it naturally! … for me, if included in a good story … great!
Though Rand was very attracted to Kirk, there is nothing to say that she was only interested in men. Same thing with Ivonova from Babylon 5 who was bisexual.
Desale’s sexuality was never extablished, and he was only around for a few episodes, so….
Do we really NEED a Gay character in the next movie or series just to be inclusive?
Trek is like Star Wars, why would we need to know the characters orientation unless it critical to the plot?
The crew can shag a tribble for all I care, but it had better be a plot device to cure cancer or restore the enterprises shields.
Perhaps the biggest missed opportunity in recent years was Malcolm Reed on Enterprise. He could still be bisexual, I suppose. That would have worked without alienating a core male audience. In that his character had macho enough interests in his role as Armoury/Security Officer to make him not the least bit stereotypical and with characters like T’Pol, Hoshi (straight guy interest), Archer, Trip, Mayweather (female interest) it would probably wouldn’t have changed the dynamic between the cast.
What about Kirk, Spock and McCoy? .. well I guess “the bromance” between them is perfect, the way Mr. Gene Roddenberry created … something beyond this, is “fantasy” … hmmm! I have nothing against the imagination of anybody, by the way! LOL! :-)
Tom Paris/Harry Kim screamed of homosexual overtones in Voyager.
I agree with #45. Its really no big deal and should be handled with class instead of in your face.
First off, This is a potentially BIG can of worms.
Second, I’m delighted with the majority of reactions to this thread. I wholeheartedly agree with the notion of having any homosexuality depicted as just ‘being’ as opposed to shoved in our faces with a big message in neon lights.
In Crusade, there was one episode with a political adviser who was – if you’ll kindly excuse the expression – parade gay. I judged on the stereotype of his actions and speech, however other than these tell-tale signs (and I used to work in interior design; the signs are real) nothing overt was offered.
It was just: look this guy is gay, simply because he’s gay. Moving on. Bravo Straczynski!
#57 “Do we really NEED a Gay character in the next movie or series just to be inclusive?
Trek is like Star Wars, why would we need to know the characters orientation unless it critical to the plot?”
Well said. Bringing up a character’s sexual orientation simply for he sake of bringing it up is piss-poor storytelling. Dr. McCoy may have a foot fetish, but I really dont need to know it just to make all the feet enthusisasts happy.
57 – We know that in the Star Wars universe they have incest. Sisters soul kiss brothers. And protocol droids are pretty darn gay-sounding.
***runs like hell***
Ster Trek DOES NOT have continuing storylines, so it just does’nt matter with the genre.
Agree with above, in your face in bed not a good idea if you want the maximum audience for the next movie.
However must say the UHURA thing is not working. It gets in the way of the bromance.
As for Gay characters, ST TOS makes a lot more sense if you consider the possibility that K/S were not just good friends. If you were going to travel a non straight route past the censors it would make sense to use the alien angle. The question is was this by design (Rodenberry) or was it just Nimoy and Shatner plus camera men messing around to see how much they could get past Paramount. There is an advantage in maintaing the mystique to keep the money rolling.
The idea that K/S is the great bromance (Cannon version not slash extentions) is appealing. However to move from mystique to actual in a manner which will be a natural extention rather than pastiche or parody will be seriously difficult for any director/producer to pull off. It will need the most incredible script and Can JJ do it, can he do it without help and couls he do it without the advice and imput of Shatner and Nimoy. or should they simply stick to tribble stories…………………..
In the end it boils down to whether K/S is real or imagined. If the latter leave well alone if the former are you up to it JJ…………………………………
I dare you JJ
#62
Why do we need to know Kirk has sex with every alien woman he encounters? It usually didn’t do much to the story. To say gay relations should fit the story is hypocritical. It’s latent homophobia.
Star Trek throws a lot of stuff in our faces, hell, most of TOS was about social issues that were straight out of the sixties’ headlines. So yes, Star Trek should be showing us how in the future there is actual equality.
K/S was a genuine love-story. I just watched Requiem To Methuselah and that ending, with Spock making Kirk forgetting his love for the clone, was wonderful. That was love. I’m not even saying it was sexual, but that was love between one man and another.
Speaking as someone who doesn’t hold a typical sexual orientation, I’d just like to say that I couldn’t care less if there was a gay character on Star Trek.
What I do care about is that only on Star Trek could you see an episode like “The Outcast”.
It was not only well written and performed, but the message of what is lost if you let others suppress your feelings has stuck with me for almost 20 years.
What about Sulu?
If in the future you can make love with a Vulcan or a Klingon, I think that the gay issue is the list of the problems.
@67
And there’s platonic “love”, and then there’s romantic “love”, and I’m pretty sure Kirk and Spock are the former. It’s unfortunate two guys can’t admit that they can deeply care about each other without being dubbed gay in our society, but once again that shouldn’t be an issue in an ideal future.
There’s a danger to be had in examining a work of fiction too closely.
Why does every thing have to be a social political statment. Can nothing be left alone. If your gay its your biz why do they feel they have to force them selfs on the rest of us? I won’t watch TV anymore do to this screw up Star Trek and I guess thats out to.
Kirk, Spock and McCoy were like brothers. To me, their love for each other was the non-sexual love siblings feel for one another – an affection built on shared experiences that no one else could relate to. In a sense, the wonders and horrors they had experienced had driven them from the ability to function in conventional relationships, leaving them lonely in one way, but secure in the bond they shared with each other. In that context, all that slash fiction is so eyerollingly… dull and obvious.
It’s sad that in this day and age it’s become a requirement to sexualise everyone’s relationships. I have close male and female friends. It doesn’t have to follow that I want to stick my tongue down their throat or get all groiny with them (well one or two of the girls, maybe!) Ahem! ;)
Attempts to make a series politically correct more often then not ruin said series. If there’s no reason for the sexuality of a character to be at issue in a series, trying to drive it to the forefont and make it an issue lowers the quality of the show in script, acting and overall feel. I could sit here and list more then a dozen series driven to ruin in the ratings because some producer or studio thought it would be a good idea to change the series dynamic by adding gay characters, changing male characters to female, making female leads more “butch” or feminizing male leads.
The one and only thing gay characters forced into Star Trek would have or will lead to is the end of Star Trek, nuff said.
Please don’t “cut and paste” a gay character into a new Trek movie or series. If it naturally comes out of the story planning and its a compelling character then go for it.
I would hate to see a gay character become the next “wesley crusher” in the next movie/series and become a lightning rod for criticism. For being gay or as a story crutch for gay issues.
Pls let me be clear- I have a gay sibling and have championed his rights for over 25 years. I have no issues with gay people or characters. I want a gay character (if there is one) to be credible and not look like a “gay cardboard cutout” as I described above.
There was really no good excuse for not having a gay character on Enterprise. By the time that show premiered, not only was homosexuality firmly in the mainstream, but one of the cast members of the original Star Trek had come out of the closet! Would it have been so hard to have a gay navigator or security chief? Then again, Enterprise was kinda sorta retrograde BS for Star Trek anyway (I never got why they felt the need to go back to a white male captain — and Scott Bakula at that! — when there had never been an Asian captain of the Enterprise).
Good point in #39
Agreed with #58 — The buzz before Enterprise went on-air was that Malcolm Reed would be a gay character. They even played w/gender roles by having him get “knocked up” lol. I stopped watching Enterprise cuz it sucked, but my understanding is they reverted to having him be straight. That’s lamentable.
I think Sulu is gay.
@44: “What does a gay character have to do with the story telling?”
For all the dissing I give to Brannon, I gotta say that your post proves his point. Not only are you not looking forward, you’re using excuses that not even professional writers or directors use when they choose to do something with characters.
But since you bring up this up Navy, I guess if a gay character falls in love with someone of the same gender and that romantic element plays deeply with the characters’ performance, personality and development, than yes. It would have something to do with the story.
I mean, if there was ever a romance that could be removed from a story and not affect ANYTHING, it would be the Spock and Uhura romance in Trek09. There is nothing about their relationship that adds anything to their characters nor their driving motivation to do the things they do. That is a case example of “What does that have to do with the story?” and it has nothing to do with being gay. Heck, I would say that a gay relationship between Spock and Kirk would actually serve the story a lot more since the film builds on their relationship, so why not step that up than throw something entirely pointless and random at us?
@44: “Why does star trek need to stop and point out a characters sexuality? How does this improve the story? How does separating and elevating one group of people over another represent what star trek is?”
You seem to be under the impression that if Star Trek were to introduce gay characters into the lore that it will be treated like a big deal when in reality it would most likely be treated like any relationship ever written. I remember in that Deep Space Nine episode where when the issue of having Dax in a relationship with another woman she had known in a previous host had absolutely NOTHING TO DO WITH GENDER. It was because of some convenient alien code that exists only to ensure that whatever happens won’t disrupt the episodic nature of the series, and coming from a series that strived from episodes that were un-episodic, that kind of broke my heart.
So here’s the worst thing that could happen if gays were in Star Trek.
Captain: Will this relationship affect your performance on the mission?
Ensign: No sir.
Captain: Good, dismissed.
And that’s pretty much it. It happened with Sisko, Worf, Dax, Kira, Odo, Spock, Riker, Scotty, Troi, Spock, Kirk, Torres, Neelix, heck, even Chekov had to have his duty questioned over a relationship!
So don’t give me any of this “how does that help the story?” crap because when it comes to Star Trek, being gay is no more different than having a black man, a blind man, deaf man, blob man, or even a bald man be a factor into the story. If a character is gay, it would be treated as an element that just distinguishes that character from everyone else, just like how every character has non-story element about them that distinguishes them from everyone else. A story should not be the absolute deciding factor in determining whether or not a character should or shouldn’t be gay, but at the same time not rule out the possibility that any relationship they may be in could play a part in a story.
This is something the Trek novels have really, really done a better job with than the shows did. That is, gay characters that are just there, without any particular attention being paid to it. You just read and notice “Oh, that female Romulan senator lost her wife and son some time ago.”
#73 & #74
Damn, “don’t cut and paste” gay characters in Star Trek? How about Uhura and Sulu? They were put in Star Trek solemnly for their race, which was great because it was breaking bounderies. So why don’t do that with gays?
Again, people complaining about this suffer from latent homophobia.
If it’s relevent to the story, fine, by all means.
But otherwise, why take up valuable screen time with a gay sidestory just for the sake of having it?
All this gay talking is pointless, to me. Sexual behaviours are personal and intimate. Showing a gay character would be the best way to mark him as a “different” person.
In the perfect Trek universe, sexual discrimination is something from the past, so there’s no need to focus on the matter.
hey, BOB ORCI if you read this, what are you guys thinking about an issue, star trek has avoided for over 40 years?!
i agree with those people that there shouldn’t be a story behind it. just show that it’s there and it’s accepted, like Caprica did just recently.
TOS didn’t focus that much on spousal relationships amongst the characters, or at least not as much as the later series did. In the TV show, the only character who is portrayed as having a spouse is Spock, and that didn’t work out so well. McCoy got an ex-wife and a daughter in the Animated Series, Kirk got a son in Star Trek II, and Sulu got a daughter in Generations, a movie he wasn’t even in. Scotty, Chekov, and Uhura are never shown in any sort of lasting romance.
I think the reason that they didn’t focus on this so much is because the story was about adventure of exploring strange new worlds. There were no families on the ship, so the “family” stories were not doable. Some of the wonderful Worf episodes, where he is struggling to be a parent, or building a life with Dax, could never have happened on TOS, because it was not that kind of show. These people were professionals, who were there to do a job. The Enterprise-D was much more of a homestead than the original ship was.
So if they want to have gay crewmen, all the power to them. We have socially progressed to the point where that isn’t as taboo as it once was. But it should not be a focus, because the focus should be on being professionals. Doing their jobs. There isn’t a ban against romance, but it isn’t the focus of the ship.
@81: “But otherwise, why take up valuable screen time with a gay sidestory just for the sake of having it?”
Because that stuff happens in movies all the time. Again, look at the Uhura/Spock romance. That took up screen time and what did that do?
I read the article and the threads and felt the need to post. I talked about this a couple years ago when Brannon popped up on the board… but it needs to be said again.
In my opinion, the reason why no Trek characters have been gay, at least since Next Gen is because I feel a lot of the writers, Brannon included, were and possibly still are, very homophobic. Here’s why…
I pitched several times to the various incarnations of Trek in the 90’s …. but my worst encounter was with Brannon during Voyager.
I am a gay man… and although I wouldn’t consider myself “flamboyant”, I also don’t try to hide it. It’s just who I am, and should’ve been a complete “non-issue” when I went into the Star Trek offices to pitch my stories.
I was ushered in to his office where Brannon and the guys where all having a good laugh about a trick they wanted to play on fellow writer Ron Moore. Apparently, Ron liked to write in a quiet environment, so Brannon and I think it was another writer and possibly an intern, were conspiring to buy a bunch of cheap digital watches, set all their alarms for different times and hide them around Ron’s office, thus causing him to have to hunt each one of them down as they starting pinging. Ha ha… we all laughed about that. What a good joke that would be.
Then we got down to my pitch. My first was a Harry Kim story where he became involved with a female crewman named Kaylan Ross… a strange high concept story that is not really important now. At the end of that first pitch, Brannon looked at me and said, “So Kaylan’s a man, then?” A few giggles and snickers came out of his cronies in the room. I was completely confused and said, “Uh… no… Harry’s not gay. Why would he be involved with a man?” The one of them said, “Oh… she’s a woman. Does Harry get to lick her wormhole?” More snickers followed.
Again, I was confused. Here I am a struggling writer… SCARED TO DEATH to make a bad impression. I was thinking, “Should I laugh? They’re all laughing. I want to sell something here. But that wasn’t even slightly funny.” I think I said something like, “Hmmm… no. No wormhole licking.”
I pitched a few more stories, but I felt like a that point they were falling on deaf ears. I remember walking out of there thinking, “Damn… don’t these guys remember what its like to be on the other side of the desk trying desperately to make a sale?” I guess I was so shocked by their lack of professionalism regarding my pitch that only when I got home did I think, “What a bunch of homophobic sh*ts!”
The next day I called a friend of mine who had also pitched, and successfully sold a couple stories and told him what happened. He’s straight but was still completely outraged. I didn’t know that he called Jeri Taylor that day and told her what had happened. I was then contacted by Jeri’s office where I received a very heartfelt apology. I was then told that all my future pitches would be directly to her. And may I say that I’ve never met a more professional, compassionate person. She never forgot how scary it is to pitch, and was very encouraging to me every time I met her after.
So… in closing of a rather long post…(sorry guys) I don’t think the PTB at the time could have written a good gay story if someone had held a gun to their heads… well, unless it was some hot girl on girl action, with a bit of wormhole licking thrown in for good measure.
Sure I’d like to see a gay character on Trek. But I think the gay thing would have to be just a matter of fact part of who the character is, not the driving point of the story. Drama thrives on conflict, and since there’s no conflict attached to being gay in the 24th century, it would be difficult… nearly impossible actually, to write a story where being gay is the tilting point of a story…. unless you did what Jeri did in Next Gen’s “The Outcast” and just turn the whole thing on its ear.
I recall several opportunities to go there, particularly in Next Gen and Deep Space Nine that were cowardly backed off.
I believe some of this was under Brannon’s watch.
I remember Riker’s feelings for a member of an androgynous race, …which of course, was played by a woman. I heard Frakes fought hard to have the character played by man, but o curse, ultimately lost.
I also remember Crusher falling or an ambassador, whom after losing his body was transferred into a female and Crusher couldn’t deal.
And I do believe Dax may have been the first to share a kiss with a loved one who was not of or played by the opposite gender.
I would be great to see that portrayed in the way the #3 poster specified, as simply another facet of a character’s life, and not some major plot-point and of itself, in a self-congratulatory manner.
I have to say, that though many fans are have been really supportive of George Takei. It bugs me that some retro-fit his character’s sexuality into the actor’s sexuality.
…Because it reminds me of this business all over again:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsweek_gay_actor_controversy
The idea that suspension of disbelief only goes for the straight actor “bravely” playing gay, while other way around gets jokes, annoys me.
…And I believe it’s a big reason why so many actors remain in the closest.
Anyway, those “special” episodes remind me of how characters of color were handled on other favorite shows from back in the day.
One episode or two episodes or romances to prove how open-minded writers are and then back to the straight and white business as usual *whew!*.
When and if they do it, they should do so without limiting to one or two special episodes and without making the fact of the character’s sexuality a plot-point.
Cre8tivguy, thanks for repeating the incident as I’d forgotten about it from when you described it previously.
.
Brannon struck me as being of the macho type that makes homophobic jokes too. He conveniently has countless excuses for there being no outright gay character in Trek, when he had the ability to insert a character in a good story through TNG, DS9, Voyager and even Enterprise! He seemed more interested in his arm candy, than anything else.
.
Brannon seems to use as his explanation what David Gerrold experienced in 1987. But those incidents were in 1987, before Brannon. He really has no valid justification for avoiding storylines that easily would have fit Trek. Viz. Garak & Bashir, Picard (because Vash, etc. never made sense), Ro Laren, and especially Reed in Enterprise.
da laffin tlhIngan # 5 – “I say try a Sulu/Chekov pairing next film”
I have no problem at all with gay characters having major roles in Star Trek. What I would have an issue with is the creative team altering already exisitng characters (Sulu/Checkov as your example states) and making them homosexual.
Those characters for example have already been shown to be hetrosexual (Sulu has a daughter and Chekov has had a few female love interests) Having Sulu and Checov come out of the closet after 45 years would feel like a major gimic. There would be nothing organic at all about it.
Again, I want to clearly state that I would welcome gay characters, but they should be all new characters.
fans know that Doctor Who is a template for how to casually include gay-bi characters and interactions while it keeping it entertaining. and that program is geared to far younger audiences then TREK.
can’t say i find the arguments dismissing this topic unconvincing. obviously, any anonymous crewperson seen on the TREKseries could be gay. neverthess, every TREKseries has always established that EVERY one of our TREK lead-characters is straight. no matter WHAT species – even if they’re an android (Data) or a shape-shifter (Oddo)! they might even have MULTIPLE spouse like Phlox – but those partners are hetero too, of course! wait, multiple sex-partner? what was that i heard about TREK’s family-focus? multiple sex-partners and spouses is ok, yet two men flirting in the background in Ten-Forward is naughty?
if some fans don’t want to see sexuality and relationships portrayed in TREK, i’d like to hear that. or are they sayin they’d prefer to see only hetero-sex on TREK?
seems to me that the extraordinarily talented Mr. Braga failed to recall that when co-creating ENTERPRISE, it was 2001-2005. hardly the tv-dark ages. gay-characters on every soap-opera, night-time comedy series and dramas. there was even some “buzz” around that series in it’s early days, that there might be a gay character, but Brannon and crew appeared to flinch at following through on that possibility.
if he’s saying that he personally agreed to help Paramount Pictures neuter TREK because he was paid to keep TREK “family friendly” and non-controversial, then at least he’s being honest in telling us why there aren’t gays in TREK.
personally, i feel bad for all the Gay TREK-writers (such as David Gerrold) who labored for a series that refused to recognize them as being an important part of that “infinite diversity”. from the TREK-lore i’ve heard over the years, even Mr. Roddenberry felt unmoved by anti-gay prejudice and/or unable to be motivated to address it on his shows (as he did so many other historical/social/political issues).
maybe in the alternate-timeline from TREK2009, audiences could discover that Chekov is gay? i won’t count on it.
i’d think that one doesn’t have to be a gay-activist to be a bit upset at the timidity of our TREK-producers and scribes. especially when there’s a double-standard here.
thanks for taking the time to review my thoughts here….
86
Sorry to hear about that! Its regrettable that people in postions of authority decide to act like a**holes. I hope those terrible experiences didn’t stop you from continuing to write!
No one should be ridiculed and belittled.
From a business point of view I doubt if the studio would green light a major gay character in a film that will cost them upwards of $200 million as they continue try to re-establish Star Trek as a tentpole franchise/ summer blockbuster.
As far as society has come there are still some neanderthals who would object…Thus, it doesn’t make business sense to attempt this on the big screen when you are trying to sell action figures and Happy Meals. The last thing the studio wants is bad press about their investment when it hits theatres.
If this were to happen it would be on the small screen where there is less $ involved.
Why does the gay agenda have to be pushed (so to speak) everywhere? Why why why? Enough already.
The writers had alot of opportunities to put gay characters in and i’m not completely sold on Braga’s reasoning.
I can understand the hesitation though. If you put a gay character in, he is either going to be a complete stereotype or fans will say he’s not gay enough. Depends on alot of things: – quality of the storylines and script, qualities, strengths and understandings of the actor in question.
Gay people exist in the future just because they didn’t do a massive song and dance about it doesn’t mean they are not there.
It’s like saying Muslims don’t exist in the future. We never saw solid evidence that there were any but we all ASSUME they were there.
What happened to people wearing Burkas, kippah hats and turbans? No one seems particularly arsed about these UNTOUCHED topics.
The gay agenda from a people who represent only 6 % of the population, why do they have to be on 100% of the shows? Enough already. It is tiresome and boring. If they want gay tv go the Playboy or Penthouse channel or some smut like that.
Here we go again.
92
There’s no reason why they can’t have a gay couple holding hands in the background, or a woman giving her girlfriend a kiss on the cheek. All the writers need to do is not give into the stereotype and write the scene as they would for a heterosexual couple, with the scene itself being totally organic and not out of place. As long as the writers don’t make any of the main crew (Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Uhura, Sulu, and Chekov) gay I don’t think the studio would have any problems.
I think that most Trekkies, whether teens, kids or adults, are mature enough to handle a scene featuring two same-sex adults expressing themselves. As long as its not graphic and over the top of course.
“Star Trek” just needs to acknowledge homosexuality. The writers don’t need to obsess or dwell on it, or parody it. They should just let the audience know that gays and lesbians can have a place in society (and in “Star Trek” as well) without being marginallized, made fun of, or ignored. I mean, “Star Trek” has always strived to portray characters of different races and genders as equals, why can’t it do the same with people of different sexual orientations?
@ 95.
Don’t suppose your wearing a little black moustache are you?
93, 95
This thread had a nice, civilized discussion going until you two showed up.
You two need to get a room where you can keep your bigotry to yourselves.
No one is pushing an “agenda”. A lot of people just want to see gays, lesbians and transgendered people be represented in a positive light, just like those of different races and backgrounds have been for decades.
#99
You do realize as soon as you call someone a bigot, you’ve effectively killed civil discourse far more? Name-calling is worthless.
@102
You do realize as soon as you call someone a bigot, you’ve effectively killed civil discourse far more?
*sIgh*
Sadly, that is true. These days it’s all about accusatory hyperbole and reacting with the same gusto. The post-”politically correct” backlash.
Both make most any discussion to improve these things fruitless.
I think it’s disgusting that hundreds have people have voted “no”.
What possible objection could any rational person have against seeing a gay character in Star Trek?
There are some ugly, small-minded people in this world. I fear we as a society may never reach the level of enlightenment seen in Trek.
@102
There ARE rational people who are EXTREMELY tolerant of gay people but have objections based on valid viewpoints.
But as long as you demonize those who disagree with you by calling them “ugly small-minded people” then you are no better than those you criticize, and will certainly never have your question answered because that kind of thinking precludes an openness to discuss differences.
It’s fascinating to read all these posts that profess “acceptance and tolerance”, but how easy these posters shed their high minded ideals of inclusiveness when someone expresses a more traditional view, different from their own, for whatever reason, and I can think of several.
Have you not just become the very thing you despise?
Tolerance does not mean we all have to be mind-numbed into believing the same thing. It does mean we can respectfully disagree. But let’s get out of the sandbox with the whole name calling thing. Nobody’s on hear ‘gay bashing.’
I don’t think it’s a good idea to include gays for next “Star Trek” show or film. For this controversial issue may end up destroying the “Star Trek” franchise’s image as a family-oriented franchise if included, and “Star Trek” has always been a family franchise since its beginning. Plus, it’s best not to ruin the classic for the older “Star Trek” fan generation, despite trying to appeal to the new “Star Trek” fan generation.
12 – canon Kirk and Spock loved each other as friends, brothers and lovers. The development of that relationship was covered in both series and movies. Gene himself had no problems with it and since he is the one who created it in the first place, Paramount can neither “canonise” nor “de canonise” something that has been canon for decades now.
#104 Jesus Christ, why can’t love between men or women be a family value? Biggot.
#103 There are no possible objections to gay love. How can you say something like that? Awful. It’s love, just like with two straight people, but they’re both men or women. How can you argue with love. But you already made your mind up, years ago, when you were told gays will go to hell, or whatever excuse someone gave you for hating them. I’m amazed at the biggotry by Star Trek(!!!) fans. Let’s celebrate all walks of life.
@104
“Family-oriented” and gay are not mutually exclusive:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/couragecampaign/sets/72157611501972510/show/
#86 I feel for you, man. If that’s true, that must’ve been terrible. In silent protest, I will now play the Smiths’ There is a Light That Never goes out while I watch the ending of Requiem for Methuselah from TOS.
@107 –
Very interesting you call me a bigot. And yet you assert, “you already made your mind up, years ago, when you were told gays will go to hell, or whatever excuse someone gave you for hating them.”
Go back and RE-READ my post without inserting your own bitter wording.
You don’t know the first thing about me, yet arrogantly proceed to judge me, the thoughts going through my brain, how I was raised, what people told me as a child, and that I hate gay people. Tell me, what do I want for dinner tonight? I haven’t decided yet.
Talk about hypocritical and judgmental….
But THANKS for proving my point.
#110 And yet, you don’t divert into specifics. Please, explain, why someone could object to gay love.
Chekov and Sulu should fall in love in the next Star Trek movie!
You know what else is futuristic? Punishment for thought crime by the collective
If anyone refuses to revere gays, they must be singled out and dealt with.
How about no one cares how gay anyone is and not everyone feels the need to celebrate every homosexual, everywhere?
” A lot of people just want to see gays, lesbians and transgendered people be represented in a positive light, just like those of different races and backgrounds have been for decades.”
Nah, that doesn’t sound like an agenda at all. Does Starfleet have affirmative action (social engineering), or do they simply promote the best of the best, regardless of personal orientation or self esteem?
@104
The first kiss between a White man and Black woman took place on Star Trek right in the middle of the Equal Rights movement. I’m sure that scene was considered pretty damn controversial but it didn’t destroy it. It made it much more intelligent and became stronger for it.
However I agree that certain things should be taken into effect. Like they shouldn’t flaunt the fact that they’re gay in order to show they’re different, because they’re not. I know plenty of people including personal friends who are gay/bi-sexual and they are no different from anyone else. You would not see them in a line-up and go “Oh yeah, he/she is definitely gay”.
If you try too hard it loses the point. It needs to be done with respect.
Here’s a crazy idea.
How about producers and writers worry about having a good story to tell BEFORE they populate the story?
That’s probably where Voyager went wrong.
They started worrying about making sure they had all these charecter types without having the story squared away.
When people are entertained by what they’re watching, they’ll relate to it. Otherwise you’re just pandering.
115 – problem with that is the general audience. Unless a guy is feminised and goes around with a rainbow flag groping every man on his way, they will not believe he is gay.
@116
An even crazier idea, how about not populating the story without having the same social hierarchy in mind, this time?
Instead of the white alpha male leader with the faux veneer of diversity that are there to be checked off, but always obviously less important and adhering to comfortable stereotypes, why not just hire who ever is best to lead and write them as people instead of types?
I honestly think people are getting tired of the so-called lovable white jerk as protagonist… See the box office receipts for The Dilemma, The Green Hornet, and the latest Ashton Kutcher movie (I know, I am).
86. Quite possibly the most disgusting thing I’ve ever read. But I guess beyond sanatized behind the scenes details which make onto DVD extras, we really don’t want to know about some of the stuff that went on.
It’s 2011, I can’t believe it’s still an issue with people. I mean, it shouldn’t even be an issue weither or not Star Trek should have a gay character, it should be just as trivial(or important) as to weither or not the captain on the ship is a man or a woman. Star Trek was a frontrunner for social/political issues, like someone here mentioned; it had the first interacial kiss. Great. But I’m afraid, as the 2009 film had none of the social/political merits the original series had, the sequel will not deal with any serious social dilemma’s, let alone gay rights. As good as the new movie looked, and as fun as it was, the original series outshines the new movie on an intellectual and philosophical level in every way.
102 – No, tolerance does not mean having to tolerate intolerance. You’re argument is for thumbsuckers.
My mistake – 103.
122 –
“You’re argument is for thumbsuckers.”
Sounds like you are the one full of hate. But I’m not going to tolerate your intolerance.
Once again, you prove my point.
wow ok. so is it safe to assume we are not talking about star trek anymore.
I know this is rather harsh, but everyone who keeps feeding this debate kinda sux.
hey Anthony. in the past 4 years that i have been an active visitor of the site without failure every article relating to the LGBT community eventually turns into inflammatory back and forth name calling.
I understand it always has a relevance to Trek, but in the future maybe dont allow commenting on such articles. it’s getting old…
#123 Hey Mr. Delicious, please, explain why anyone’s love can be objected to. Respond to my inquiery.
Also, guys who are calling others bigots, at least have the decency to spell.
Nothing is more annoying than people who don’t know how to properly use a word.
I think the one issue here is that Star Trek has already missed the boat.
The mixed-race crew in TOS, the inter-racial kiss, and all that is from the 1960s. It meant something then, to show that one day this could be a potential reality.
Today, we have known gay politicians, business-people, performers, and respected members of the community in most of the developed world. Some in the US are trying to get married in a country where marriage constitutes less than 50% of all civil unions. I even know a gay divorcee who complains she ever had the idea in the first place. “Divorce is expensive.” Tell me about it. ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is repealed. AIDS is no longer on the front page here because more and more gay individuals live with it, fewer die from it or get it. It’s been relegated to the 3rd world and drug use.
This is happening now, and showing a ‘gay person’ in Star Trek to make a point would almost be considered retro. If they do it on purpose, give us a Bronson Pinchot “Serge” character who is over-flamboyant and hilarious (’Beverly Hills Cop,’ 1985, 26 years ago!), or the guy from the control tower in “Airplane.”
I’m going to go watch Rachel Maddow cover the State of the Union on MSNBC without her having to kiss her girlfriend to make a point.
Anyone remember the pink chairs on the USS Grissom?
#128
Captain Esteban insisted they were salmon, not pink.
Not that there’s anything wrong with it!
But please, everyone, let’s all be civil here and remember that the world will not progress until we all come together and pretend to like each other.
I am so tired of the gay debate. Just leave everything be. I dont need gay men or women pushed in my face because gays are protesting. Its just like how black people protest if there are no black people on a cast. I hate it when they just throw a black person in a show b/c they feel they have to or they will get sued. What happened to just picking the best actors they could get no matter what nationality? There is no reason to create a gay couple on a show if it is not necessary. I know there are plenty of people who wouldn’t want to see two men or two women getting cozy with each other. The default of society is attracted to the opposite sex and not the same sex. Its not appealing. I have nothing against gay people, they are following their feelings and that is great. Everyone deserves to be happy in love but I dont need it pushed in my face on the shows i watch. Leave things be!!!
@131
Funny you would say “just like black people” given that one could have used the same argument against Uhura in the 60’s, just because black people were protesting then.
In hindsight, the move of simply having Uhura be present on the show gave Star Trek a much more important legacy and a role in inspiring so many people to actually feel good about themselves. To believe they could actually go for height of achievement, because it is reachable.
In world where we’re hearing about a gay teen taking their own life virtually every week, I think tolerating “gay men or women pushed in [your] face” is worth gay teens or children feeling good enough about themselves, that they reconsider suicide.
I’ve always thought that if Enterprise had continued, we would have learned (in a matter of fact way, not in a “very special episode) that Malcolm Reed was gay (it was strongly hinted at in “E2″). But the show wouldn’t have made a big issue out of it, because it is supposed to be 22nd Century and humanity has evolved to the point where sexual orientation simply isn’t an issue.
So, I’m not sure if he’s entirely correct. DS9 does touch on this in the episode “Rejoined”. Dax basically comes into contact with a past female loved one/partner from a past host.
Apparently it was one of the first/early lesbian kissing scenes on TV.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rejoined_(DS9_episode)
Speaking of “Torchwood” and “Will & Grace”, John Barrowman (who is openly gay) tried out for the role of Will, but was rejected in favor of Eric McCormack (who is straight), because it was felt Barrowman’s characterization of Will was “too straight”.
On another note:
I think a big problem with American television is that it is pretty much incapable of addressing any sort of issue in any way that isn’t utterly ham-fisted. Everything is milked for dramatic value to the point where it just becomes ludicrous and unbelievable. No message can be delivered with anything more subtle than a ball-peen hammer to the face. Star Trek’s writing has never been terribly subtle so I don’t know that could be done in Trek without it being made a big deal.
@135
I always classified Jadzia, and I assume Ezri as pan-sexual. She seemed to just be attracted to individuals.
This thread is degenerating fast with some ugly comments and personal attacks and so i say tone it down or i will close it
@ #104
“Star Trek” has always been a family franchise since its beginning”
This “family oriented franchise” had several male captains that would bed any female that gave them a second look, and at least one had an illegitimate son he didn’t know existed, and maybe more…
Please define “family oriented”. Perhaps you meant “straight-friendly, boys will be boys (wink wink) oriented”.
Well, I come over here since a lot of the movie site message boards I visit are getting very heated over the Oscar nominations and I expect a quiet, thoughtful chat about all things Trek. And look at what I get!! :)
If I can through in my penny’s worth, I’ve always felt that the Gay/Straight argument is a Kobayashi Maru, mainly because the arguments on either side rarely share a common playing field. I have gay friends who I love, care for and respect but I know I wiill never fully uinderstand them as the thought of same sex attraction is alien to me (forgive the unintentional puns). So straight off, I am at a disadvantage in the discussion. I understand love, emotional love as much as, I guess, anyone can. I understand the need for love, for companionsahip, to know and feel that my heart, my soul resonates with anothers. And I know that is what my gay friends have found as much as my straight ones. (i don’t normally catagorize them like that by the way!). My problem comes, if I may be so crude, with the purely physical aspect of it and the attempt to place both gay sex and straight sex on the same level and to try and convince us that they are both to be considered in the same way. That I cannot do because for me, and yes, this does come from a religious foundation but don’t jump all over me just yet, straight sex, when it is expressed openly and naturally, is an opening of oneself to the possibilty of creating life, procreation in other words. This is something that is intrinsically impossible through gay sex. So, naturally, I mean biologically, they are very different. Gay sex is seen as a physical expression of the emotional love between the two people as indeed straIght sex can very often be (especially when contraception is used and the procreative aspect is intentionally removed) but istraight sex is still, contraception or not, a physical opening to the potential of life being created.
As such, gay sex and straight sex are different and becasue sexual intercourse can be so much a part of the overall expression of ones sexuality, it immediately establishes two distinct sexualities. The demand from some that we accept both as the same therefore will never, can never be accepted by me. Human equality is a desire and a pursuit that I fully agree with but not to the point where we loose the unique and characteristc qualities of something so basic as human sexuality and it’s expression in procreation. I know that medical science has blurred the lines here but again, I hold to the basic biological qualities of straight sexual intercourse and I would never allow it to be diminshed by equating it with something that I see as completely different. Please note my lack of moral judgement here (in fact my true desire to avoid any impression of such) and please don’t try to infer one from what I have written. Being open minded and fair while holding true to what you believe is very difficult and what some see as closemindedness and bigotry can in fact be a painful stand for deeply held beliefs struggling against a desire to be fair and conscious of the needs and struggles of others.
If Trek were to introduce openly gay characters, I have no doubt that it would be done in a very simple, straightforward, honest way that would in no way change the quality and ethos of a universe that I have loved for almost 40 years, except to, as it has always done, ask a question that needs asking and push us to know oursleves better. IDIC means, not that we are all the same, but rather we acknowledge, work through, agree to disagree and move on together in our differences and celebrate what binds us to each other. The pursuit of equality shoud mean seeing ourselves as equal in value but allowing ourselves to still see each other as differnt.
Sorry for going on so long; there’s more I feel I could or should say but it’s late, it’s been a busy day and I’m tired, Feel free to jump all over me now cause I’m off to bed ;)
“I have nothing against gay people, they are following their feelings and that is great. Everyone deserves to be happy in love but I dont need it pushed in my face on the shows i watch. Leave things be!!!”
Perhaps you have just made the case for the way gays feel when watching their favorite shows. It hurts to be told that your brand of love is SO unappealing, when everyone else is getting it on, right in your face on every show, in every commercial, on every billboard, in every magazine… whether you like it or not. So since someone MIGHT get offended by ‘your’ show of affection, you need to keep it out of view.
Oh, and let’s not forget the grauitous sexual tension and bed-hopping on any given daytime drama. I’d certainly call that “pushed in my face”.
By the way, my tiredness is evident is my bad spelling (blush!!) Please forgive me.
In the past, articles such as this have been rather heavily moderated with warnings posted by the site mods about civility. This one seems to be a departure, and personally I like it this way. The people who are being uncivil make a rather strong point, though not the one they were perhaps trying to male.
I keep seeing people saying things like, “Why do we *need* a gay character on the show? Can’t we just have a good character, and if he/she is gay, so be it?” Unfortunately this misses the bigger picture, and one Gene Roddenberry was very aware of: perception is everything. On a ship of 400 (or probably more like 800 with the new size of the Enterprise) people, you’d think you’d see at least one gay person/couple. The fact that you not only don’t see them on the ship, but never in the entire franchise starts to become less of a coincidence and more of a pattern.
Imagine if it was race. What if, Uhura had been white? Would Star Trek had been a racist show then? Not necessarily, but her presence, as is fairly obvious to us now in the year 2011 dispelled the notion that the ship was an all-white crew. It was important to see her there, so much so that Martin Luther King Jr. said the same. Perception is everything. You *need* black characters on the Enterprise and in the show. If every character you see is white, that sets a rather bad example not only for the fictional universe, but also for the viewers.
Replace “black” with “gay” and you get the point. Granted, it’s slightly harder to include a gay character as a background character. You have to attribute some lines and/or actions to the character, but of all the random background characters, main characters, and guest characters who could have done this, the writers always decided to make them straight when the opportunity to do otherwise presented itself.
‘in’ my bad spelling!! geez!!
@117
I suppose you’re right. But Star Trek should NEVER be dumbed down for a general audience. Trek is a show that can make you think as well as entertain. I think if they were to create a gay character it should be done nonchalantly. Something that gets the point across but doesn’t rub it in your face.
For example: In Star Trek Voyager we learn that Janeway had a boyfriend. In the first episode she talks to him before leaving on her mission. They’re conversation makes it clear they care and love each other and then they part ways. Now imagine if they did this but with two guys or two girl. Talking about stuff in their daily lives, like the Dog in Janeway’s case, and then mention they love each other and move on.
We learn the character is in a relationship with someone who is the same sex and leave it at that. It’s no big deal and we can develop the character more in future episodes like any other character.
“I have to say, that though many fans are have been really supportive of George Takei. It bugs me that some retro-fit his character’s sexuality into the actor’s sexuality.”
Actually, I had never considered the idea of Sulu being gay until George Takei himself said that he had felt the character was… and just because he has a daughter, does not mean that he’s straight. There are adoptions and surrogates. There never was a mention of a wife and in all the years, we never once saw a relationship with a female.
So it does not retro-fit or change anything about the character.
@146
I think there was an episode of TOS where beautiful women were having odd effects on the men and making them basically stare at them and drool at them, and Sulu was among those affected, which certainly suggests Sulu was straight. Episode may have been “Spock’s Brain” and/or “Mudd’s Women.” Let’s face it, this sort of thing happened a lot.
Not to hijack the thread but I saw this on another site today and found it hilarious.
A Star Trek KFC from 2006. Don’t remember seeing it on air but it’s great nonetheless.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/scifimediazone/news/?a=28687
Oh one more thing…. this should probably go in the next ShatWatch but I found a clip on Michael Giacchino’s site where he was interviewed by Shatner.
http://www.michaelgiacchinomusic.com/features.htm#Interviews
It was Mudd’s Women… being distracted by a woman’s beauty and confidence can happen to anyone.
When I see a very attractive woman, I can certainly appreciate such aesthetics… a great deal in fact. In the same way I appreciate the beauty of a wonderful piece of art or something shiny. It doesn’t mean that I want to sleep with them.
And, if I put Vaseline over my eyeballs and something is sitting in front of the sun in the same way they put Vaseline over the camera lens while backlighting Mudd’s women, everything looks beautiful… but my eyes BUUURRRNNN!!!!
Yes it’s time – 20 years ago!!! It’s an embarrassment that Trek couldn’t simply put a possibly-to-be-interpreted-as-gay couple in the background, or a main character that just happened, after having been seen awhile, to be gay. The whole situation has been conspicuous in its absence.
Trek is so far behind the times now that no matter HOW they finally introduce an acknowledgement that gays exist into their franchise, it’s going to be a big deal–which it never should have been.
#138 & #140 – nice refutes.
“Not forward thinking”? Well, that’s for damn sure.
Honestly, they could’ve made a main character gay and nothing would’ve changed. They could’ve made Harry gay easily. They could’ve made Reed gay and wouldn’t have had to change anything about his character.
PS: About the “tolerating intolerance” garbage, I’d like to quote someone who I admire a lot: “Well, yeah. And also, *duh*. Antonyms are incompatible. Opposites are *opposed*. That’s not a particularly noteworthy observation, so I’ve always been baffled as to why this bit of adolescent wordplay was regarded as meaningful.”
Actually, when you really give it some thought, the whole idea of the Star Trek universe (and especially Starfleet) being all-inclusive and equal-oportunity is a farce, quite frankly. The idea may sound good on paper, but the execution is lacking, which is very telling.
The emperor wears no clothes.
A Starfleet that supposedy doesn’t discriminate, that has the entire population of Earth to recruit from. I don’t know the stats, but I think I read somewhere that white, anglo-saxons are a minority, and that percentage will continue to shrink as compared to other races in the future.
One female white Captain. One black male Captain. One black Vulcan. Tokens all. Even the aliens are played by white actors with a funny nose (Bajorans) or funny ears (Vulcans) or funny antennas (Andorians). We’ve even seen white actors portray Klingons in blackface and white actresses portray Orians in greenface. A white android in yellowface. And to kill one bird with two stones, we got the token black AND blind Chief Engineer. That’ll show ‘em we’re diverse!
Sometime, when you have a lot of spare time, try to notice the background players, the extras, and even the guest stars in the various series and movies. Notice the lack of diversity.
As a middle age man, that happens to be white and gay, I gave up a long time ago on this Star Trek Myth of diversity. I’m not afraid to tell the emperor that he’s naked.
Trek, and most probably Paramount, chickened out years ago. They continue to spout the bullshit, but it’s hollow. The most telling was Reed. He started out as ambiguous, then took a right turn to straight. He became laughable, as a closeted gay man trying to be straight.
Frankly, this is a widespread problem in mainstream filmed sci-fi in general. The studios and execs cater to their target audience. The straight young white male. Star Trek is not alone in this. The “other” franchise, Star Wars, has the same problem. The characters. in power are white (mostly) males and females. Straight, of course. George did give us the token Mace Windu. And a green dwarf. And a Wookie. Now that’s diversity.
Finally, I can’t leave out the Transformers franchise, written by some of our friends here. Talk about stereotyping? OMG!!! Bob, if you read this: I respect your talent, but you can do better than that crap. To paraphrase you: the choice is yours.
45 years later, and we are no further ahead… to paraphrase Spock, “Astonishing!”. Inclusion would be both nice & beneficial for those of us who are not heterosexual, just as important as it was for a young Mae Jemison and Whoopi Goldberg to see Nichelle on screen back in the ’60’s… however, Star Trek sadly missed its opportunity to be a frontrunner on this issue as it was for so many others. A shame, but better late than never!
@153. I tend to agree with you. So does my gay sibling. (brother) We are both 47 so I guess you could call us middle aged white men.
He thinks its all crap about the EXECUTION of diversity in Trek. I feel the idea is still there.
Yes they stumbled with Reed in Enterprise. It would have been great to see him as a gay strong character. He could kick ass, liked weapons and wouldn’t have come across as a stereotypical character. I also believed him to be a good Starfleet officer. I think he would have been a great confidante to Trip Tucker and also to have a little disagreement between them if and when he came forward with his orientation. Trip is just a good old southern boy who COULD HAVE JUST NEEDED HELP UNDERSTANDING homosexuality and not necessarily disagreed with it.
However, I think you summed it up with your statement about studios and execs cater to their target audience. And in a business way it makes sense. The gay dinner theatre I attended with my brother in Toronto last year DID NOT advertise on the classic rock radio station or in the sports section of the Toronto Star.
They advertised to their target audience as they wanted to sell the tickets.
While we are on diversity in Trek- 1 in 5 people struggle with mental illness today. (Myself one of them- Bipolar Disorder)
We have never seen a character have to deal with any mental illness on Trek (to my recollection- someone please correct me if I’m wrong)
It would have been great to see a character deal with PTSD from the battle at wolf 359 or someone who is genetically disposed to depression bipolar schizophrenia etc- travelling space MUST frustrate someone who has those conditions. It would have been great to see Trek do their take on mental illness
Gay, Straight, Bi, Green, who cares.
To each their own, there’s more important issues at hand, like if the alien cigar shape craft on the moon is real, face on mars is real, motherships bigger than the size of earth near Saturn is real and why does the Govt and Nasa need to with hold the truth from the public?
Are they really afraid of national security, the public stop paying taxes and working simply because there is life outside of our planet, I mean get over yourselves. The human race is ready for whatever discovery is made, just look at our pop culture, who cares if Santa Clause isn’t real, I want to know the truth dammit!
Attention aliens, ignore our govt, we are ready for the truth!
I wonder what Mr Darwin would think of this notion. It seems to be contrary to his theory, n’est-ce pas?
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
No problem with gay characters on Star Trek. It was the original show about diversity. BUT…I hope we don’t see a forced and gratuitous relationship like the one in Phase II’s Blood and Fire. That was just awkward.
What catches the viewers’ pique is whether the character is interesting or not. Period.
BTW, I don’t get why a lot of fans want Sulu to become gay. Because he’s Asian??? Don’t tell me it’s because he’s played by a gay actor. That’s exactly what we don’t want to be doing isn’t it? Stereotyping?
I thought that clip was pretty gay. Why do people get pissed when people like 93 and 95 bring up a valid point? I am not against gay people, to each his or her own. But if people dont want to have a gay character then thats there opinion regardless if you agree or not. Doesnt make them a bigot or a hater. I would like to see a couple hot lesbiand characters on the show. Thats just me.. am I a shovinistic pig? Or a true visionary?
@106
You are just ignorant….
Yeah, it’s past time for this to happen. A gay captain is a good idea, as long as it’s not Kirk or another previously established character.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5_K_pUKEJY
Shatner says, Keep it gay!
Over-the-top characterizations of anything is just wrong and annoying, not to say keeping a stereotype alive. Sexuality should never be the defining characteristic of an individual. Above all else, IMHO, is that person a good, honest person? Do they show compassion for their fellow human being, their planet and all that live on it? Gay/straight/bisexual/transgender are labels and labels are just wrong. What makes this an issue is the fear that people have of things that are different to them…this fear makes them lash out because they cannot handle the difference and labels seem to make them feel better, but inside they are just as insecure as the rest of us.
but remember, we all breath air, red blood pumps through our veins, we all have hopes and wishes in our short time on this rock hurtling round and round an insignificant medium sized yellow star at the outer rim of one of many galaxies in this universe.
James T Kirk is a white male of Scots/Irish ancestry. Spock is half human (possibly Hispanic) and half vulcan. Dr McCoy is another white male, almost certainly of Scots/Irish ancestry. Uhura is a black woman of Swahili descent. Chekov is Russian. Sulu is Asian, possibly of Korean descent. Scotty is Scots. That is how it is. Do they and should they have to be anything other than who they are? NO!
#86 – Wow, that is not a nice story at all, Cre8tivguy. I’m glad that Jeri Taylor stepped in and apologised. From what I have read here and thinking about what happened to you just confirms to me that I think that the whole gay/bi issue should be left out of the Star Trek, unless they get a greater female presence. Actually, all the present Trek writers and producers are male, and very nice people, no doubt, but they are not female. Star Trek really needs to be a positive woman’s touch and I don’t mean some ball-busting “feminist” either. Humanity needs to grow up.
#135 – “Speaking of “Torchwood” and “Will & Grace”, John Barrowman (who is openly gay) tried out for the role of Will, but was rejected in favor of Eric McCormack (who is straight), because it was felt Barrowman’s characterization of Will was “too straight”.”
LOL!!! John Barrowman is very good as Jack Harkness in Torchwood and I like the way they deal with the various relationships in that show.
#138 – “This “family oriented franchise” had several male captains that would bed any female that gave them a second look, and at least one had an illegitimate son he didn’t know existed, and maybe more…”
It seems that you did not actually watch much of TOS and you certainly were not paying attention to the Star Trek – Wrath of Khan movie.
Although a few times, a little bed-hopping may have been implied with Kirk, in actual fact, Kirk spent most of his time alone and I think, quite sexually frustrated and lonely for a mate. I don’t believe that there were sexual overtones between Kirk and Spock. There is such an emotion as “brotherly love” as well as “platonic love” and that also existed between him and McCoy as well.
Now, the Wrath of Khan – this is the movie where we are introduced to Kirk’s son, David, born to Carol Marcus. In the movie, it is very clearly stated that Kirk did know about the baby and that Dr McCoy delivered the baby. In the lift, McCoy makes a joke about the Carol Marcus affair and Kirk very pointedly reminds McCoy, that as a physician, he should know the dangers of opening old wounds. Kirk also says something very telling later to Carol – “I did what you asked. I stayed away”.
In fact, it was the bitch Carol Marcus who denied him access to his young son, and even lies to their son, David, about who his father is and tells David that his father was dead. That is why I do not want any such character near this nu Pine/Kirk. The fact that the bitch would do such a thing and thought she could get away with it… UGH! (Of course, today, hopefully such a bitch would not be allowed to do such a thing. David would be allowed access to his birth records once he became an adult, if not beforehand).
158. C.S. Lewis – January 25, 2011
I wonder what Mr Darwin would think of this notion. It seems to be contrary to his theory, n’est-ce pas?
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
—-
Really? How so?
158. C.S. Lewis – Referencing Darwin seems insincere since you don’t believe in evolution. Remember?
“My problem comes, if I may be so crude, with the purely physical aspect of it and the attempt to place both gay sex and straight sex on the same level and to try and convince us that they are both to be considered in the same way. That I cannot do because for me, and yes, this does come from a religious foundation but don’t jump all over me just yet, straight sex, when it is expressed openly and naturally, is an opening of oneself to the possibilty of creating life, procreation in other words. This is something that is intrinsically impossible through gay sex. So, naturally, I mean biologically, they are very different. Gay sex is seen as a physical expression of the emotional love between the two people as indeed straIght sex can very often be (especially when contraception is used and the procreative aspect is intentionally removed) but istraight sex is still, contraception or not, a physical opening to the potential of life being created.
As such, gay sex and straight sex are different ”
Thank you, Ian Fee. This is how I feel and this is NOT because of any religion. Heterosexual intercourse between a healthy, fertile couple ALWAYS open them up to the (remote) possibility of creating another human being and that is what is being ignored and even denigrated by society in general. It also confers upon the couple decision making and certain (lifelong) responsibilities that a gay couple never have to deal with.
If a gay couple (male or female) want a child, there has to be a third party. The latest medical technology, artificial insemination, makes the process of getting a baby easier (eg Elton John and David Furnish are now the parents of a son, Zachary, born to a Californian woman). Without the technology, they would not have a baby, unless one of them was prepared to f*ck the mother of their child.
How does this not render the biological mother or father of these children a little irrelevant, unimportant and non-essential?
Those children may well take a different view. . .
I can’t help finding a certain sad irony that we’re talking about the lack of representation for homosexuals on Star Trek, when this was a show that, as others have pointed out, led the field in espousing diversity — even if it’s diversity *in spirit* by simply presenting token after token after token, to address comment #153.
But the thing that drives the sad irony home for me is that TNG made it abundantly clear that Data had sexual relations with at least two biologically human women. I have to ask, no matter how virulently homophobic or so-called “family values” oriented you are, how can you see sex between a robot and a human as more wholesome and acceptable as sex between two human beings of any gender or sexual orientation?
It’s truly bewildering to me….
Maybe it’s the demographics of the viewership, but Star Trek, from the 90s until now, truly stopped being forward thinking. I still hold out hope for the franchise port-reboot, though.
Wasn’t there a TNG episode in which Riker fell in love with a alien that changed sexes and how that race was intolerable about keeping their sex or something along those lines?
I guess a smart writer can write about how a alien race is intolerable about homosexuality and the enterprise and crew talk about how intolerant earth’s past used to be and how humans have evolved to accept homosexuality as normal and not something that is against gods will. Having just male and female copulate but how the human race has evolved to allow the copulation between males/males and females/females just like plants?
To each their own but I think CS Lewis maybe talking about creation and how humans were created to mate with the opposite sex?
I’m inclined to say that a token gay character would be contrived and condescending. They should just announce that Wesley Crusher was gay like Rowling did with Dumbledore. lol.
42. Jeyl – January 25, 2011
—-@41: Well, if there was ever a PHD for missing the point, you certainly would ace the course. Never mind the fact that being gay is more of a human factor than a political one, it’s also not limited to one country.
Also, have you not seen the episode Season 2 episode of Deep Space Nine titles Sanctuary? That deals with refugees.—-
Aha!!
Ironically, it is YOU who have missed MY point.
Mine was to call attention to the absurdity of judging Star Trek by its failure to feature sufficient characters of anyone’s particular culture or kind, by following that style of criticism to its logical end across the entire viewership.
The call for Cuban-refugee character was merely bait to lure you in.
And you fell for it!!
P.S. — I don’t remember whether I saw that DS9 episode or not. DS9 was a huge disappointment to me and I didn’t watch much of it. For all I know they had a character who was a Mormon with gigantism as well.
I may be missing the point here, but arnt we addressing todays issues in a show set in the future, where crime, poverty, hunger etc have been a thing of the past, just like the judgement of Homosexuality?
It is my understanding that people in the future (within Star TreK) dont have to have a large Neon sign floating above them saying they are Straight or Gay as it is not an issue, which would make the show really light years ahead as NO ONE GIVES A DAM IN THE FUTURE.
Surely by the none showig this gives the connotation of the above message. Why should we force the continuing discrimination of todays soceity into TV programmes about the future, which will be watched for years to come, so that our future children can grow up with these reinforced stereotypes of Straight or Gay!??
The involvement of Straight or Gay characters have been, I think great with the times and worked as such, to have it forced into each episode would have been bad idea as ratings would have dropped quicker then a lead balloon.
Star Trek works best when things are discussed, and shown in small bit sized pieces.
It is easier for the mass to take and accept things, things will never change over night nor in a 45 minute episode. By the very admission of a Black, Female and English Captain’s, teenage officers (not with ASBO’s) and alien offices and crew mates, this shows that tolerance is evident and that Star Trek is still the leading front on this subject.
Thats in my opinion anyway.
133. Thorny – - – - – “I’ve always thought that if Enterprise had continued, we would have learned (in a matter of fact way, not in a “very special episode) that Malcolm Reed was gay (it was strongly hinted at in “E2″).”
You’re thinking of that moment in the Mess Hall of the generational, alt-future NX-01, where they learn who got married, found a partner and who didn’t. He basically says “You’d think I would’ve found somebody on a ship this size.” Unfortunately that theory is slightly scuppered by the end bit where his solitude is ended and he pulls out a chair for a passing blonde woman, saying “This space is free.”
But there again, sexuality isn’t as simple as that. Even in the 22nd Century, I suppose it might take a while for people to find out. As it turned out, the writing didn’t go there with Reed (or any other characters) for whatever reasons and he was written with straight romantic interests… mainly that ‘Shuttlepod One’ fantasy involving T’Pol and to make him occasionally uncomfortable around her and Trip.
– - – “But the show wouldn’t have made a big issue out of it, because it is supposed to be 22nd Century and humanity has evolved to the point where sexual orientation simply isn’t an issue.”
That’s pretty much how it ought to be treated. I mean in the future, would you still get father disowning sons for coming out? That’s not very progressive. But on the other hand, like so much of Gene Roddenberry’s ideas about a perfect humanity – it instantly kills the drama which so many TV shows rely on.
At the end of the day, I refuse to see Star Trek as homophobic. The reason why it has never been discussed is that Gene Roddenberry’s underlying message that people’s differences are no big deal. They’re accepted to the point where there’s absolutely no need to say anything. That sort of goes against what it is to be homosexual in the 20th/21st Centuries. TV and film is largely full of attention seeking gay characteratures who fall into common stereotypes within the Entertainment Industry – largely femine bitchy types, obsessed with musical-theatre, in many cases promoting promiscuity and unable to have lasting relationships because society frowns on same sex marriages. In my opinion, Producers pander to those worst aspects and rarely create any positive role models, to counteract the homophobia out there.
I don’t know so much about American TV, but judging by British programming I don’t have much confidence a gay character on Star Trek would escape falling into that trap. Having to meet audience expectations of gay and lesbian people in popular culture… which as I say, unless you work in showbusiness, don’t really bear too much relation to those out there living ordinary lives.
If Star Trek had moved with the times and for instance, during Enterprise had given us a gay crew person… I’m happy to admit as a hetrosexual fella that wouldn’t have changed a thing for me. I’d have still have watched it week after week and been disappointed when they cancelled it.
I seem to recall LeVar Burton commenting on his relationship with Data… and his problems with women… I know he probably would have been cool if Geordi came out…. but by that time in the 24th Century hopefully no one would have given a shit.
What?
Most of those characters were pretty gay to me.
Today, gay characters on tv are not groundbreaking. They are more part of a quota, being squeezed in just to show they have them.
3. Gerry Alanguilan
COULDN’T SAY IT BETTER!
Whatever happens next, with the franchise, I already know that ,I wouldn’t care for a background reference to homosexuality in a Star Trek movie (or in a series).
I understand that in the future, as presented in Star Trek, people’s preferences don’t matter, and, as such, shouldn’t be focused upon.
But, since it wouldn’t matter, if the writers were to refer to homosexuality, why be shy about it (with one little scene in the background) ?
Most of the time, characters make sense to me only if they really matter to the story being told, I have to care for them.which means that, I would have to know many things about a (male)character, as a man, long before I was told that his husband’s first name was Richard, for instance.
Of course, that also means that he wouldn’t be an inconsequential character, i.e., a (disposable) red shirt.
which=Which
171. “To each their own but I think CS Lewis maybe talking about creation and how humans were created to mate with the opposite sex?”
when dispensing nuggets of intolerance, one should not wrap them conveniently in the guise of religion (which so many often do), or in this case science. ‘It’s not me, it’s my beliefs.’
By the way, homosexuality is found in nature.
#182
Thats why I referenced plants, I dont really care if people are gay or straight.
I’m looking for entertaining and engaging well-told stories in my Star Trek….not gay characters.
184. dayxday – January 26, 2011
Thank you. That’s what I was trying to say earlier. If a couple of guys/gals walking around in the background holding hands will make 9% of viewers feel vindicated somehow, then by all means, include it.
But don’t alter the story to accommodate it.
177. Zulu – January 26, 2011 – Funny stuff.
come on no gays in any damn movies or tv series heck no! God said noooooo!
It strikes me as odd that Star Trek, which had (until now) always been on the forefront of diversity and showing a ‘blended’ future has been so sadly deficient in gay character representation. In fact, just about every modern show/franchise except for Star Trek seems to have fallen in step with the times. Not the way it should be.
I attended a recent speaking event last September of famed “Tribble” author/screenwriter David Gerrold, and he echoed that feeling as well. In fact, one of the reasons he left ST-TNG in the first season, was because of a broken promise to produce his script, “Blood and Fire”, which was to be an AIDS allegory with two openly gay characters aboard the Enterprise D. The episode was later produced in the TOS-era as one of the fan made Phase II online episodes (and revenge being sweet, Gerrold got to direct the 2 part episode as well).
Again, it’s well past time for this….
“But don’t alter the story to accommodate it.”
Funny though, isn’t that exactly what they did to star trek with the last movie? Kirk a thug, Spock ghetto, Bones degraded to supporting role, triad destroyed, Star fleet rules altered and other lovely changes all for the sake of the twilight sparkle generation.
We already have “red shirts” in Trek so maybe now we should have “pink shirts” too. Then when one walks by the camera, we’ll know that a gay character has been included.
Sorry really bad joke and I don’t want to make fun or offend any one, but pink shirts is great “red shirt guys won’t be the only crew to be shafted”
#71 “Why does every thing have to be a social political statment. Can nothing be left alone. If your gay its your biz why do they feel they have to force them selfs on the rest of us?”
Some people just wonder why a show like Star Trek that has always celebrated racial diversity among the cast and characters, has never included sexual diversity as well.
I just want to add that your statement is the same tired drivel I’ve heard time and time again. It embarasses me on your behalf that you see a group’s fight for recognition as an afront to you.
You must understand that gay people *have* to struggle for recognition. Consider that:
- being gay used to be a crime, now it isn’t.
- could get fired from their jobs just for being gay, now they can’t
- gay people were forced into hiding, now they aren’t (as much).
- people would kill and beat up homosexuals, and now… oh wait… this still happens.
This awful thing you complain of, this ‘forcing it upon you’, is actually working to remind the world that gay people exist, and it is normal, and there is nothing wrong with it.
Who knows, if Star Trek had a gay character 20 years ago, maybe a few less people would have been beaten to death over something they can’t control.
In summary, you’re complaint is ridiculous, short-sighted and selfish. Grow up.
#191
Well said. : )
So much for tolerance.
Despite what the LGBT community and George Takei says, Gene Roddenberry never had any gay characters nor planned to. No documents or evidence has ever been presented to prove otherwise.
Gotta love Bragga bringing this up years after he could have taken a stand and introduced a gay character. What a self-serving dweeb to try to pretend AFTER THE FACT that he would have liked to introduce one. I’m sure in the 70’s a lot of Southern whites retrospectively would have told us they supported civil rights in the 60’s.
52, agree with you.
Oh, and who didn’t see this becoming a gay vs antigay argument? lol
Personally though, I prefer my tv to play heterosexual programming. I don’t have anything against homosexuality, but if they have a big thing about in the next movie/show, I won’t watch it.
@167. boborci – January 25, 2011
Well since C.S. Lewis seems indisposed I’ll take a crack at it. If the point of procreation is to pass ones genes on then those inclined towards same sex relations would be less likely to pass on their genes. As studies seem to suggest that homosexuality is not a choice but an inherent trait at birth then why hasn’t natural selection worked against this trait occurring in the population? It would seem to fit more with the traditional explanation of evolution if gays were not exclusively gay. Not to say that there’s anything wrong with that. Just a question of evolution.
oh and I thought Riley was gay. Not to mention those duds in Way to Eden.
For anyone questioning evolution, please read Darwin’s Dangerous Idea by Daniel Dennet. Amazing.
@191
First of all Star Trek is not a romance show, if there were ever a venue to explore gay romance it is not ST. But despite that, there were episodes that went quite overboard in exploring this issue and considering the target audience being families they probably shouldn’t have done those episodes to begin with. Especially the Ezri/Kira relationship in the mirror universe, I mean, I’m not homophobic or anything but that was darn sleazy.
Jadzia getting involved with a former hosts’ lover had no bearing on the DS9 story and no bearing on the character except to say, “yeah here’s a gay episode”. And that was them trying to do it in a meaningful way.
#156 denny – that’s whay I loved the introduction of Barclay. Brilliant, NOT so perfectly well-adjusted!
14: Lt. Hawk has been identified as gay for as long as I can remember, and I was just starting out in Trek fandom in ‘96. I think it’s *great* that his retconned relationship with Keru is being used the way it is in Titan, but that aspect of the character was there right away in FC, even if it didn’t show up on screen.
@ 198
Thanks for the book reference.
By the way, how is the scripting of my sequ…I mean of the sequel going?
:)
In the next movie it should be revealed that all Klingons are gay. I wouldn’t mind a little Klingon action. Maybe we could have cross-species gay relations. Now that would be interesting.
This may be the topic that makes it to 1701 posts…
On the subject of Kirk/Spock specifically as gays
It can be reasoned that mind melds are much much more intimate than actual sex and Spock melded with Kirk a lot.
Kirk got a lot of sex because GENE was a horndog during WW2. Even he says so. He had a wife at home but he cheated on her with every nurse in the Pacific theatre. His rationale was he could be shot down any day, so why not? This is what Gene thought being a man was at that time, and under those circumstances. This is the real life basis for the fictional oversexed Kirk
NOW, purely in the context of fiction:
SO: since Spock would naturally experience all manner of sex through his melds with Kirk, it could be reasoned that Spock got his jollies vicariously through Kirk.
AND also: Kirk would also gain experiences through Spock, namely all the previous Pon Farrs. That would push Kirk’s desire for sex into overload since as a human, he does not repress his emotions at all.
THUS: Kirk and Spock share a bond no human gay couple ever could.
YES they love each other, even more than Doogie Houser loves his man. They are closer than any two human men could ever be.
Kirk may not even realize it. Spock certainly does.
Remember the “psychic rape” of Valeris that Spock actually found distasteful. Nimoy says as much in “I Am Spock”
PLUS: Once Spock thought he killed Kirk in Amok Time, Spock no longer had any sexual urges. (I honestly dont remember if they had mind melded previoulsly) It can be INFERRED that Spock thought he had killed his “lover” and thus lost the Blood Fever, because he certainly had NO attraction whatsoever for T’Pring.
LOGICALLY, Spock and Kirk were “gay” on a level no mere Human can ever understand.
@ Bob.O
Bob, I know you like to read scifi, but there is one story everyone missed and I wish I still had it.
The LOGICAL conclusion from cloning is a planet of no human males. All women in the future are lesbians by default and they use DNA scrambling to reproduce. No men are needed ever. As long as they maintain their level of technology.
It was a story written in the mid to late 90s and i think was in a “best of” compilation.
You should have an intern look that up and maybe consider something similar. Suppose such a planet that now needs men because they destroyed their tech or a natural disaster did that for them?
There have not been any spefically gay characters in Star Trek on screen. However, the DS9 episode already referenced gives some indication that in the Star Trek universe, it is no big deal. Jadzia discussed her situation with Kira and Sisko, and the concerns were not about a gay relationship, but a cultural taboo about Trills becoming involved with people in their prior lives. The fact that they were both women was absolutely not an issue.
I do have to laugh when people try to protray Kirk and Spock as having some sort of latent sexual/homoerotic fantasy toward each other. When it comes to James T Kirk, I don’t think you can find a more hetero male out there. Saying he has gay fantasies is like saying James Bond has gay fantasies about Felix Leiter. It has absolutely no basis in fact whatsoever.
I always found it interesting that if a guy has a really good guy friend, he must have have gay fantasies about them. Kirk and Spock are more like brothers. They are family. They would die for one another. But never once on screen (or in novels for that matter), did I ever perceive that they had any sort of romantic longing for each other. Whatever Gene Roddenberry intended in the beginning, that was not the relationship that developed (I have yet to find proof of this theory that Roddenberry intended Kirk and Spock to be bisexual, and I consider myself pretty well versed in all things Trek).
I had a best friend in high school and college that was a guy. I can tell you for a fact that as far as homosexuality is concerned, I am the furthest thing from. No offense to gays out there, but frankly, I don’t see what you see in guys. In fact, I don’t see what women see in us either. I have always said, if I were a woman, I’d have to be a lesbian:)
197. A Kirk for the Rest of Us – January 26, 2011
@167. boborci – January 25, 2011
Well since C.S. Lewis seems indisposed I’ll take a crack at it. If the point of procreation is to pass ones genes on then those inclined towards same sex relations would be less likely to pass on their genes. As studies seem to suggest that homosexuality is not a choice but an inherent trait at birth then why hasn’t natural selection worked against this trait occurring in the population? It would seem to fit more with the traditional explanation of evolution if gays were not exclusively gay. Not to say that there’s anything wrong with that. Just a question of evolution.
The answer to that is that GAYS are not just GAY.
I live in a city with a huge gay population and some of them are not exclusively gay even if they consider themselves gay.
many men start of straight simply because of the biological urge (Pon farr if you will) and they do marry women and have children but then realize once they’ve made a child that they’re happier with men. And they “go gay” in their 20s & 30s only after reproducing.
Lesbians of course still have their biological urge to reproduce and that’s what sperm donors are for.
thus gays reproduce.
Now if only we could make everyone in India and China gay for about 40 years… (kidding)
Star Trek is a fictional programme dealing with events in the future. Science plays a part as it is different and more advanced than what we have at present. This allows for humans to be able to live in big starships and move about and explore outer space. However, Star Trek is essentially about human beings and their experiences of what they encounter and how these things affect them, and also about how their presence may affect other/different life forms, planetary and star systems (prime directive?). Therefore, one cannot exclude basic human needs and drives, given that even in the TOS era, 400 people (mostly human) were out there in space for a long period of time. Sexuality, romance, friendships, family are a part of who we are. Exploring the outer reaches of star systems will not necessarily change that. Why would it/should it? Why would we want it to?
So, Yes, Family, friendships and other social relationships, romance and sexuality can be a part of Star Trek. In fact, it would be ridiculous to think that they wouldn’t/shouldn’t be. Then there are the aliens – hence xeno-linguistics, xeno-biology etc which would presumably include study of the methods of reproduction, cultural, social beliefs and their dynamics etc.
Star Trek, like most sci-fi, has made the assumption, rightly or wrongly, that if there were life beyond our world, our solar system, that it may not be that diametrically different from what we know of here. Basically, they are discovering in the Star Trek world variations on themes, whether they are biological, cultural, religious, psychological, sexual…
And I do think this fits in with Gene Roddenberry’s ideas/vision.
“206. Damian – January 26, 2011
But never once on screen (or in novels for that matter), did I ever perceive that they had any sort of romantic longing for each other. ”
watch the first season episodes again and pay attention to the way Nimoy and Shatner look at each other, forgetting for the moment that they are “Kirk and Spock”
They share VERY gay looks, especially in Mudd’s Women.
203–In the Enterprise novel “The Kobayashi Maru” there is a gay Klingon couple portrayed. Also, the “Typhon Pact: Rough Beasts of Empire” novel notes a lesbian Romulan couple in addition to the before mentioned T’Prynn in the Vanguard novels and Ranul Keru in the Titan novels.
I have to agree with some posters here, that to turn a character into a gay character and turning it into some sort of plot device just for the sake of saying it was done would be a mistake. Star Trek is not about sex, it is about exploration (about the potential for humanity as well as of space). If a character happens to incidentally be gay, so be it. However, I think it’s clear that in the Star Trek universe, sexuality is not an issue any longer. To focus on homesexuality as an issue would be unnecessary.
209–Sorry, I just don’t see it. From the first season on, I see Kirk trying to bed down with every hottie he comes across. I doubt perceive myself as dense, and never once did I get the impression that Kirk and Spock are attracted to each other. I have always seen them as having a family bond, one of very close brothers.
Also, I don’t understand the term “gay looks.” What I see in Mudd’s Women is an amused expression regarding the situation with Mudd and the 3 women. It is a similar look I would share with a friend if I were in a similar situation. And I can assure you, I have never had a gay fantasy in my life. I find sharing a bed with another guy repulsive (sorry again to any gays out there, I just don’t see what you see in guys).
“I know you’ve told us you designed that relationship as ‘Two halves which come together to make a whole’. Is that how you still see it?”
[Roddenberry]: “Oh yes. As I’ve said, I definitely designed it as a love relationship. I think that’s what we’re all about – love, the effort to reach out to each other. I think that’s a lovely thing. Also, dramatically, I designed Kirk and Spock to complete each other. I designed Kirk and Spock, as I told you, as dream images of myself, the two halves. But in terms of the characters, yes. That closeness… absolutely.”>>
<>
As he says, Kirk was a friend to Spock in the series,
later on gets to be considered brother, no physical love, yet
and in the motion picture era Spock thinks of him as – a t’hy’la
t’hy’la = friend, brother, lover
If you put all of that with the scenes from the series and the movies, you can see exactly when each step was taken.
#207 – “Now if only we could make everyone in India and China gay for about 40 years… (kidding)”
You may find they end up being “gay” out of desperation. These two countries have been busy murdering…oops aborting huge numbers of their female feotuses for some time now. In some parts of India, not a single female child can be found. China’s one-child policy has lead many couple’s to have their daughters aborted, so that next time they will hopefully conceive a boy.
What to do with all those young testosterone driven, aggressive males? Put them in an army? God help us all!
<>
The only difference being, during the series, affection was enough to get the point across.
“There’s a great deal of writing in the Star Trek movement which compares the relationship between Alexander and Hephaistion* to the relationship between Kirk and Spock – focusing on the closeness of the friendship, the feeling that they would die for one another…”
[Roddenberry]: “Yes, there’s certainly some of that – certainly with love overtones. Deep love. The only difference being, the Greek ideal – we never suggested in the series – physical love between the two. But it’s the – we certainly had the feeling that the affection was sufficient for that, if that were the particular style of the 23rd century.
Yeah, I never really got into the “slash’ portrayals of Kirk/Spock, but I can see where they get it from.
I’ve always assumed they were gay, just on a different level.
Gene says so himself in the novelization of “The Motion Picture”
Spock doesnt have sex but once every 7 years, but they are closer to each other than any human man & woman could ever be.
You dont have to have homosexual “sex” to be “gay”
The very word Homosexual means sex with another of your gender, but it doesnt mean the same as the original Greek “Eros” which did mean love between two men.
I agree that retro-slashing Kirk/Spock robs us of one of the great friendship t’hy’la stories in Trek; we don’t need to go there to get gays in Trek.
But they really shoulda been there long before now. I think the books DO do a nice job of not sensationalizing characters who happen also to be gay, for the most part. #211 Damian gives examples. Tucker’s brother is also gay, and has a family (Kobayashi Maru etc).
Although the screen should have had what the books have, I do applaud the allegorical episodes cited in the article, making a point about our problems with prejudice NOW–and it’s true, they couldn’t have made that point with actual gay people BECAUSE–as we all know!–no one cares in the future, and everyone accepts it then. It’s more a message for the 20th/21st centuries.
You can be the only thing on one’s mind while he is dying, the only thing on his mind when he is reborn… too bad for you, it doesn’t count if you are both guys.
You can sacrifice your ship – the same one that you ended any romance with a woman for, for a guy…. your son and your wife, your career, you can consider his soul your own responsibility as much as your own and have his father agree with that. You can stop his mating drive and flirt with him throughout the years, hold hands and talk about …. this simple feeling.
But too bad, you are both guys.
But if a woman happens to tease a guy twice, and he takes it and then tells her to go away. BIG ROMANCE
Slightly off topic, but
Darwin was trying to get published before his competitor, and in those days that was the same as building the Eiffel Tower, it was a big deal.
Darwin was never convinced during his lifetime that he was the endall and be-all.
he was an Athiest because his daughters died in childhood, and hated God as a result, not because he didnt ever believe in a god, but because he felt cheated and angry.
His wife was a devout Christian to her death.
AND Darwin spent his life after publishing his theory in correspondence with every English cleric trying to reconcile Evolution with a Belief in God.
In otherwords, take Darwin with a grain of salt, he certainly did.
Re-reading #70– I have to agree.
What I see with Kirk and Spock is a plutonic, familial love. And yes, you can love someone who is not a blood relative without wanting to get into bed with them,
It works both ways. In a way, our society is oversexualized. Just because I have a really good friend that happens to be a girl does mean I want to crawl into bed with her.
I am disturbed by some posters here who think you are homophobic just because you don’t wnat a gay couple paraded around like some exhibit. Again, if there is a character happens to be gay, whatever. I don’t need him or her to be pushed down my throat. Many have referenced Uhura as being Black in a 60’s show. But she wasn’t paraded around the show as the token Black character. Her race was not an issue in the 23rd century. I think the same would go for homosexual characters. Their sexual orientation would be no issue for anyone.
That is what made Star Trek so special. Your race, religion, sexual orientation, etc was never an issue. Uhura was an important bridge officer who happened to be a beautiful Black woman.
People saying “in the 24th century, nobody would care and they thus shouldn’t make a deal out of it” do realize it’s a TV show being produced in an era where homosexual acceptance isn’t exactly widespread, right? Whatever people in the future think of homosexuals, making a very specific *point* about gay acceptance on Star Trek would have gone a way to fixing up modern day bigots, just as the show dealt with other forms of bigotry in the 1960s. It’s Star Trek’s biggest dropped ball.
I mean, nobody in the 60s said, “hell, black Americans will be totally fine in the future. No sense putting a female one on the bridge, right?”
Oh for the love of…
Look, Kirk and Spock were not gay. They were not in any sort of sexual relationship. Why is it that two men can’t be close without it meaning they are in some sexual relationship?
Do straight men not have close friends and brothers?
Another question- it’s been said that in the 24th century (or I’m sure the 23rd, had anyone asked these questions in the ’60s), no one will care and anyone could be gay… okay… but there’s also the rule about Star Trek canon- that if it didn’t happen on screen, it didn’t happen.
It’s like… the ah… the chicken and the egg… the CHICKEN AND THE EGG…
I for one believe that Star Trek showed humanity had evolved beyond the desires for, and I am sorry if this offends, unnatural physical relations. The human machines were designed and/or created to work in a specific way. It is my hope that by the 23rd century we will have gained the wisdom required to move beyond homosexual practices.
My opinion, offered without venom or vitriole. If you respond in disagreement to the post, please do so without animosity or personal attacks. Thank you.
@222
Kirk and Spock were the first big male paring in modern history to be slashed by fans. So, regardless of canon that has and will continue to be a big legacy from Trek, right along with the subtext. As it should be.
Regardless of your preference, there’s no need to argue against that kind of chemistry.
There are fans of pairing who would like to see it become canon, but their reasons for wanting it have about as much to do with gay rights as wanting to see Taye Diggs naked on film has to do with black rights.
@186 “come on no gays in any damn movies or tv series heck no! God said noooooo!”
When you can get your good friend God to come on here and post on the subject, fine. Until then I refuse to take your word for it. I also refuse to take the word of an ages old text that was written by fallible human beings, and has been reinterpreted by many others over the years to fit their agendas .
BTW which “God” are you referring to? Jehovah, Allah, Zeus, etc…? Rather presumptuous of you to speak as an authority for ALL religions.
There is a distinct difference between friends and brothers relationship which other ost characters have, and what Kirk and Spock share. Shown in both the series/movies and spoken of by Gene himself.
You wouldn’t be like this if they were a boy and a girl, which just goes to show how hypocritical and homophobic “real trekkies” are.
IDIC my gluteus maximus
I think the only way it could be worked in well is if the character starts off married to another (either two women or two men) and they dont draw attention to them being gay, instead you just write the story around the two married eople and wht normal couples deal with…within the confines of the back story anyway. since this is about exploring new worlds not exploring a bunch of people on a ship.
There could actually be a race tht sees it as a problem so tht there is that episode where it is back to the twenieth centry sterio types against gays. Cause some races may only see sex as a way of reproduction, and may not understand why people would couple if no offspring would come of it..this would be simular to todays religious outspeak against it but without bringing up or bashing religion. But use simular hate and fear and misunderstandings.
I personally think that the human race should give up sex altogether for a generation since all it does is cause problems (and employment cant keep up with the population anyway), and being a star trek fan I am doing my part to not be able to have sex. lol.
223: You’re a moron. That’s like defending slavery and telling people not to rag on you for being an ass, because you defended it “without venom or vitriol.” Ahh gee, how nice and high-minded of you!
You’re a douchebag homophobe at least a generation behind the times. What you see in Star Trek I will never understand.
There are a lot of folks on this site who for whatever reason, feel that “Star Trek” should NOT address homosexuality because of their fear of it being “rammed down their throats”. Trek writers have covered a lot of topics without ramming anything down anyone’s throats. Racism, poverty, hate, wars have all been addressed in some form or another during the 45 years of Trek. And in most cases, it was interwoven with character moments, story and visual effects. Yes, first and foremost an episode or movie has to be entertaining. But if you want to have something to remember and ponder for a long time after, there needs to be something addressed. “Star Trek” has already addressed and acknowledged most issues except for homosexuality. And it doesn’t mean we need to see two men or two women groping each other or f**king each other. That would be over the top and unnecessary. All that is required is a scene or two to let everyone know that it is acceptable for one to be gay, lesbian or transgendered and still be able to contribute. It can be done subtley and quitely. And it should be characters that are important to the story, with their orientation being a piece that doesn’t distract or impose itself on viewers. And those characters should and could be written as straight characters would, because most gays, lesbians and transgendered folks have talents and interests similar to those of straight people.
And I’ve read how some people claim homosexuality is “unnatural”. First of all, homosexuality isn’t limited to the human race. It occurs in the animal kingdom. Secondly, homosexuality is just another form of love. Therefore, homosexuality is perfectly natural, even if it isn’t perfect. No kind of love is. It may not have been planned by Mother Nature, but ironically Mother Nature isn’t perfect and neither are we.
Homosexuality violates the law of “Survival of the Fittest.” If, as we evolve, the species is becoming more and more perfected for the purpose of continuing as a race, the homosexual component which does not exactly reproduce as efficiently as heterosexual relationship are doomed to fail. So give it a few million years and homosexuality should be weened out of the species as a genetic aberration.
I always assumed that the Enterprise had just as many gay people on it as any ship or town in modern times. It just wasn’t a big deal. It’s like that much vaunted exchange between some guy and Roddenberry over whether Picard should have a toupee or not. The guy says that by the 24th century, we’ll have a cure for baldness. Roddenberry allegedly replies that in the 24th century, baldness won’t matter.
I figured that with homosexuality it was the same. There’s gays all over Star Trek; it’s just not a big deal.
There are no gays in Star Trek.
There should be Gays in Star Trek.
By omitting the homosexuals the producers are pandering to the right wing religious groups who are free to see the Star Trek universe as a future where all human “illnesses” like homosexuality have been “Cured” this is UNNACEPTABLE.
230:
If by “the law of survival of the fittest” you mean “the Theory of Evolution” you’d be mistaken.
Man is now capable of reproducing without the need for a heterosexual relationship, or even a partner. Sperm is donated, and women are inseminated without the need for the sexual act. Gay couples with kids is now a reality.
We also, in theory, do not allow our weak to die like the Spartans. Part of our evolution is also mental, spiritual and emotional, so we care for the sick and handicapped, and ‘evolve’ generally towards inclusion and acceptance, though that is a multi-generational process.
Man’s ‘evolution’ has removed the ‘reproduction’ aspect from the picture via medicine and technology, and there is certainly enough speculation in science fiction how that could ‘evolve’ in a foreseeable future. How we evolve as sentient, spiritual beings separates our own evolution from that of slugs and snails.
To all the religious bigots out there…….
GOD CREATED ALL PEOPLE.
SOME PEOPLE ARE BORN GAY.
GOD DOESN’T MAKE MISTAKES.
Okay, now break up into small groups and discuss…
#230
Or males and females are capable of reproducing, whats more efficient?
male+female or male+male, female+female, male+self, female+self?
#231
I agree who cares? Whats the fuss, get over the complexes
#230 – Dr. Jack – I find your comment not only offensive, but erroneous. First of all, there is no “law” that for survival of the fittest. It is a concept. In fact, we are becoming less fit with time. People will all kinds of debilitating diseases are living longer, and procreating. Most of us are far less fit and robust than our frontier counterparts. We only live longer because of the relative ease of our lives and modern medicine.
There is no proof that homosexuality is an aberration. You might as well say that being black is an aberration, because that’s really where you are going. You’re taking your obvious prejudice and trying to mask it in some pseudo-scientific talk, when in fact you’re just being ignorant.
Star Trek has often taking on the plight of those who are discriminated against. To say that the gay lifestyle should not be approached is no different than saying Trek shouldn’t show women or blacks or Asians.
I’m appalled by the large number of outright bigots who follow Star Trek. You obviously don’t get it. And you disgust this heterosexual white male individual writing this.
In the future, Dr. Jack, I suggest you study true natural science, and not just your uneducated, prejudiced agenda. No natural “law” is being violated by homosexuality.
I apologize for my typos. I was pissed off and currently have pink eye, so it’s really hard to see.
I guess they just figured DADT would go on forever…
237
Pink eye sucks. I hope you get better soon!
I had it once myself. It was pretty gross.
“Don’t ask, don’t tell” should have been applied to morons instead of gays.
All idiots should keep their dumb comments to themselves.
#236
Well said, bravo
Here is an interesting Star Trek Trivia fact for all of you…
In the TNG episode “The First Duty” one of the academy training ships has the same exact ship registry number as the USS Defiant…NX-74205.
Noticed that nugget of trivia in my Star Trek: The Next Generation 10th Anniversary Collectors Book.
Fun little note I think.
242
I had noticed that too…..and the members of those training ships all belonged to Red Squad, the same organization which had another group of cadets wind up in command of another Defiant class ship, the Valiant.
I wouldn’t mind seeing an openly gay character in Star Trek. Then again, I wouldn’t mind seeing openly Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindi, Sikh, etc., etc., characters in Star Trek either. And I wouldn’t mind seeing a character who is a stamp-collector, bird-watcher, bowler, wine-collector, antique dealer, racecar driver, who also specializes in fusion cuisines.
Okay, I know—the next Trek show can showcase a different religion, minority and/or lifestyle choice in each episode.
“Stay tuned for a very special hour of… Star Trek: Diff’rent Strokes.”
I was wireded out when the had Spock & Uhra kiss, I don’t believe that Star Trek movie is the place for this very controversol political issue.
kids watch this, it’s had enough to explain what kirk was doing with the orion girl with out having to explain other things.
Most people who believe in God and value a form of scripture, believe that homosexuallity is wrong. for a movie that is suppost to be for all including a movie that one can take a family to, this is one place that this issue does not belong.
I also believed that in the future regardless of a persons sextually preferreance they would have the good taste not to bring it to work.
yes there may be charaters who are gay, but that is not somthing that the movie should be about people go to see the action, dazzle, McCoy and Spock fight, and Kirk bring everyone together to solve a problem that seems unsolvable. not a politaical issue that is going to only make half the auddence happy, half pissed off and not waiting to even see it, and what’s left confused either because they are to young to understand or to dumb.
No the issue of Gay charaters especaialy main charaters is wrong, it wont sell enough tickets so the company would loss money,
Star Trek has always been a Action/comady series so to make it a drama social isssue will bore people.
I sorry I love all the charateres but even in a hetrosextually relationship I would find it boring I got to see, Spock, Kirk, Uhara, Checkov, and Sulu kick ass, Scotty to get them out of there & McCoy patch them up so they can do it all again! leave the mushy I love you, Politacali crap for the Oscars give me somthing I can go out of the theater with a cheer, not something that is going to bore me!
Using the “gay” card is just writer´s laziness for cheap repercussion.
And while you´re here gaying yourselves in this old, battered issue, a real fun Comic book homage is being held elsewhere.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/scifimediazone/news/?a=28818
The anonymity of the internet does make bigotry easier. Just ask the KKK about anonymity. It’s just another mask. Or those who were mortified to see their contributions to Prop 8 posted on the web.
I have a feeling that if we were all face to face, without our masks, many of these remarks would not be made.
“Ya wanna say that to my face?”
For some Christians, Christianty is a reason to hate others. Accept the following; God is gay. He created the universe, the earth, all the animals, he was an interior decorator.
…was, as he’s dead now. Because of aids, that he got from Mary.
My oppinion is:
Star Trek is NOT about SEX… It is about space, exploration, human drama or, maybe now, even ALIEN drama…
Sex is part of the Human nature. But Star Trek is NOT only about Humans… And sex is something to do with love, with feelings, or even with reproduction, in a more basic level…
Bringing a gay character to the stories is to pay so much attention to a maybe minor detail that, I think, is NOT the focus in Star Trek…
So, what’s the point?? This is just because “gay” is the new “trend”…? Is it, by the way?? So many people think so – even gay people…!! It IS receiving to much attention already. For sure, not only “good” attention, BUT… is is becoming more and more VISIBLE and, in a way, maybe “the world is getting more and more used to this diversity…
If this is true the logic way seem to be it becoming something quite uninteresting in therms of people’s love, choice or tendency…
I don’t know if I made myself clear, but… I TRYED….!! ;)
To me it is just out of context of Star Trek… and more to a soap opera or a teenage TV series…!!
“Star Trek is NOT about SEX…”
Did we watch the same Star Trek? :D
I guess so…!! ;)
At least ST is not MOSTLY about sexual issues…!! :}
Yes (47%)
maybe/unsure (13%)
No (39%)
So… if there were a parade right now, out of 100 people, 47 would be walking, 39 would be protesting and throwing stones, 13 would be watching from the windows…. almost feels like home.
Years ago a friend and I were discussing the increasingly un-subtle and in-your-face politically correct preachiness of Start Trek, & his prediction was that the next Captain of the Enterprise could only be a middle-aged, overweight, lesbian Mexican woman.
“No gay characters on Star Trek”.
Who cares?
Why is that the thing that’s important?
Why is that the thing we’re talking about?
There’s also no:
-Jewish characters on Star Trek
-Stoner characters on Star Trek
-Morbidly obese characters on Star Trek
-Little people on Star Trek
-Bisexual characters on Star Trek
-Deaf characters on Star Trek
-Hermaphroditic characters on Star Trek
-Tall, athletic, blond Swedish characters on Star Trek
-Autistic characters on Star Trek
-Myopic characters on Star Trek
-Ainu characters on Star Trek
-Puerto Rican characters on Star Trek
-Asexual characters on Star Trek
-Mute characters on Star Trek
-Muslim characters on Star Trek
-Australian characters on Star Trek
-Foot-fetishist characters on Star Trek
And so what?
What most people here are forgetting is that Star Trek: The Original Series was made in the sixties, and you would have to be deaf, blind and dumb not to see that a lot of the time the original series was about sexual freedoms and the exploration of oneself, sexually as well as socially. Roddenberry had a vision about the future, one where man was united and all walks of life were accepted. It was, in a way, part of the hippy-movement. Sulu and Uhura were characters on the show, mostly because of their race. So to put a gay crewman on board for the sake of it, would actually do the show justice.
256. Eff It – January 27, 2011
Years ago a friend and I were discussing the increasingly un-subtle and in-your-face politically correct preachiness of Start Trek, & his prediction was that the next Captain of the Enterprise could only be a middle-aged, overweight, lesbian Mexican woman.
“No gay characters on Star Trek”.
Who cares?
Why is that the thing that’s important?
Why is that the thing we’re talking about?
There’s also no:
-Jewish characters on Star Trek
Nimoy, Shatner, Koenig are all extremely Jewish and Vulcans are based on Nimoy’s Jewishness
-Stoner characters on Star Trek
Plenty of Drunks, including Scotty
-Morbidly obese characters on Star Trek
Morn & Scotty
-Little people on Star Trek
Keenser? The ferenghi
-Bisexual characters on Star Trek
Just about all the women on DS9…
-Deaf characters on Star Trek
TNG
-Hermaphroditic characters on Star Trek
TNG
-Tall, athletic, blond Swedish characters on Star Trek
There must have been a few over all the years just without speaking roles
-Autistic characters on Star Trek
-Myopic characters on Star Trek
-Ainu characters on Star Trek
-Puerto Rican characters on Star Trek
-Asexual characters on Star Trek
Data at the very least
-Mute characters on Star Trek
TNG
-Muslim characters on Star Trek
Rabau, Khan
-Australian characters on Star Trek
Commander Kyle
-Foot-fetishist characters on Star Trek
Several directors with foot fetishes on DS9. Frakes? Burton?
And so what?
#258 Well said, sir.
I’m amazed at how much hesitance there is for something as simple as putting a gay character in Star Trek. I’m afraid there’s quite a bit of latent homophobia there, especially from male, white, teenage middle-Americans.
We on the other hand, here in The Netherlands, love the gays! If we ever make a science-fiction series, there will be nothing but gays and the straight men will be the exeption. There will be debates; Is The Netherlands ready for a straight character on the bridge? Awesome. We have by the way, a gay prime-minister now, Rutte. Although, not everyone agrees that he is gay, but he is single and goes on holiday with his mother. So…
Actually, the role of the communications officer wasn’t even part of the original script, only added later because Gene liked the word uhurU & knew the actress personally from before, so he added her and invented a new role simply for the sake of having her there.
And it turned out just fine.
Khan isn’t a Muslim. Facepalm…..
I thought that we saw such a person in the TNG pilot episode, remember the guy walking around in the skirt on the ship?
‘Q’ definitely was AC/DC
Nothing wrong with homosexuals in Star Trek. As long as it isn’t token and so in your face that it smacks of covering demographics for the sake of demographics.
#199 “First of all Star Trek is not a romance show, if there were ever a venue to explore gay romance it is not ST blah blah blah”
1) Star Trek explored social issues. ‘Nuff said.
2) If you read post #68, I said ” I couldn’t care less if there was a gay character on Star Trek. ” I was just responding to a guy complaining about why gay people “feel they have to force them selfs on the rest of us”.
3) If you start a response with “First of all”, people kinda look for something like a “Secondly” in ther rest of your post.
Gene was open to having gay characters in the show. In his authorized bio they have a letter he wrote on this subject. His only problem was the way gay charcters were being written. He thought by the time Star Trek took place, being gay was not a big deal and people would not even acknowledge it. Gene was all for gay characters, but he didn’t want a 20th, or in this case, 21st century spin on LGBT characters.
You know, I love it. To some people, if I don’t think Kirk and Spock shared secred longings for one another, I am suddenly a homophobe. Again, look at Uhura in the original series. She was not paraded around like “Look at me, the token Black woman on the bridge of a starship”. Her presence was organic and when viewed on the show seemed perfectly natural. My view is if there is a gay character in a future show and movie, it should be handled the same way. It does not need to be “Hey look at me, I am the token gay character…hey, are you looking at me.”
You know, as a self professed moderate, I must say there is one disturbing characteristic liberals and conservatives share. That of judging others who disagree with them. If you disagree with a conservative you are going to Hell. If you disagree with a liberal you are a fascist bigot. And you wonder why there is no civil discourse anymore.
I’m sorry, I don’t see the gay love between Kirk and Spock. If that makes me a homophobe to some people out there, whatever. I guess James Bond is gay too. I really don’t care anymore. I see Kirk and Spock as blood brothers. If some out there want to see it as some sexual longing, so be it. It’s a free country.
And to think that exactly the fact that the two of them were not “paraded around ” and not cliché feminised types is what makes you deny everything about them…..
I’ve just always assumed that they are gay characters in Star Trek, but just like gay people today, they don’t (necessarily) they don’t go around shouting “I’m GAY” at every opportunity. In fact I work at a University and out of all the staff I know I couldn’t tell you if we have a gay members of staff or not, but with over 2500 staff theres bound to be plenty.
the problem with gay characters is that you have to make them very obvious for TV (i.e, the camp/ effeminate Will and Grace or Modren family type clichés)
Having Gay friends, I would find that I would find very annoying/stupid/offensive.
Who likes Star Trek, but doesn’t want gay characters on the show? Just what are you watching it for, exactly? The costume design?
After 270 posts, this is seeming to be as absurd as a Next Generation crewman in his “dress uniform”.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/memoryalpha/en/images/e/ee/Man_in_a_skant.jpg
I don’t want to ever see that again.
269—That goes back to my earlier point that our society is oversexualized. I mean you can’t have two people (hetero or homo) that are very good friends without them having the hots for one another. I am definetly not a prude, but I don’t see sexual longings in every best friend pairing out there.
But, hey, you see Kirk and Spock as a closet gay couple, more power to you. I don’t. I’ll leave it at that.
268. You’ve obviously missed the point. If they were paraded around, they would have been in more scenes, had more lines, and have tried addressing this issue more up front. Once again, I say go back and read what Gene wanted. It was not to parade around people and make statements. It was to show that in the future none of this mattered anymore.
Sure the episodes dealt with current topics, but it was never done in a way that said “hey! look at me! I’m making a social commentary!”
And 267.. well said on all accounts.
271 — Agreed. No matter your views on human rights or anything else under the sun… that is one unfortunate “look” for any sentient being of any gender.
271–Assuming you are not just being sarcastic, I watch Star Trek for the story and for space exploration. We are really getting bogged down with to have a gay character or not to have a gay character. Whatever the next movie, TV series, etc turns out to be, somehow I get the feeling that a character’s sexual orientation is not going to be the central plot point. It’ll be about some crisis that the crew will have to solve, ultimately.
“I want no parading” card is really not the one you can pull here. Not after JJ version of Spock who does just that.
On a completely unrelated note (other than mentioning James Bond again) I recently found out that John Logan (co-wrote Star Trek: Nemesis) is involved with writing the next James Bond film. In addition to Star Trek I am a big Bond fan and I also noted in the past that Stuart Baird (also of Star Trek: Nemesis) edited Casino Royale. I’ve always been interested in seeing some people involved in Star Trek past involved with other series and movies I am interested in.
Stuart Baird is a talented editor, and let’s hope he stays one.
261. Max – January 27, 2011
Khan isn’t a Muslim. Facepalm…..
He wasn’t exactly a Sikh either. They wear hats and never cut their hair, and the modern ones never fight. They practice strict non violence.
Chalk it up to the writer not doing his homework. Makes more sense for Khan to be a Muslim, given everything about him.
Absolutely vile and DISGUSTING. The absolutely rock bottom of the barrel now. This is downright awful.
It just absolutely and deeply offends me that someone mentions ‘Stuart Baird’ on here.
281–Greg Cox adresses that oversight in his Eugenics Wars books. Khan was a Sikh who followed Sikh customs at first. But after the chemical accident in India, he becomes angered and starts to feel the world needs his “guiding hand.” He decided that he was above Sikh customs and he shaves his beard and cuts his hair.
New Voyages did a good job on this issue. I thought it was well done and did not distract from the story. A good test is during a gay scene was it handled in the same way that straight characters would be treated?
#280
Brilliant!
#281
Not Canon!! THIS IS A DISASTER!!!1!!
It never ceases to amaze me how many people will veil their hatred and bigotry with alleged claims of Christianity. More death and destruction and warfare can be attributed to the zealous worship (or non-worship if you prefer) of a deity as opposed to anything else. If Jesus were around today do you really think he would ask his dad to smite the gays?
This is why I turn my back on all religious practice. I’ve no doubt that there is a higher being who has set things into motion in the universe. But I doubt that earthly concerns are part of his/her/it’s/their direct interest.
Maybe we should go back to discussing Star Trek nudie films?
Oh Harry!
Why did you have to bring this fictional character “God” into it?
You are such a wind-up artist!!!!
Whoever the idiot was who said, “God said Noooooo” really just about summed up the complexity of some religious thoughts!
Gay Characters in Star Trek:
The Traveler
Trent from Angel One
Mordock the Benzite
Kolrami the Zakdorn
John in Transfigurations liked Crusher, yes…but dude – that white outfit changes everything
Simon Tarses
The new and improved Ambassador Odan
Proconsul Neral of Romulus
Dr. Russell, Klingon spine surgeon
Soren the Outcast (not Soran the Kirk killer)
Hugh Borg
Jaglom Shrek
Ambassador Voval, from Liasons
Garak had a thing for Bashir
Rumpelstiltskin had a thing for O’Brien
Verad the Trill
Arjin the Trill
Lenara Khan the Trill
Any other Trill
Ruk the Android
Balok
The Metron
Trelane
The Organians
Lazurus
Akuta
Korob
Mr. Hengist
Galt, Master Thrall
Proconsul Claudius Marcus
The Morgs from Spock’s Brain
Those Greek dudes sitting behind Parmen
Tongo Rad
Plasus the High Advisor
The Sarpedion Prosecutor who charged Kirk for being a witch
Dr. Coleman
Dr. Richard Daystrom was most likely asexual, but he did love the M-5 a little too much
For anyone questioning evolution, please read Darwin’s Black Box by Michael Behe. Amazing.
…or any of Richard Dawkins books….
@286: Impressive.
An interesting note is that Andrew Robinson, who played Garak, felt Garak transcended sexual orientation categories. “I started out playing Garak as someone who doesn’t have a defined sexuality. He’s not gay, he’s not straight, it’s a non-issue for him. Basically his sexuality is inclusive… Originally, in that very first episode, I loved the man’s absolute fearlessness about presenting himself to an attractive human being. The fact that the attractive human being is a man (Bashir) doesn’t make any difference to him.”
I tend to accept Andrew Robinson’s commentary on Garak as authoritative (= same level of canonicity as a tech manual), because he invested SO MUCH in that character. He was the only Trek actor to write a book without a ghostwriter… and that book turned out to be very, very good Garak background material. And, honestly, who’s going to correct him?
#278
Talented enought to cut out key data and picard scenes to make the final toast scene empty and crappy, stuart baird hasnt done anything of quality.
Hire james cameron already, would love to see his version of star trek and his take on humanity
@ # 285 you left out Kivas Fajo ” TNG The Most Toys”
284.
Yeah, you’re right, BSS! I do tend to enjoy throwing a cat in amongst the pigeons!
I swear to God, I’m atheist!!
Bootiful Harry
I’m a dyslexic atheist but I do believe there is a dog
All hail REX!
Kneel before doZ….
@283 THX-1138 –
“This is why I turn my back on all religious practice. I’ve no doubt that there is a higher being who has set things into motion in the universe. But I doubt that earthly concerns are part of his/her/it’s/their direct interest.”
This is WAY off topic for this thread, but I find your comment interesting and have a few follow ups.
(1) How did you arrive at such certainty that there is a higher being?
(2) What convictions drive you to the conclusion this being is disinterested?
(3) Once arriving at such a certainties, why have you decided the best course of action is to reject all religious practice instead of exploring further?
I’m fascinated by philosophical questions. Sorry to change topics.
Everyone here complaining about gay characters being “shoved in your face” is failing to realize two things.
(1) You only THINK that kind of stuff is obvious and uncomfortable because you’re all used to heterosexual stuff being shoved in your face so often that any change seems jarring.
(2) Obvious and purposeful inclusion of controversial minorities is what Star Trek is all about.
There were a ton of tiny details in STXI that constantly established the characters as straight, which all of us were oblivious to, and which, if they had been GAY details, would have gotten you all screaming that it was forced and P.C. Imagine McCoy commenting that his *husband* had taken the whole planet in the divorce — TOTALLY FORCED ATTEMPT AT MODERN ISSUES. Or Scotty using male metaphors to describe the Enterprise as a “well-endowed lad” — SO CREEPY AND STEREOTYPED. Not even mentioning Kirk’s every-five-seconds hitting on anything female he sees. Make that men he’s flirting with, and suddenly he’s an oversexed gay stereotype. Movies are constantly bashing us over the head with straight sexuality, which is fine — humans are sexual creatures! But don’t have double standards, where you insist that gay characters should somehow be expected to keep all of those important details necessary to their characterization A SECRET, which is basically what you’re asking for when you’re claiming any outright statement of their orientation is unacceptable.
Not to mention Star Trek has ALWAYS been about an outright, even *aggressive*, inclusion of particularly marginalized or controversial groups in American society. Chekov didn’t have to speak with an accent or mention that everything was invented in Russia all the time — during the COLD FREAKIN’ WAR, yet! Talk about bashing the audience over the head! Yet Roddenberry did it anyway, on purpose, to show that in the future our prejudices would be so completely gone that we could not only be open with, but CELEBRATE things about us that would have made us uncomfortable back in the unenlightened 20th/21st century — sound familiar? It’s why Captain Robau was played by an actor of Arab descent in our modern-day environment of anti-Muslim sentiment, and it’s why insisting that any gay character should be ~unobtrusive~ and unnoticeable is a serious insult to the philosophy of Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. Surak would be seriously disappointed in you all.
Lastly, anyone claiming that none of the XI characters should be gay or bi, because their TOS counterparts weren’t, is seriously missing the point. This is a REBOOT. Here Kirk is a fatherless delinquent, Spock and Uhura are in love, and Vulcan is freaking GONE. You really think the sexualities of the characters are untouchable sacred elements in comparison?
That was the MOST NON-EXPLANATION as to WHY, I have ever read! WTF?
Sorry #296…but the Star Trek 2009 is NOT a reboot. It’s clearly been stated that it’s a divergent time line from the already established Trek universe. If it weren’t there would have been not need to drag Nimoy into it to set up the story going forward from that point of departure. For what it’s worth, I would have preferred a true reboot. Then anything would have been possible to change.
#285-you rule, thanks! More diversity, more sex! I don’t care who’s doing it. Homophobic people can’t even touch themselves.
298 — maybe, but only half of the characters were born before the diverging point, not to mention that the filmmakers have said “fluctuations in the space-time continuum” caused by Nero changed things even before that divergent point (Pine’s Kirk having blue eyes instead of brown, for instance). Thus, for the purposes of our discussion, sexual orientation could easily have been changed for most of the characters.
That’s assuming that all of them were straight in TOS to begin with, which statistically seems unlikely anyway. Sulu having a daughter doesn’t preclude him being gay, for instance, when surrogates and adoption happen all the time NOWADAYS, and I don’t remember Scotty having too many dalliances, period. Then there’s the question of bisexuality — I personally think that if Kirk had no problem wooing ALIENS, men were certainly not some untouchable taboo.
Jesse Ventura may be a crass, boorish redneck, but he really nailed it when he said, “organized religion is a sham and a crutch for weak-minded people who need strength in numbers”.
Its a non issue today and a non issue in the future, look around and look at employment opportunties, parades, and acceptance. If the gay community was mistreated and theres a good story to tell sure but dont do it just to satisfy insecure feelings or complexes. When the world is 100% gay there will be no more tears, i kid. Heterosexual is still the mainstrean until that changes you will see kirk kiss females.
I dont care what god u believe in, what sex u like, as long as u dont try to change my beliefs or force ur beliefs on me, we are cool.
I always thought worf, tasha yar, geordi and wesley was gay. Just because there was no kissing scene doesnt mean they werent gay.
300. Andrews – January 27, 2011
“298 — maybe, but only half of the characters were born before the diverging point, not to mention that the filmmakers have said “fluctuations in the space-time continuum” caused by Nero changed things even before that divergent point (Pine’s Kirk having blue eyes instead of brown, for instance).”
Your point is well taken. It shows how JJ covered all the bases so he could have a reboot without it REALLY being a reboot as he claimed. If it had just been a straight up reboot he wouldn’t have had to resort to space-time continuum hogwash to explain certain things (even if that could somehow change the genetics of someone to alter their eye color or height).
Harry,
Richard Dawkins may also be single-minded in his approach but he is right too when he said “you wouldn’t brainwash your child to become a mass-murderer or terrorist would you?”
It is a terrible crutch for these people. But a lot of these people need a crutch I suppose.
It is just one big club/cult.
Oooooh scathing, but true………
#303 – “I always thought worf, tasha yar, geordi and wesley was gay.”
OK, either you are joking or you know very little about Star Trek – I can’t tell which. Here are some episodes which clearly establish that those characters are NOT gay:
Wesley: Justice, The Dauphin, The Game
Geordi: Galaxy’s Child, Aquiel, Transfigurations, Booby Trap
Tasha Yar: The Naked Now
Worf: Reunion, Parallels, All Good Things, and on DS9: Looking for par’Mach in All the Wrong Place, The House of Quark, You Are Cordially Invited.
Tasha is the only questionable one since Data was an android, though clearly a “male” android.
#306
Never heard of closet gays or bisexuals? :)
I have plenty of friends from all walks of life and never look at them as anything but fellow human beings. Good people are good people no matter what.
In regards to some form of Star Trek having a character who is gay: As long as people are treated respectfully and not in a stereo typical way I say go for it. The problem with a lot of TV shows when it comes to presenting things that are, for some reason, difficult for some to accept is that they go for the “shock” factor or treat things in a ham handed fashion. If it’s not organic and respectful to the story or the character then it’s just a “stunt”.
#223 – “I for one believe that Star Trek showed humanity had evolved beyond the desires for, and I am sorry if this offends, unnatural physical relations. The human machines were designed and/or created to work in a specific way. It is my hope that by the 23rd century we will have gained the wisdom required to move beyond homosexual practices.”
First – human beings ain’t machines!
Second – Define “natural”. I think the practice of artificial insemination is more unnatural than any homosexual canoodling…
Third – humans have proved themselves being capable of doing and being a great many things, at all levels of any spectrum.
Fourth – Using “mother nature” to somehow prove that homosexuality is not normal or natural – yet it is found in “mother nature” across the human and animal spectrum. It is obviously not the patterning or predilection of the majority, otherwise there would be little in the way of procreation for any species -not good for a species longterm survival (Hate to tell some of you this – but artificial insemination is not an option for the vast majority of humans or animals). The reason why some homosexuality (gay and lesbian) is found around the world in all human races and societies is to do with “mother nature’s” checks and balances. Various cultures have been more tolerant than others when dealing with this subject.
It is one of the natural means of population control. It sure beats high infant and maternal mortality rates, high mortality rates for the under-fives from malnutrition and disease. Not that all societies have not had these as well, but a little homosexuality (male and female) seems a slightly a kinder way of keeping population numbers in check. Checks and balances.
Certain population dynamics have been changed in the last 40+ years due to contraception, artificial reproductive medicines/technologies and advances in medicine in general. 40+ years is a VERY short time in the history of humanity and a lot of this medical technology is still not within reach of at least half of humanity even now.
Well put Keachick,
I would say though, that human beings are in fact walking chemical exchange “machines”
207. Scruffy the vampire janitor – January 26, 2011
—-many men start of straight simply because of the biological urge (Pon farr if you will) and they do marry women and have children but then realize once they’ve made a child that they’re happier with men. And they “go gay” in their 20s & 30s only after reproducing.—-
And let’s not forget the societal pressure to conform that has driven countless gay men and women to marry and have children. Though, I expect this pressure to be significantly lower with Gen. X’ers and increasingly less with succeeding generations. If there isn’t a drop in the incidence of gayness in the offspring of Gen. X, it would suggest more complex biological factors, which wouldn’t be at all surprising.
#2 & #3 – AGREEMENT
It is a NONISSUE in the Trek Universe, but in OUR universe, LGBT’s need validation. History has been unkind to gays and now that they have a toe-hold in the media, we seem to be getting it shoved in our faces. We are told, not asked to be tolerant. Previous notions of ethics and morals are thrown out the door (most tv and movies do this anyhow), and we are almost legislated into acceptance. I have a lot of gay friends, being in the scifi community, but THEY dont shove it down my throat. One of my friends (lets call him Fred) in our group, found out another (Barney) was gay, when he overheard a phone conversation with his ‘partner’. He was floored, and couldnt accept it. With time he did, and when our gay friend went into the hospital and passed away (we still dont know why – they wouldnt do an autopsy), Fred visited him every day. Acceptance comes through casual familiarity, not forcing it down our throats. I like Neil Patrick Harris, he doesnt jump up and down yelling I’M GAY, or acting in stereotypical gay roles. Gays have been bullied too much, but I’m afraid they have learned how to return the favor – I dont appreciate being told Jesus was gay, or that because I believe in God, I must hate gays…
I really am tired of this ‘controversy’.
The Human Adventure is just Beginning.
That is such a true Statement. We are all Humans or in my Universe Terrans. We as Humans weather it be White or Black or Brown or Gay or Straight or Transgendered need to treat each other with Respect and Dignaty. Once we get there then things will be much better for all of us. Yes we will have our Differences but that is what makes us Human or Terran. The Vulcans have it right. IDIC. Infinate Diveristy in Infinate Combanation
Let’s get it to 400 comments!
XD
Face it, both sides,
You’re not going to convince the other side.
(Lets see how many more comments there’ll be until we realize this.)
(Probably lots more)
Mmh. The question ain’t “Yes” or “No”. The question is “Why.” Because honestly, having a gay just to have a gay doesn’t help anybody.
If it happens naturally, I’m okay with it. If they give me an interesting character, who, by the way, is a gay, it’s all cool. But if they give me a gay character who has nothing else to do but being gay (think “Mayweather The Token Black Guy” here), they can shove it up their collective turboshaft. I deeply despise this “We don’t have a gay / muslim / paraplegic / lesbian / three legged dog in the principal cast yet, we need to get one!” attitude that seems to permeate Hollywood these days.
I voted no, because from my current experience, trying to insert a gay into Trek will result in a Token Gay Guy, and I feel no urge to see that kind of targ manure. I have yet to see a TV show whose gay characters don’t feel like a forcible last-minute insert to please the gays-are-fashionable-and-oh-so-cute crowd.
#315 – I couldn’t agree more.
Let’s eliminate the bullying – quit criticizing the gays, the geeks, the nerds, the poor, the sub-literate, the Believers, the Atheists, the politicians, the lawyers, the drunks, the slackers, and on and on…
Oh, wait – what would we write next weeks TV show (insert name here) about?
Well, were human – we can’t do it over night. To paraphrase Gene;
I will not CRITICIZE today…
This horse just refuses to die.
What’s going to have to happen is Star Trek is going to have to do an excellent episode/movie about this subject that no one can ignore. Something that will evoke a major response.
#301
Well, so much for tolerance.
320.
Tolerance? Hey, I can tolerate religious people, but it doesn’t mean they’re exempt from criticism! Religious beliefs are responsible for most wars! Disgraceful!
To my fellow Americans: Why do so many (not all) religious folk (their excuse) have such a problem with sexuality but not violence? Violence is wrong, right? Guns=God? Am I missing something?
I believe it would be a huge mistake create to include gay characters in the next Star Trek movie (or any movie or TV show) just to try and push some social agenda or to cower to the homosexual community. It usually comes out preachy or clumsy. Look to Caprica for an example, they took the toughest, bad ass character and made him gay. Not just gay, but married. My guess was that it was in response to the Prop 8 debate that was raging in California at the time.
This also reminds me about how women were generally portrayed in Battlestar Galactica. All of the toughest, bad-asses in that show were women.
Both of the above cases are examples of how the show’s creators tended to overcompensate when combating the stereotypes of gays and women.
In my opinion, it diminishes the quality of the show by making it less believable. (I know believable is a stretch anyway for science fiction anyways)
#321
Sorry for the rush to judgement, but the quote from Ventura didn’t exactly suggest tolerance on your part, Harry.
And, yes, religion has played a major part in war and intolerance throughout history, but it can also be a platform for social reforms (particularly in the last century). Martin Luther King, Jr., Gandhi, and Mother Teresa were all religious people.
Like any belief, it all depends on how it’s used, and making broad derogatory statements about a certain “different” group of people only leads to more ignorance and more divisiveness—just as some have leveled against the LGBT community.
Ah, Vultan, I never have a quarrel with you!
As the Buddhist said to the hot dog vendor, “make me one with everything!”
@319. “What’s going to have to happen is Star Trek is going to have to do an excellent episode/movie about this subject that no one can ignore. Something that will evoke a major response.”
In 3D, right?
#325
:D
regarding religion its like politics, its only the fringe extremists that get the media coverage, unfortunately
The “it’s a non-issue in the future” excuse for not featuring gays doesn’t fly because *every* main character on each Star Trek show got some action with the opposite sex at some point — or at least flirted with the opposite sex, thereby demonstrating their straightness. “It’s not an issue in the future” doesn’t mean “…therefore we will pretend you don’t exist.” It means “…therefore we will show you existing in the future, just as we show straight romance, and the *characters* will treat it as a non-issue.”
That’s how TOS treated the issue of race. And, more recently, it’s how “Caprica” treated the issue of sexuality. They didn’t make a big song-and-dance about Sam being gay: they just introduced his husband Larry without comment. Sam Adama could’ve been married to Lana instead and he wouldn’t have been any more or less of a badass — but the fact that he’s gay enriches the world in which the show is set, and makes it more true to life.
Reed is the same. He could’ve been gay and he would’ve been exactly the same otherwise — the only difference would be he’s not lusting after T’Pol’s “nice bum”. But his presence as a gay character would enrich the show and the Star Trek universe as a whole.
321. Harry Ballz – January 27, 2011
320.
Tolerance? Hey, I can tolerate religious people, but it doesn’t mean they’re exempt from criticism! Religious beliefs are responsible for most wars! Disgraceful!
Sorry Harry, all wars are based solely on HUMAN GREED.
Religion has nothing to do with it. If you truly study the history of human warfare, you’ll see that one person or a small group of people in power desire something, and until 1945 the lowest classes have always been considered “cannon fodder” and expendable.
Atheists cause just as many wars, because they desire something and they have no moral code that protects their “fellow man.”
Islam was spread by the sword, Christianity was spread by the sword, Aztec Blood Cult was spread by the obsidian sword, and what did Ghenghis Khan believe?
In this case, Khan was an angry young proto-Hitler who was full of hate and wanted to kill everyone or see them bow before him.
Same thing with the Aztecs, submit or die.
Same thing with the Muslims, submit or die. They directly copied Khan in this case.
Christianity however was spread covertly by Roman soldiers at first. It wasnt until Charlemagne’s time that entire countries were converted at sword point.
The why of it is the same as Moses’ killing of the golden calf worshipers. “Division could be fatal.” Empire building, in other words.
the Crusades were more about trade with China than freeing Jerusalem, which led to the Age of Discovery. If the Muslims had played nice all along and not interrupted the flow of commerce, the Kings and Popes would never have fought wars for Jerusalem and settled for Acre, a trading port.
The Borgias were greedy empire builders.
Atheist Hitler wanted a German Empire.
Atheist Stalin wanted a Soviet Empire.
Atheist Mao wanted a Chinese Communist Empire.
Atheist Ho wanted a Vietnamese Empire.
Atheist Pol Pot in Cambodia, and Atheist Kim in North Korea.
Wars are about power and greed. Ask the Cro Magnons, they slaughtered the Neanderthals over the food supply.
Nevertheless, believeing in something that isn’t there is strange. Christians say you can’t prove there is no heaven, as in, because we can’t see it, it can be there. Which is weird. It’s the same thing that happens to conspiracy believers, whatever argument you bring they’ll say it’s part of the plan(in this case, a plan by the government), the same with religious people(not all of them of course) who actually believe fossils are here to fool us, to test our faith. And when we discover life on other planets, they’ll say the same. It’s a persistent rumor(or figuratively, a tumor), that gets passed down, generation through generation. And now there are even Christians who stand by Darwin’s theory of evolution but also believe God put that in motion. It’s like what DiCaprio says in Inception, that an idea is the most dangerous and persistent of all things.
#330 Hitler was a Catholic. Do us all a favor and get an education.
Oh dear, from having gay characters in the show to gods and Hitler and dinosaurs.
Simply put, anyone who uses Christ as an excuse to kill, offend, steal or hate another, does not know Christ at all. If everyone followed one simple rule “Do unto others as you would have done unto you” the world would be a much better place. That rule doesn’t even require a belief in a higher being, just a belief that all human beings have value.
#332- play nice now.
Great discourse here (except for the thinly veiled attacks)
Would love to see a story about one of the supposedly straight characters on Trek struggle with homosexuality. If they were genetically changed somehow that turned on a “gay gene” during an away mission? (Its been said being gay may be genetic)
Could this person turn off this gay gene medically? Could McCoy “fix” him up? What if said altered crewmember didnt want or was unsure if they wanted to revert back to hetero sexuality. If he or she was in a hetero relationship and then developed a gay relationship what kind of drama would that create?
It might creat the kind of morality play that the original series was so good at. Thoughts?
#329 I contend that they were making a big deal about Sam being gay. Making him the polar opposite of the gay stereotype is a statement.
Just as with the woman priest’s characters polygamist marriage, which had no purpose in the story, was a statement on marriage.
Just as in Galactica, making all of the toughest, hard-boiled, prone-to fighting, don’t-mess with characters women.
335.
“thinly veiled attacks”
Damn! Too subtle, as always! :>)
#329…it could be argued that Malcolm Reed lusting after T’Pol’s bum instead of her breasts could be a subconscious sign of his closet homosexuality or bisexuality…he did try awful hard in the beginning of the show to impress Archer, more than is normal. Additionally in the episode E2, in the mess hall when everyone was discussing who their alternate counterparts ended up marrying, Malcolm found out he never married. Hmmm…
Additionally I’m surprised no one brought up the fact that Voyager writers had originally intended for Captain Janeway and Seven of Nine to have a lesbian relationship.
Just like the human race, this topic evolved.
#339 Originally Intented? I think the episode was called My Puberty.
330. “,,,all wars are based solely on HUMAN GREED.”
“Religion has nothing to do with it.”
tell that to the Jews. Whether you relize it or not, religion plays a role, either as the cause, or as an excuse. Sometimes it’s the attackers religion as in the case of the Crusaders, the Japanese Buddists Worriors, Moses or the Vikings, and sometimes it’s their victims, as in the Cursades, the Nazi’s or the Soviet purges. Yes greed is a reason of course, but religion is the manipulating factor, because the average citizen doesn’t usually benefit but may die in the campaign to build an empire. The interesting point is how easy a philosophy of love can be turned into a weapon with just enough prodding when eternal life is promised, a rather selfish endevour.
#335 It’s been said it’s genetic? It is, troll. Not that it matters.
…As for the Cro Magnons and Neanderthals -I’m not sure what they thought since I haven’t had the chance to meet any. Then again, perhaps I have… :)
@ 343- Troll? Play nice now.
You’re right it doesn’t matter.
Its insults like yours that sometimes force Anthony to shut down these threads.
I enjoy reading the other posters thoughts on the issues this board brings up. The “robust dialogue” encourages healthy (I hope) debate about the issues.
Hurling insults at each other through cyberspace is rude and non productive. It also shuts down some great threads because some of us can’t or won’t play nice.
YOU?
It’s a good thing our space program is limited to sending out robots, satellites and landing on the moon.
When we were created our lifespans were limited to 100ish years and our brain function to about 10% for a reason, so we don’t destroy ourselves and the rest of the galaxy/universe! There is nothing wrong with believing humans were created and we continue to evolve today, see both theories are correct.
Imagine if humans today had the ability for faster than light travel? The whole galaxy would be upside down :)
@315
I deeply despise this “We don’t have a gay / muslim / paraplegic / lesbian / three legged dog in the principal cast yet, we need to get one!” attitude that seems to permeate Hollywood these days.
I don’t see that attitude happening at all to any degree by those in power, otherwise there would be plenty of examples of gay / muslim / paraplegic / lesbian / three legged dog (seriously what?!) characters on TV and in the movies.
There aren’t.
The issue to me seems to be that the folks in charge think of writing any character who isn’t default as a chore, as someone who must somehow be re-tooled because they are so different from what they are used to writing, when that clearly isn’t the case.
That’s where the other problems stem from, such as the tokenism, because they aren’t simply writing themselves. Writers, producers, and directors (who are mostly white men) think they must write these characters differently, because, obviously those kinds of people can’t be anything like them. They must have stereotypical elements, right?
That’s where they blow it. And that’s where you get sassy flamboyant, but somehow always conveniently without a relationship gay bff, muslim terrorist, and so on, and so on.
Hollywood needs to get with it. America is a very diverse place.
They need to be a lot further along in reflecting that without the caveats and preconceived ideas what “those people” are.
Just write them like you would anybody else.
Community is doing it better than Outsourced (which is a HUGE fail), for example, but both still have the same hierarchy of character importance.
Young straight, attractive middle class white people are the leads.
This country could be so much more open-minded and less fearful of “the gays” and “the muslims” if the media would use it’s power to demonstrate this truth, while entertaining, instead of continually falling back on comfortable types.
#347
True, I mean what if bestiality/zoophilia is a character that is interesting to explore? If Star Trek doesn’t have one, clearly it is not forward thinking, or are we just talking about groups/classes that have gained acceptance and strength?
Zoophilia is the spectrum of human-animal sexual interaction. Other than for breeding or veterinary purposes, in many countries humans are frowned upon if they interact with a non-human animal in this manner. Historically, sex with animals has been seen negatively in the West, generally either as a religious offense against God, or as a suspect or abusive act unsuited to the civilized world. Both of these are generally held societal views which persist to the present time.
Tolerance was a theme in Star Trek 2009
Spock’s human mother mated with a alien Vulcan and resulted in hatred/racism/bigotry Spock had to deal with since he was a boy and through his adulthood.
You don’t need homosexuality to explore issues like Tolerance, bigotry etc. they can be presented in other ways that would not offend views held by different groups.
I just don’t foresee how one can manage writing in a gay character without pissing off the gay community or the non gay community, it would come across as pretentious, stereotyping or having one for the sake of having one.
GR didn’t want homosexuality in the future, not because he was against it but because his vision of the future was conflict free and a perfect utopia, being homosexual wasn’t deemed wrong or a sickness, everyone was accepted regardless of race, creed, sexual orientation etc. like many hiring policies of global corporations today.
#346 It’s one or the other, creationism or evolution. You can’t hijack a rational theory to fit your irational theory.
#345 The way you phrased your remark(”It’s been said it’s genetic”), and the fact your little story involved people going gay and “turning back” was insulting, at best.
put a gay character on star trek and you will lose a lot of viewership, including mine – especially if it flaunted in every episode. not everyone who watches trek is a trekkie – there are a lot of casual and family viewers who will be turned off by the constant gay agenda shoved in their face.
there already were gay characters on star trek – look at wesley crusher and we all know what lt. malcolm reed was all about.
#350
I’m sorry where you around when life started? If you were, would you please let us know your version of events or beliefs?
How is it irrational? Is it irrational simply because you do not agree with it?
I always thought there should be more raging transvestites on “Star Trek.” ‘Monty Python’s Flying Circus’ managed to mainstream them in the 1970s, and Trek obviously missed the boat.
#350
If humans created a species would it not evolve and adapt to its surroundings through time? How is that irrational? Don’t let your biased views cloud your judgment, anything is possible.
Hitler was not a Catholic, he was an occultist
That’s like saying Azimov was a Jew. He descended from Jews, but was a devout Atheist
Like Bill Mahr, born Jewish, forced to convert to Cathoilc, devout god-hater.
If you can offer any proof that Hitler ever attended Mass, please do.
“tell that to the Jews.”
Everyone forgets the Jews originated the “killing for God” business when they decided to take Canaan, 5000 years ago, and even now they slaughter Palestinians.
They have no high ground to stand on.
Ever read the O T? All it is is killing for JHVH.
Oh dear. If anything, this website has once again proven Godwin’s Law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_Law
@ 332. default
“#330 Hitler was a Catholic. Do us all a favor and get an education.”
What does an education tell us then? First it tells me to employ critical thinking and get in touch with reality. Second, history tells us the following:
1) Despite being exposed to Catholicism, little Hitler did not ultimately take it seriously. No one who could bring about the Holocaust could possibly embrace Catholic doctrine or the teachings of Jesus Christ (a Jew). Where Mother Theresa freely chose to serve the poor and the dying in Calcutta, India, Hitler was religiously devoted to German superiority and genocide.
2) Had the German Chancellor taken the teachings of Christ seriously, the Holocaust never would have happened.
3) Many of us respect Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr – a Baptist minister. He was an incredibly brave and forward thinking individual who took a moral stand because what he witnessed happening in his culture ran counter to his sense of justice and his understanding of the teachings of Christ.
4) The fact that MLK and our African-American brothers and sisters can embrace Christ in light of the fact that their ancestors were enslaved by white “Christians” in this country say a lot about their open mindedness and objectivity, because Christ never had a racist bone in his body.
So let’s think through the issue a little more before blaming religious people for the evils of the world.
Final point…
5) These evils of the world that so outrage you and me…well, Dr. King was convinced that the solution to those evils was found in the peaceful teachings of Christ.
#358
many religions teach peaceful solutions not just Christ. :)
359 –
Oh yes…I agree. I was responding to our friend default with respect to his point about Hitler being Catholic….that’s why I used that specific example.
351
“there already were gay characters on star trek — look at wesley crusher and we all know what it. malcolm reed was about.”
Neither character was gay. It was established that they were straight. Wesley Crusher did have interest in females, including Robin Lefler and Anya, the shapeshifter. And in “E2″, Malcolm Reed was ruing the fact that he didn’t find a female companion. And later in the episode, he offers a chair to a female crew member. He could have been written as a gay character, sure, but he wasn’t.
#348
Sex with animals?
I guess some guys prefer getting p**sy from a cat!
So many philosophers on here……with nothing to say.
@350. – I’m a straight white male in a committed marriage.
If somehow a dormant gene triggered homosexual behaviour it would be upsetting to myself and I think to anyone.
Youre married- have children and all of a sudden youre gay?
My twin brother who is in a monogomous gay relationship would just be as distressed if his gay gene would somehow shut off and he started to have heterosexual tendencies-
How would my wife feel if I started to have homosexual desires through no choice of my own? How would I feel even though I still loved my wife except for physical attraction?
How would my brothers partner feel if the reverse happened?
I was suggesting a drama that would I feel might have been interesting. There might have been enough of a twist on it to make everyone think “hmm what would I do or think?”
I posed the statement that being gay is genetic as not to start the whole choice or genetics debate.
I meant no insult as to anyone being gay and to “turning back” to their original orientation.
My “little story” as you put it could just as easily started as a gay crew member having their gay gene switched off. It would have evolved with an internal struggle as to : “What if I can’t go back to my original orientation?”
“Will I be able to stay in my current gay relationship?”
Will my partner stay?”
If after experiencing heterosexual sex would I want to revert back to my original orientation?
Cyanide,do you feel insulted now? Would a heterosexual person be insulted now?
I think my ideas would have been a “Trek “way to explore sexuality as they did with war racism etc.
Again, I meant no insult or offense to anyone.
It interesting how people sometimes pounce on a word in post and attach all sorts of meaning to it.
Cyanide- I’m curious as to why you chose that word a known poison as your handle?
@364 “My “little story” as you put it could just as easily started as a gay crew member having their gay gene switched off. It would have evolved with an internal struggle as to : “What if I can’t go back to my original orientation?” “Will I be able to stay in my current gay relationship?” Will my partner stay?” If after experiencing heterosexual sex would I want to revert back to my original orientation?” ”
Folks, I think we have our story for the next ST movie right here! Bob Orci, are you taking notes? One note to the studio though — this really needs to be in IMAX 3D please!
ST 2012 will be like a fusion between Star Trek, Days of our Lives and Tales of the City — and in glorious IMAX 3D — I can hardly wait!!!
#364 That’s a lot of text, I’m not going to read that!
@366. How convenient :-)
@72 Dom
I agree kirk and spock were a family love. Kirk said in star trek V that he never had a family and spock and bones were his family!
Star trek is a “family” show i dont think that the majority of people in the United States think that gay characters constitute family values.
With that said, the new leaders of star trek Abrams,Orci probably have a “forward” thinking mentality and will try to break some barriers.
The Die is cast!
Well, after all this, if they do put a gay character into the next film, he had better be pretty fantastic—an uplifting demeanor, razor wit, toned body, chestnut hair, and eyes that you can’t say no to.
@365 MJ-
would love to hear your story pitch
But I think my “little story” isnt grand enough in scale to make a movie with.
I think it could have been great as an episode though
But hey BobOrci- if you’re taking notes- I have some other ideas.
#369 Star Trek: TOS had a man like that, he was the captain of the enterprise. :D
369+371.
Yes, and with the very best “chestnut hair’ that money could buy!
This thread is becoming as tiresome and annoying as anything from season one, two or three of Enterprise.
I’m turning to the next channel, as I did back then.
Sorry Brannon, metaphorically just doesn’t cut it in this day and age… and it shouldn’t have in the years that ST TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise were around. You can congratulate yourself all you want saying ‘we addressed this in a back door fashion,’ but this displays nothing more than backward thinking cowardice.
Other shows, then and now, have had gay characters with no detriment or loss to its fan base. It really is time for these backward attitudes to go away.
It was cowardly of the staff; it was cowardly of Paramount to be skittish; and it remains cowardly that it still has not been addressed more positively than saying “we goofed, we regret it.”
Thankfully, many of the TREK novels have addressed this issue and moved on and treated it as the big deal that it is not. Moving on,
372 –
That was a toupee.
…as in ‘Takei.’
#295
Keep in mind that these are just my observances. I realize that nobody else may share my own feelings or beliefs and that is OK
#1 As with any belief there is never certainty. Anyone who can say that they have utter certainty in their faith based belief is probably misguided to the meaning of their own words. Briefly though, I have observed a certain order to the universe in nature, mathematics, and the reality of human existence that suggests perhaps a plan is in place. Also I would hope that all of existence had more meaning than just abstract randomness. I am a student of quantum mechanics and suspect that we may be the subjects of a greater observer.
#2 This one is simple and perhaps disinterested was the wrong word choice: I can’t point to any event that a higher being has made their presence known to man. I also haven’s seen where war has been averted or disaster has been stayed because of a this higher being.
#3 Also easy for me to answer. You presume that I haven’t explored other aspects of organized religion. In truth I haven’t studied ALL religions. But one does nat have to eat everybody’s recipe for liver to know that liver is not for them. From what I have observed though, organized religions ask for man to give service to a higher being; one that I have concluded is not paying us much attention, or at least has no intention to interfere one way or the other. In short: Why does God require my devotion? Isn’t God Supreme and above such earthly needs as praise and worship? And in reality, since most of the people who tell us that God requires praise and worship and are in the position of acting as an intermediary between us and a supreme being don’t they align themselves in this channel of worship, thereby gleaning a bit of the glory (like donations and devotion and unquestioning compiance) from the faithful?
In short, I have concluded that organized religion serves men and not a higher authority.
375.
Uh, yes, I believe that was my point. :>)
Ugh, comparing two human adults in love to mating with other animals? Nazis? Wesley (of course he was, because he was so wimpy and unlikeable, right?) being gay??
Wow… I wish I were less surprised at the ignorance on display here.
NO No NO! It was bad enough watching a “bi” Kira in the alternate universe. Star Trek has always held the highest morals, to have a homosexual or bi character (any species) would go against the values of Starfleet & the Federation itself. “Enterprise” tackled the subject w/ the progenitor & that was too weird. I’m not homophobic, but I have raised my children on Starfleet morals & would hate 2 c those morals go into a black hole.
Just doing my part to get this to 1701 posts…
A gay character doesnt have to be “out”
one of the coolest gays I ever knew never presented as “out”
He was (and I imagine still is) the stereotypical hetero- male, served as a LT in the US Navy in Gulf War I, and never gave off a “gay vibe”
I’m sure there are plenty of gays in Star Trek, they just havent been waving rainbow flags around. Not every gay is an interior decorator or broadway star.
I imagine all Trill would have to be slighly bisexual, since the Trill itself migrates from host to host with no thought to the sex or sexual preference of the host. Trills reproduce in their own way I suppose.
Since the host retains his or her own memories then experiences the memories of the Trill, they’d know all about love & sex in every possible combination.
IF IF IF (Bob, are you reading this?) IF they do a gay character in the next movie you can easily explain it away if it’s a Trill character.
I know plenty of people that believe something similar to THX.
St Augustine compared men : God :: worms : Men. Even Nietzsche said God wants someone to talk to. Larry Niven & his circle agree. There is a God of some kind (because a truly random universe would have collapsed by now) but we’re not ready as a species to hold a real conversation with HIm (or it).
Organized Religion is something we needed in our barbaric past, but one of Gene’s main philosophies was we wouldn’t need it in the future. That’s why only the “aliens” have religions in ST.
moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney and boborci:
As it happens, I have never stated my opinion on Mr Darwin here or elsewhere. Why would you assume anything one way or the other? Because I am the namesake of a great Christian apologist (and Oxford don and one-time atheist)?
Hmmm… now who is stereotyping whom? Would it surprise you to learn that I am an Ivy League graduate and a rather prosperous, highly credentialed professional?
But I digress.
The theory of evolution explains the selection criteria for reproductive success and thereby the survival of a species under competitive conditions.
It is perhaps too obvious a point, but I’ll make it none the less:
To successfully reproduce, a genotype must first reproduce. Reproductive dead-ends are, ipso facto, evolutionary dead ends.
Secondly, the whole of the Christian message is that we are to have life and have it more abundantly, an echo of the Jewish Bible’s divine command to be “fruitful and multiply” in holy imitation of Yahweh’s creatio ex nihlio.
Narcissism, selfishness, and sterility are selected against in both micro and macro evolution. Christian ethics and, where applicable, Christian law consider the first two sins (i.e., crimes or infractions against the law of God) and in the case of the third, a misfortune or even a punishment for unrepentant sin.
It would seem to even the least objective observer, these two (purportedly) “incompatible” worldviews are, in actuality, in complete agreement in this case.
Arguments and proponents of this particular expression of human sexuality are, by their own endlessly repeated accounts, merely seeking hedonic gratification without restriction or disapproval.
I was once adolescent. I remember the condition well. But I grew up and learned that “I” is not [sic] sine qua non.
I recommend to you both two very important papers:
The first is Festinger’s 1962 Scientific American article. Whatever you might think you know about it is trivial compared to his insight on the need of traitors to justify constantly their treachery, mainly by recruitment and corruption of others.
The second is Gutman’s remarkable 1982 breakthrough in the Journal of Marketing.
Both likely require access to an academic library. Both will help you understand the grip of external (and not necessarily benevolent) forces upon the human spirit, enable by the co-option of the human mind.
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
378 – Harry,
Touche.
Scruffy:
Thanks for nicely summing up so succinctly what I blathered on about. Yay brevity!
383. C.S. Lewis – January 28, 2011
“The first is Festinger’s 1962 Scientific American article. Whatever you might think you know about it is trivial compared to his insight on the need of traitors to justify constantly their treachery, mainly by recruitment and corruption of others.
The second is Gutman’s remarkable 1982 breakthrough in the Journal of Marketing.
Both likely require access to an academic library. Both will help you understand the grip of external (and not necessarily benevolent) forces upon the human spirit, enable by the co-option of the human mind.”
This sounds fascinating.
Festinger’s 1962 Scientific American article:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/26131342/Cognitive-Dissonance
A summary of sorts:
http://pdfcast.org/pdf/cognitive-consistency-theory
moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney – January 28, 2011
“Why do religious people love violence” etc.
moauvian,
Your comments are typical of your generation, which was of note raised with almost no primary knowledge of history or the Christian religion. It was exposed to incessant statist propaganda however, the effect of which is to transmit extreme opinions without basis in fact.
Were you to study the history of war, of criminality, of domestic violence, of employment and economy, you would discover a remarkable commonality: Christianity, through the church as well as by individual repentance, moderated all these expressions of hatred and violence.
The concept of “just war” was the only effective means to slow the unrestricted bloodshed of post-imperial Europe during the Dark Ages.
The ten commandments explicitly forbid violence against person and property – when they are not commanding honor and respect.
Men are commanded to love their (one) wife, in stark contrast to the polygamous collection of multiple wives, slaves, concubines, prostitutes, and others formerly accepted and considered little more than pets or even property to love or abuse as the owner pleased.
“Masters” were taught to treat their servants and slaves as brothers – their servitude being merely an economic condition, not a moral condition. Likewise with the destitute, “feed the hungry, clothe the naked” and “love thy neighbor as thyself”.
Of course, a functional trading economy cannot exist without trust and respect, otherwise considerable dead weight is imposed by the need of a complex legal system and soldiers to enforce it.
Further, the very concept of “police” is a unique contribution of Christendom. Sheriffs, constables, the King’s court, and our precious Common Law heritage of peace and its making.
Please take this opportunity to read and learn for yourself the true history and teachings of Jesus Christ and his followers. Yes, we (not he) made and will make endless mistakes and errors. But his truth is forever – and not what you see on TV (or the movies).
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
#375 Doug: YEA. nicely said.
And no, Archer/Porthos weren’t an attempt to introduce an alternate, bestial lifestyle.
Anyhow, I agree that merely allegorical stories don’t cut it when the flagrant absence of gays in Trek is a statement by itself: that someone is still scared of the more narrow-minded viewers. ST doesn’t have to take a “stand” on homosexuality or do an issue episode: just quietly acknowledge it exists, and stop making a “statement” by leaving it out.
I resent the implication that “homosexuality” is about sex, and would therefore make Trek about sex. In the first place, *flippancy* when wasn’t Trek about sex? But in the second place, and more importantly, no, homosexuality isn’t merely an act; it’s about people living their lives and belonging to the same society as everyone else.
CSL left out one important difference that JC made to the world.
When the Jews were trying to trick JC into convicting himself, they asked which commandment was the most important. A trick question.
At that time, the Jews had the 10 commandments we’re familiar with plus something like 4000-8000 others that made life way too complicated.
Thus, JC gave them exactly 2: Love God with all your heart, mind and soul, and Love one another as you love yourself. If you keep these 2 commandments, you keep them all.
And that’s the code we should all aspire to live by. Everything else is just tacked on.
Of all the Prophets, only Jesus and the Buddha forbid violence. Moses and Mohammed enjoyed violence. Moses killed a slave driver, then the calf worshipers. Mohammed raised an army & killed thousands so he could have Mecca.
Not once in the Gospels does JC say “Take up your swords.” In fact he rebukes an apostle when in JC’s defense he takes an ear off somebody.
Jesus never directly says anything about homosexuals either.
What I never understood is how anyone can call themselves Christian but adhere to the Jewish Bible, especially when you take the historical Jesus’ mission of reforming Judaism.
The Jews dont think Jesus was their messiah because they defined Messiah as a warlord who would lead an army to liberate them from the Romans, a war the historical and Biblical Jesus sought to prevent. “Turn the other cheek.”
Thirty years after Jesus was executed as a “sorcerer” and “enemy of the state” Rome put an end to Jewish unrest, permanently.
@383. C.S. Lewis – January 28, 2011: “moauvian waoul- aka: seymour hiney and boborci: As it happens, I have never stated my opinion on Mr Darwin here or elsewhere. Why would you assume anything one way or the other?”
He would assume that because that is what Seymour loves to do on these boards. He is all about twisting and spinning things and just trying to say stuff to get reactions out of people with a bit of mean spiritedness involved — intelligent discourse need not apply. You are just his latest dupe, I’m afraid.
@390. Bor Orci, I am not referring to any of your comments in my above post.
For all of those irritated by “gay people appearing everywhere”, remember that they Are in fact everywhere, and have been there all the time.
This is no increase in numbers, just a decrease of forced hiding.
@330 — Atheists have “no moral code”, eh? I guess that’s why the prison population is overwhelmingly athe– OH WAIT. Sorry, but your assertion that atheists have no moral code just doesn’t match up to reality.
Plus, here’s a fun little thought experiment. Who do you think is more moral? A person who treats his fellow human beings with respect and does no harm simply because of his natural sense of empathy, or a person who does the same because he is afraid of eternal hellfire and torment if he transgresses? Hmm.
@336 — If Sam Adama being gay was a statement, well, that’s the kind of statement I can live with. From that definition, *any* inclusion of a gay character would be “a statement”. And maybe it is, just as Uhura’s inclusion in TOS was a statement. That doesn’t make it a bad thing.
@355 — Hitler was baptised Catholic, never renounced his Catholicism, and was never excommunicated. The Nazi government enjoyed cordial relations with the Vatican throughout its entire time in power. Many quotes from “Mein Kampf” and various speeches talk about how he believed he was doing God’s work. And then, of course, there’s the Nazi motto “Gott Mit Uns”. The sole source of evidence in favour of Hitler being an atheist is the “Table Talk” book, which was “selectively edited” by Martin Bormann (who was an atheist) to conform to his own anti-church views and also included outright fabrications by French translator Francois Genoud. Hitler may have been interested in the occult but that doesn’t mean he was not still a Catholic — which, by his own words, he was. It certainly does not make him an atheist.
@358 — No true Scotsman, etc. etc.
@368 — Maybe that’s true, about the majority of people from the US not thinking gay characters represent “family values”. So what? When the ban against interracial marriage was struck down in the United States in 1967, the majority of people in the United States were against “miscegenation”. But the ban was struck down anyway, because it was the right thing to do.
@393 “Hitler may have been interested in the occult but that doesn’t mean he was not still a Catholic — which, by his own words, he was”
So what is the point? Deranged mass murderers and sociopaths run the gambit of religions and include atheists as well, but that doesn’t mean I have to accept their self-proclaimed faith. I reject it — no, he was not Catholic. People who accepted all the claims of Hitler claims at face value is what led to Nazi Germany and all of the atrocities. If more people had realized he was full of crap and not accepted his self proclamations, then he would have ended up as another minor party leader extremist thug.
The Pope was just as afraid of Hitler as anyone. He has no army anymore.
The Jews think the Pope didnt not resist but it has been proven by documents that the papacy did more for the Jews than they think. The Catholics resisted quietly out of self preservation. Pope Leo was not a Borgia after all.
Hitler was a self promoter. He’d say anything to get elected, and he did.
Hitler used JEWS and HOMOSEXUALS to get elected. The Night of the Long Knives, when Hitler killed all the Jews & Homos that got him elected happened after he was securely ensconced in Dictatorship, not before.
Hitler used people, then disposed of them. The man that taught Hitler to be an expert speaker was a Jew, and the man that got him all the votes he need to be elected was a homo, Ernst Rohm. No one was more surprised than he was when Hitler betrayed him.
Stop saying Hitler was Catholic. That’s like saying Saddam was Muslim.
Neither one was.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_R%C3%B6hm
@395. I could not agree more.
If it wasn’t such a serious topic, I could almost laugh at ColeMercury’s argument that, well, Hitler said it so we must accept it (i.e. “in his own words”). Like we would believe anything Hitler told us???
You and I wouldnt but the Germans of the time were truly desperate.
by the end of the war they knew they’d been duped.
Now accepted as canon: Khan was bisexual, expecting everyone under his command to “serve” him.
@399. Dumble-dorf: “Khhaaann! “Khhaaann! “Khhaaann!”
Wars are started by people who serve the ‘gods’ of their own choosing. Money, Power, Lust, Hate, Love, and so on. Blaming all the worlds troubles on religion might be valid, since religion is the worship of all of the above. But dont blame them on Jesus.
BTW – Reed was a tush man – Brits tend to go that way, and so what if he was a cross dresser… he was probly a Monty Python fan!
Hooray! Another gay debate.
*not gonna bother this time*
Last one was fun, but lots of work!
Oh, hell – the Talosians offered Pike the chance to get busy with a brunette, a redhead and a blonde chick for the rest of his life and he decided that he’d sooner commit suicide.
Star Trek has already had a gay captain. ;-)
Hear hear! @ 403.
makes sense to me. Vina was also an Orion slave girl.
What I dont understand is why there were green skinned Orion women in Trek 09 and the men werent coo-coo for their cocoa puffs?
Caveat emptor! Read Daniel Dennett with some caution. He also wrote “Consciousness Explained” which did not explain consciousness at all. See David Chalmers on the hard problem of consciousness, and John Searle’s criticism of Dennett. Dennett’s circular argument (in CE) has something of the flavor of solipsism in its bald rejection of the obvious, which I think is a measure of the problem’s difficulty that it could drive some to go to the absurd for an explanation.
The importance of listening to those who disagree can’t be underestimated; they find your mistakes when you don’t want to…or can’t. The subjective nature of personal experience remains unaccounted for, and there is no scientific-mechanistic-materialistic model to explain consciousness as an emergent property of the brain.
Caveat Emptor likewise to Michael Behe! Darwin’s Black Box is one long argument from ignorance, and mostly a demonstration of Behe’s own failure of imagination. It is NOT a demonstration of intelligent design at the biochemical level in nature.
Now, you want some mind boggling? Read the folks on the edge. That’s not Dennett or Behe.
http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/806
“and there is no scientific-mechanistic-materialistic model to explain consciousness as an emergent property of the brain.”
Unless you accept that we are the best natural computers on the planet, and that consciousness is really just our false interpretation of outstanding natural programming that is so good that we misinterpret it for some facade that we called consciousness.
406: “Unless you accept that we are the best natural computers on the planet, and that consciousness is really just our false interpretation of outstanding natural programming that is so good that we misinterpret it for some facade that we called consciousness.”
If there is an interpretation at all then there is a subjective aspect requiring explanation, whether the interpretation is false OR true. That there IS an interpretation AT ALL is the problem. You have to explain how subjective states necessarily arise out of objective purely material processes. If you do a Nobel Prize awaits you I am sure.
http://www.imprint.co.uk/chalmers.html
Also, go to: http://www.umass.edu/philosophy/faculty/faculty-pages/levine.htm scroll and click on Materialism and Qualia: The Explanatory Gap
Ah C S. Lewis you know me so very well. To what generation do I belong? Did you know that I’m 46 and I went to a Christian school for nine years? Are your points ever based in reality and are you ever willing to admit you don’t everything? You are the best example I could think of- of what’s wrong with religion. Oh, and my point still stands.
moauvia wrote:
“are you ever willing to admit you don’t everything?”
ehhh?
Just a note… Mr. Lewis has been dead for quite a while. He can’t hear you. Though… since you obviously think he can… (I’ll let your keen mind fill in the rest)
403. “offered Pike the chance to get busy with a brunette, a redhead and a blonde”
Maybe he was holding out for a Deltan chick?
His motto was, “once you’ve balled bald, skulls with hair mean nothing!”
I find this talk of “family values” and bringing in a gay character to the next film would undermine high moral principals etc. Up until recently with artificial insemination (medical technology sure does “muddy the waters”), aren’t all gay people the result of a heterosexual union and their very births make them part of a family?
Anyway, I had a “little story” of my own for Star Trek, which involved an alien who belonged to a small population of true hermaphrodites and was married to a human male. Both were crew on the Enterprise. Don’t ask me to explain the hows, whats, of the hermaphrodite’s biology. All I know is that this person is able to change their sex at various points in their life in a regular cyclical manner. Both the person’s sexes are capable of reproduction.
In order for the human/hermaphrodite relationship to work, does the human male need to be bisexual? What about the hermaphrodite? When the hermaphrodite is coupled is sher own kind, their cycles work together – while one is female, the other is male and then they swap their sexes. However, this person’s lover does not change.
The scenario – Kirk is in the ship’s bar (10-forward or whatever). He meets the hermaphrodite as a beautiful woman. Of course, being the heterosexual Kirk that we know he really is, he can’t help but notice her and begins gentle flirting.. In walks her partner and Kirk makes a polite exit.
Later (weeks perhaps), the lift doors open and there are two men caught canoodling by Kirk. They quickly assume a professional posture. Kirk is looking at one of the men, confused…but? but? The penny drops when he finds out that one of the men in the lift is a hermaphrodite.
CSL is a prime example of Belief co existing with Reason
What’s wrong with religion has already been pointed out as self-serving prophets who control the minds of their faithful instead of allowing them to seek answers themselves.
That Church that protests Vet Funerals and Muqtada-Al-Sadr are prime examples of abuse of power. Jim Jones, the whole Guru movement of the 70s… the MegaChurches of today.
As a Catholic, our priests are required to study for years before attaining their frocks. They have to prove they know what they’re doing.
Any crazy person can pick up a Bible, interpret it for himself and call himself an Evangelical.
BTW. Christ never said, “Bathe in my blood.” That comes from pagan Roman / Persian Mithraic beliefs. New initiates to Mithraism were bathed in bull blood.
356. Scruffy the vampire janitor – I think you missed part of my post.
I have trouble with anyone who believes in talking snakes.
Keachick
You really need to read Heinlein if you havent already. He and Zelazney already covered every possibility of sex within the human species including cloning oneself multiple times for sex with one’s clones, male and female.
using both cloning tech and time travel to make clones
I think the Lazarus Long series is the most perverse with Stranger in a Strange land coming in second but being more about love than just sex.
#411
Kirk wouldn’t care, he will tap it. In the 24th Century all the bigotry, hatred, conflict, war, famine etc is gone. If Kirk finds something sexy he will plow it till the cows come home.
Who is to say Kirk isn’t bisexual? :) the characters are what you make it, you can interpret and imagine whatever you fancy.
I would imagine there would be swinging parties on the Enterprise 24/7 and everyone is invited, how forward thinking is that? Brannon Braga?
Seymore, I know youre a joker a toker and a midnight smoker
CSL takes you seriously, but I dont
#416
correction 23rd century ;)
416. “If Kirk finds something sexy he will plow it till the cows come home”
…and if Kirk had married Carol Marcus, he could have plowed the cow until something sexy came along!
#419
LoL
390. MJ. Sorry you think that way. Mean-spirited? Twisting and spinning things? Really?
Hell, I thought we were shooting the shit.
419
Ouch!
423.
Why buy the milk when you have a cow at home?
424
Yeah, but sometimes the cow runs dry!
Plus I’m not into having sex with farm animals!
417. Scruffy the vampire janitor – Ummm… But I did like your comments at 412 about Catholic priests studing for years to know what they’re doing.
425.
Never shudder at udder!
@394, @397 — Actually, I *am* laughing at your counter-argument. “Hitler said it, therefore it must be a lie”? It brings to mind the following scenario: “During a meeting with Albert Speer one afternoon in 1941, Hitler happens to mention that he had a salad for lunch. Therefore, he must have actually had a cheese sandwich.”
Yes, deranged mass murderers and sociopaths run the gambit of religions and include atheists as well — Stalin was an atheist, as was Mao. But Hitler was a Catholic. Saying “He can’t have been a real Catholic! I reject his Catholicism!” is falling into the “No true Scotsman” fallacy as I said to Factchecker @358 before. And regardless, he was *not* an atheist as Scruffy claimed @330.
@395 — Um, yes, Saddam Hussein was a Muslim. Just because his dictatorship was mostly secular in nature doesn’t mean he wasn’t personally a Muslim. By your logic, every US President ever must have been atheist too because the United States government is officially non-religious.
#415 – “You really need to read Heinlein if you havent already. He and Zelazney already covered every possibility of sex within the human species including cloning oneself multiple times for sex with one’s clones, male and female.
using both cloning tech and time travel to make clones”
What has this got to do with my “little story”? The two characters are not clones. It’s possible that my ideas are not that original, but I am not talking about cloning…
#416 – “Kirk wouldn’t care, he will tap it. In the 24th Century all the bigotry, hatred, conflict, war, famine etc is gone. If Kirk finds something sexy he will plow it till the cows come home.
Who is to say Kirk isn’t bisexual? :) the characters are what you make it, you can interpret and imagine whatever you fancy.”
What? You make him appear to have no conscience at all. In my story, once he realises that the woman has a date/partner/other, he politely exits the scene. This is how I see Kirk responding in such a situation. I have this impression from all the TOS and movies I have seen. Sure, he is in there, plow and all, where availability is obvious, but I have never seen him prepared to go after someone who already has someone. Clearly, this hermaphrodite character did have someone special and he respected that.
Kirk may be bisexual (aren’t the vast majority of humans that way, anyway?), but that does not mean he has no manners.
Hey, MJ — if Hitler had said post-1933 “I am the Fuhrer of Germany”, it would cause a paradox and the universe would explode. XD
Again Cole misses the point
I know Muslims in the US who eat bacon.
Muqtada Al Sadr would never accept Saddam as a Muslim. Saddam drank beer.
That’s the point.
Hitler may have been baptized, but that doesnt make him a Catholic.
He was an occultist. If you study what he truly believed and what he tried to create, you’d understand.
keachick
the point was, “it’s been done to death”
You may never be published, because frankly, it’s been done.
No harm, no foul.
409. Cyberziggy
“ehhh?”
“Just a note… Mr. Lewis has been dead for quite a while. He can’t hear you. Though… since you obviously think he can… (I’ll let your keen mind fill in the rest)”
Crazy huh? You know the wierdest part? He’s talking back!
Thanks for playing.
@429 @431. Wow, two entire posts trying to counter me. Guess I made my point. LOL
@411 “What about the hermaphrodite? When the hermaphrodite is coupled is sher own kind, their cycles work together – while one is female, the other is male and then they swap their sexes. However, this person’s lover does not change.”
ahawhops, ughups,
(the sound of me throwing up right now)
Allow me to propose a solution.
In this “alternate timeline”, Chekov is younger than his “prime timeline” self, hence he is a wholly different person.
In the next movie, give Chekov a male love interest. Show them having a good time together at a crew gathering, cue any other cast asking Chekov how long they have been dating.
Take that male crewmember and get him captured by the antagonist or whatever natural force that opposes the Enterprise’s crew, thereby raising what’s at stake for the protagonists.
Give Chekov and crewmember a happy reunion at the end.
That’s all it takes and it’s not preachy or cliché. And it would be a great signal to LGBT youth out there in response to the waves of suicides last year.
@430. “Who is to say Kirk isn’t bisexual?”
Kirk is not bisexual. MJ, 1/29/2011
There you go!
@437. If that was handled as a minor part of the story in Trek 2012 I could buy into that approach. Good idea!
On the subject of Kirk and Spock being lovers, here is it is straight from Kirk,
from the novelization of Star Trek: The Motion Picture:
* Editor’s note: The human concept of friend is most nearly duplicated in Vulcan thought by the term t’hy’la, which can also mean brother and lover. Spock’s recollection (from which this chapter has drawn) is that it was a most difficult moment for him since he did indeed consider Kirk to have become his brother. However, because t’hy’la can be used to mean love, and since Kirk’s and Spock’s friendship was unusually close, this has led to some speculation over whether they had actually indeed become lovers. At our request, Admiral Kirk supplied the following comment on this subject:
“I was never aware of this lovers rumor, although I have been told that Spock encountered it several times. Apparently he had always dismissed it with his characteristic lifting of his right eyebrow, which usually connoted some combination of surprise, disbelief, and/or annoyance. As for myself, although I have no moral or other objections to physical love in any of its many Earthly, alien, and mixed forms, I had always found my best gratification in that creature woman. Also, I would dislike being thought of as so foolish that I would select a love partner who came into sexual heat only once every seven years.”
@432 ” Again Cole misses the point. I know Muslims in the US who eat bacon. Muqtada Al Sadr would never accept Saddam as a Muslim. Saddam drank beer. That’s the point. Hitler may have been baptized, but that doesnt make him a Catholic. He was an occultist. If you study what he truly believed and what he tried to create, you’d understand.”
Well put!
Scruffy. “Everyone forgets the Jews originated the “killing for God” business when they decided to take Canaan, 5000 years ago, and even now they slaughter Palestinians.”
“They have no high ground to stand on.”
“Ever read the O T? All it is is killing for JHVH.”
1. The point was the Jews were singled out by their religion, by the Nazis.
2. I had already mentioned Moses waging a religious war in my post. You missed that.
3. Who said Jews had the high ground? Only that they were murdered for having a different faith.
4. Yes, I’ve read the O T?
5. And yes, I have been referred to as Maurice on occassion. Still other times, the Gangster of Love.
And finally: sorry if I don’t take myself as serious as some of you. I’m laughing at the “superior intellect.”
Oh, and your point about the Palestinians proves again, it’s all about religion.
MJ, quit taking it personally when people disagree with you on a previous post. You disagreed with me and I’m not accusing you of trolling or being insincere.
@442- Not to be confused with the “gangsta” of love I hope?
Braga could do a new TV show, about a Gay Space Colony.
So in order to continue the mission, they perform the ultimate sacrifice (Star Trek is all about sacrifice) and they become straight, thus, they save the universe by continuing the species.
TADAA (plays John Williams soundtrack)
Actually, the biggest problem we have now is sex in space.
Until the ION engine gets approved, a chemical reaction engine will take 15 months to reach Mars.
The gonads of any astronaut will be nuked. AND unless all the astronauts are very old or have low T or have a tremendous amount of self control, naughtiness will happen…
Plasma engine, sorry
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/search/results/?q=plasma+engine&x=0&y=0
Could you imagine if the crew of Apollo 11 were all gay? They’d still be butch manly gays but can you imagine?
Perhaps this is where the Mirror Universe splits off… Naughtiness on the Moon.
Maybe Abbot and Costello really did go to Venus…
Listen up, if you people wanna practice that kind of lifestyle, that’s your business and your soul that’s gonna have to live with the consequences but don’t shove it in our faces telling us we have to accept you and that we have to have homosexual characters on our TV shows. This is is the reason why today’s TV shows are practically unwatchable because it’s no longer about writing quality programming. It’s all about getting ratings and appealing to every demographic in the world. What they need to start doing is looking back at what made TV programs in the past so memorable and why it produced the TV legends we honor today. None of it had to do with gay characters or gay relationships. Sure it has dealt with racial bigotry but that’s not the same as dealing with homosexuality. Racism deals with the non-acceptance of people due to their skin color or nationality which they were born with so it’s a not a choice they made it’s something that’s a part of them and that part they should be proud of. But homosexuality is a lifestyle choice. It’s not something they’re born with. And if they have to deal with so much mistreatment it’s because of the choice they made not because they were born with it. Homosexuality is not something you’re born. It’s something you choose. That’s why racism is an issue that’s better able to carry it’s message then homosexuality could ever hope to accomplish with their gay pride marches. You see it’s necessary for gays to open up and tell the world they’re gay not just so other people will accept them but so they can accept themselves. When was the last time you ever saw black marches about black pride, recently. And if there has been then why aren’t there irish marches about Irish pride, or Mexican marches about Mexican pride, or Italian marches about Italian pride? you see? We don’t need to tell the world what country we come from so they’ll accept us cuz the Constitution of United States says we’re already acceptable in this country. As for homosexuals if you really believe your behavior is acceptable then shouldn’t the Constitution of the United States support you as well?
The jews have always been singled out, but they did it to themselves 5000 years ago.
Instead of a live and let live philosophy which probably would have saved them, Moses and the ancient Israelites began a program of exterminating anyone who didnt worship their God.
BUT
Hitler wanted the money the Jews had. He may have hated Jews in general, but ultimately Germany was broke, there was no fiat currency and he needed hard GOLD and JEWELS which Jews had.
Remember, the Swiss still have Nazi gold in their banks
#450 You will miss everything cool in life and die angry.
#450 :: Do you have physical evidence that sexual orientation is not something one is born with?
“…Mexican marches about Mexican pride…”
Quite a bit around here.
And what is up with the “us” and “them” mentality?
#450 agreed.
Recently I’ve been following a lot of comic book folks on Twitter and someone said this the other day and it really got me thinking.
“We have diversity in comics. More so now than ever before. What we don’t have is meaningful support of diversity. Or a means to develop it.”
I think that says a lot about what’s going on about gays in Star Trek and what all these comments have been reflecting. There’s more acceptance now than there ever was, but still no support or a desire to develop it. Since Star Trek is now in the hands of a group who’s number one goal was to make Star trek appeal to the mass audience, I unfortunately don’t see them doing anything with gay characters. It’s not because they don’t support them, but because the industry their aiming to please doesn’t support them. So get ready for a lot more familiar, and a lot less forward thinking.
#453 But wait, that’s the thing that always amazes me(as a Dutchman) with the discussion Americans have regarding being gay, why does it matter weither it’s nurture or nature? Even if it is nurture(which it’s not), who cares?
It seems that some people will only accepts gays if they are considered victims, if it’s genetic. If it’s nurture, gays are apparently offenders. But they’re neither, nor victims, nor offenders.
@450: “As for homosexuals if you really believe your behavior is acceptable then shouldn’t the Constitution of the United States support you as well?”
How about the Declaration of Independence?
“That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.”
Yeah, that applies to them 110%. And if it’s a choice to be gay, than that is by definition a “pursuit of happiness”, a happiness that does not infringe or intrude on your way of life in any way. The worst it can do is make you feel “icky”, and that’s pretty much what racism and sexism was all about.
@450. While I understand some of your post I have to disagree with your statement that homosexuality is a choice.
My (twin) brother is gay. When I asked him why he “chose” this behaviour he informed me that it wasn’t his choice. He simply said that when he reached puberty he started to notice men just as I started to notice females.
He could not choose to be straight. The thought of hetero sex makes him shudder. Just as the thought of gay sex makes me (and others) shudder.
I would not or could not choose to be gay either.
Its the way he was wired just as the way I was wired to be heterosexual .
I really don’t think gay people choose their lifestyle. How many gay people would choose to be ostracised from their friends and family. Risk losing their jobs?
Their lives?
Its ok not to agree with homosexuality but a gay person does not choose their sexual orientation just as you are unable to choose your eye colour
Love your question about the constitution though.
It makes me wonder if Roddenberry wanted a gay character in Star Trek in the 60s?
I wonder if he knew that Takei was gay when he cast him as Sulu.
It would have been cool if he did.
He may not have been able to put an openly gay man on the show but he put a gay actor in the role. Genius.
Was there anybody close to Roddenberry that can confirm this?
David Gerrold?
Chris Doohan?
458 – Very good points and thought-provoking, important questions to ask.
#450
Who would choose to be gay? Yout argument is flawed and illogical.
Im male and love females, why would anyone choose to love their own gender? To be cool? To get tax breaks? They are born with it and cannot help it, something to do with astral spirit and being born in the wrong body.
You need the device from the draco to insert their soul into a cloned version of their body but the sex that suits their astral energy.
@460 Thanks Mate
Takei says he was out to his close friends as far back as Star Trek, so Gene knew.
I’m sure if you search the George takei archive on here, you’ll see he’s talked about it a lot.
450.
Hey, look everybody! Who knew Sarah Palin was a Star Trek fan??
You are a five-alarm, redneck moron. Don’t have children. Your hate and bigotry should not be passed along!
The No True Scotsman fallacy could be wrongly applied and in the case of specific religions I think one often encounters the mistake where it is that.
There are no distinctions that separate Scots-men from any other sort of men, and as some men of any other “race” do good and others do bad, the same is true of Scots-men, Scottish pride notwithstanding.
So there is no single way-to-be that distinguishes the Scots-MAN from any other according to which he can be said to diverge and, that being the case, the idea of a “true” Scotsman is a mere vanity.
BUT, with respect to religion, whether Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc., there IS a true way to be as reflected by the teachings of those religions, according to which we could say one has been more or less true to those teachings he professes to believe in.
The fact that people can be manipulated en masse to go against the teachings they claim to believe does not mean that there is no true teaching or way to truly reflect it. It just means that people can be effectively duped to go against it, to become “untrue” Christians or Muslims, and this remains true EVEN IF you are wearing a white collar and a black frock; never confuse one’s beliefs for the accouterments of belief, for those are mere symbols that can also be used to deceive you into believing what is untrue. Never confuse symbol for reality.
And do we not say that Al Qaeda has “hijacked” the Muslim faith? Well, how could we say that and NOT imply that there is some truer way of being a Muslim than blowing stuff up, a way that has been distorted by extremism?
#458 “Its ok not to agree with homosexuality”
How is that ok? I don’t agree with you loving your wife. Is that ok too? Weird. How can you disagree with love?
To quote a famous Dutch writer: “Only true loves strikes one in the back.”
@461
“Im male and love females, why would anyone choose to love their own gender? To be cool? To get tax breaks? They are born with it and cannot help it, something to do with astral spirit and being born in the wrong body.”
I’m sure pedophiles’ would love to use your “logical” argument to justify their “love” for underage children. According to your logic the didn’t choose to be pedophiles so how could we dare prosecute them then ?
Not that I believe they shouldn’t be prosecuted, but believe me they tried to use your logic to their benefit.
#467
The difference is that it is illegal to be a pedophile.
To take advantage of the young and innocent is wrong regardless of nature or nurture.
#450
In Morgan Freeman voice
“TrekMovie.Com…….is no place for morons!”
There’s no good idea committed to paper, whether religious or judicial, that some sneaky bastage can’t find a way to get around it, while professing his love for it in smiling speeches. Religion and politics have the same problem. Paper cannot constrain life. Life must constrain itself. To do that, you must discover your connection.
457 — From the Declaration of Independence, as you quote:
“… with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.”
Even if we have to kill a bunch of native peoples and take their lands to do it. Just a thought to consider. “Some apes are more equal than others.”
so, what have we learned?
It’ s a sad thread.
“Some animals are more equal than others”
Animal farm, George Orwell.
BOB.O, that’s too vague a question.
If anything Anthony (as much as we love you) should have learned to NEVER allow comments on controversial issues, since you know they’ll go awry
Other than that, I think Shatner Kirk & Nimoy Spock played the characters as gay in the Original first season because, let’s face it, Hollywood is gay.
In his books, Shatner shares some moments when older predatory gays try to bed him when he was just breaking into acting. By the time he was in his 30’s he came to accept that, yes, Hollywood is just plain gay.
I dont think it matters if a character is gay or not, because the actor is gay.
Look at Neil Patrick Harris, he plays straight, but he’s gay. Jimmy Olsen & Superman were played by gays Adam West played Batman as gay. Every Brit actor that ever was was gay. Rock Hudson, Cary Grant, the list goes on.
It’s just something we have to accept.
BUT BOB.O, if you must have an openly gay character, you can explain it away more logically if you use the all women reproducing by cloning planet or the trill bi sexual angles.
Just saying.
Besides, it’s every man’s fantasy to crash land on a planet of Amazons and “Die by Snoo-Snoo”
That if we don’t behave, Anthony is going to give us the Roman Moroney:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GVCgTFw2Qk
We have learned that all Gays are just losers that were bullied at school and just needed any kind of arms that they could find to hold around them and give them a self esteam. Seeing that they couldn’t get any girlfriends because they saw how ignorant they were of proper behavior. My simple advice to the gays. Stop being so stupid! Get a wife, have children. Discover the never boring dynamics of a straight relationship. That way you don’t look back at your life with regret, while suffering with aids. Did i make you cRY? =P
466. CaptainSubtext – January 29, 2011
#458 “Its ok not to agree with homosexuality”
How is that ok? I don’t agree with you loving your wife. Is that ok too? Weird. How can you disagree with love?
To quote a famous Dutch writer: “Only true loves strikes one in the back.”
This cracks me up, because I once read a book of Oscar Wilde quotes and you cant repeat any here…
“the point was, “it’s been done to death”
You may never be published, because frankly, it’s been done.”
Has it? Where? Not on Star Trek (I’ve not seen TAS, nor read the comics or books). Anyway, aren’t we talking what gets to go to the movie screen, perhaps in the next Star Trek sequel? Actually, I have written nothing, except here. As I said, a “little story”.
Have to go. Be back. More to say.
You’re so right. I’m so sick and tired of all the Gays out there trying to screw with our kids. My 6 year son came home from school and asked why his Big brother was going to the prom with a man!!! What am I suppose to tell him?! “Well, son, you can date boys too.” If I were to say that, I would NOT be helping him at all !!!!!! He should not be confused about these things, as well as everyone else in this world. Do what ever you want to do, but don’t make me have to explain a star trek episode to my child when he’s just trying to watch it for entertainment. That makes me not want to watch TV! let alone another Trek!!!!
Humans find it difficult to accept things that are different.
I can see why aliens hide and the govt keeps such things secret.
When you have progressive fans of star trek clash in the battle of beliefs, there is no hope for mankind.
@466 Love the handle by the way.
Some people don’t agree with homosexual behaviour. Some feel that its a sin against God nature etc. (I’m not one of them) This thread was about having an openly gay character on Star Trek and (as usual) it went off in different directions.
People have made posts thinking having a gay character on Trek was way overdue and some felt that no they didn’t think it was a good idea. Some were vehemently against it.
When I said its”OK not to agree with homosexual behaviour” Its because it is ok to disagree about issues. Plug in any word where “homosexual” was in my last sentence. (promiscuous, drunken, irrational) We are allowed to disagree with each other in our free society.
The individual who doesn’t agree with homosexuality may not be correct- but they should be allowed to voice their opinion freely without being attacked in this thread.
Thanks Anthony for letting it go on despite some name callers out there.
BobOrci what have we learned? Someone read one of my earler posts and with tongue in cheek he proclaimed that I singlehandedly came up with the story for the next Trek! (see my post #335) He even wanted it in 3D! I’d be happy to contribute in any small way to Trek (wink)
But to answer your question?
Some of us have come a long way and are ready to see a CREDIBLE gay character in Star Trek.
Some of us are clearly not ready for it
Some of us are probably rolling their eyes and saying to themselves “Who cares?”
But Bob if you’ve been charged with putting a gay character in the next movie- I don’t envy you the task. It might be HARDER than when you wrote the first one. You had to worry about the first Trek appealing to existing fans while bringing news fans in to discover Trek. (You did a great job as my 12 bucks went towards the hundreds of millions Trek made)
How do you bring a gay character in and make him/her credible and not a stereotypical “cut and paste” person?
Do it poorly and offend the gay community and also anyone else who didnt want a gay character?
Do it well and then offend the masses because they may accuse you of stunt casting?
And I’m aware that making movies is “decision by committee” and Paramount may just pull the plug on the character before a single frame is filmed.
Or (perhaps) even worse you create a compelling gay character and film the script as its written only to have it left on the cutting room floor because the “suits” don’t like it or “test” audiences don’t approve.
But hey Bob I’m looking forward to the next Trek film.
Great to see you here as always
@444. “MJ, quit taking it personally when people disagree with you on a previous post.”
Dude, you have me rolling in the aisles with this one.
I will apologize though for getting under your skin.
472. boborci: “So, what have we learned?”
1. That unfortunately we have some bigots in Trekdom who are never going to accept gays.
2. That we have some gay advocacy people who want to use Trek to force the issue into the public consciousness.
3. That a lot of us are frankly bored by this topic and wish Anthony would post something new on the movie. (my vote here!)
Here, Here…
Star Trek is supposed to be fun!
“Fire phasers!” BOOM “Yay!”
You can always come over to CHAT to get off-topic.
Harry Ballz has been leading a discussion there of post-Vietnam war era Quebecois neo-chauvinism and how it almost led to a secession bill, while the rest of us lie around farting and making dolphin noises.
**dolphin farting noise**
AJ: (sniffing) Mmmmm. What smells like calamari?
483: “3. That a lot of us are frankly bored by this topic and wish Anthony would post something new on the movie. (my vote here!)”
Bob is in a better position to do that than anyone! How about another fun clue, Bob?
@ 296. Andrews – January 27, 2011
I do find myself very much in agreement with the various observations you listed in your post.
479. When would you rather kids learn about gay people? When they’ve gotten older and have preconceived notions about what’s right and wrong? When they’re starting to think for themselves and question that which has been taught, or not taught, by the grownups in their lives?
To censor an entire section of the population from someone is intellectually dishonest. It presumes a lack of trust you have for your kid, it presumes a lack of trust yourself to explain to him the diversity of this world, which is there no matter how you feel about it, and it presumes a lack of trust for the world at large.
To say you don’t want your kid to be confused also doesn’t give him much credit. Sometimes people should be a bit confused and challenged. If Star Trek, or some other piece of entertainment, sparks a conversation about the world at large then so much the better. It’s a bonus, a teachable moment in a sea of mindlessness.
That’s one of the best by-products of Star Trek, The Twilight Zone, and Doctor Who, all of which were created largely to get grownups and kids to talk about larger issues together. The exploration of these issues is designed not to preach to the converted, but to challenge all sides of an argument to get a conversation started.
Mr. Orci, I hope we could learn that it would be wonderful to include diverse characters such as non-straight characters in the next movie. There are several suggestions above for how to do it without changing too much in the script, I’m sure. Part of me thinks that the later series copped out a bit by having more aliens in the cast. It’s cooler, and it can serve an allegorical purpose, but sometimes it’s better to be more direct.
@ moauvian waoul- aka: You are tonights entertainment
@490. LOL
Star Trek (in all its incarnations) has ALWAYS included hot-button issues in the eps–racism, sexuality, religion, etc. It was always hidden behind alien races. That allowed the writers and actors to comment on our cultural taboos by being so far removed by our reality. This provided a safe place for such discussions.
I agree with many of the above posters–this will be a non-issue by the 23rd century. It should already be a non issue here in the 21st!
“When would you rather kids learn about gay people? When they’ve gotten older and have preconceived notions about what’s right and wrong? When they’re starting to think for themselves and question that which has been taught, or not taught, by the grownups in their lives?”
It is true that kids will grow up and will eventually be aware of the existence of homosexuality but it’s for the parents to decide when to make them aware of such behavior and it’s for the parent’s to teach their children whether it is acceptable behavior in our society not television not movies and certainly not you. This is the way I see it. Children also watch Star Trek because for the most part it has been watchable for all ages and bringing homosexuality into the world Star Trek would not only drive the children but also a lot of the parents that watch it too. There’s an old saying. If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it. Star Trek is not broken so don’t try to fix it by bringing in something new just for the sake of bringing in something new. The bottom line is this. I believe more than half of Trek’s fanbase is quite happy with Trek the way it has been and the way it is now and for Trek to bring in homosexual characters to the franchise just to appeal to the demographic that want to be noticed would be another Pandora’s box that should’ve been left closed.
I meant to say “drive away the children but also it will drive away the parents that watch it too.”
This thread has given undeniable proof to the concept of entropy. It has descended to complete chaos.
I guess if we learned nothing else, we learned Star Trek fans run the gamut from the religious to the atheist, the conservative to the liberal and the fascists to the communists, to everything in between, above, below, around, inside and out.
Our new Spock, Zachary Quinto is gay. So Star Trek is open-minded just not rub it in your face open. A step forward indeed.
@ 296:
“Obvious and purposeful inclusion of controversial minorities is what Star Trek is all about.”
That’s what ST is all about, huh? I agree with you. It’s not Science Fiction, it’s not Space Adventure, it’s not Space Fantasy…it’s all about minorities. Granted, ST has spaceships and technobabble, but at its core it’s not about science or exploration or adventure, it’s all about touchy-feely Kumbaya sanctimonious social preachiness.
That’s ST’s biggest problem.
@258:
1. First of all, we’re obviously not talking about bit-parts, one-shot characters, or “aliens” functioning as metaphors for a human minority. When people say there’s “no gay characters on ST”, they mean there’s no recurring main characters who are gay. Like how Scotty was Scottish or how Chekov was Russian…that’s what they’re talking about.
2. Actors are different than the characters they play. Just because Nimoy & Shatner are Jewish doesn’t mean their characters are. By that logic, since Takei’s gay, Sulu is gay & the whole premise of the conversation is wrong.
Likewise, just because Jewish culture influenced the “tone” of Vulcan culture doesn’t mean that Vulcans are Jewish.
There are no Jewish characters on ST.
3. Drunks aren’t stoners. Booze is not pot – they’re entirely different. There are no stoners on ST. If booze is the same thing as pot, then gay is the same thing as straight.
4. Morn & Scotty are definitely obese, but hardly grotesquely, morbidly obese. There are no morbidly obese characters on ST.
5. Again, actors aren’t characters. Keenser & Ferengi aren’t midgets – they’re aliens. I’ve never seen a Starfleet Officer with dwarfism. There are no little people on ST.
6. OK, you’re right about all the DS9 chicks being bisexual. I stand corrected on that one.
7. Geordi was blind, not deaf. There are no deaf characters on ST.
8. There are no hermaphordite characters on ST. There may have been genderless aliens, but that’s not a hermaphrodite, is it? A hermaphrodite is a human with male & female sex organs.
9. Regarding tall, athletic blond Swedish characters on ST: You say, “There must have been a few over all the years just without speaking roles”
That doesn’t count. If it did, then there must have been a few gay characters over all the years in the background without speaking roles. But a background-character without speaking roles doesn’t count. We’re talking about MAIN CHARACTERS. There are no tall, athletic blond Swedish characters on ST.
10. Data’s an android. He’s not an asexual human. They’re different. There are no asexual characters on ST.
11. As for Rabau & Khan being Muslim…there was never any indication of that on screen. They may have been defined as such in a book or something, but as far as the general audience is concerned, there are no Muslim characters on ST.
12. Who the hell is Commander Kyle? Let me guess…a character who appeared for 3 seconds & spoke a couple sentences. That hardly counts. There are no Australian characters in ST.
13. Directors are not characters. There are no foot-fetishist characters on ST.
So, to recap: There are no gay characters on ST. Nor are there any Jews, stoners, morbidly obese, midgets, deaf people, hermaphrodites, tall athletic blond Swedes, autistics, myopic people, Ainu, Puerto Ricans, asexuals, mutes, muslims, Australians, or foot-fetishists.
I guess what I don’t understand is why gay people are more important than any of them. Say they do a new ST & put an overtly gay person in the show…what about Jews, stoners, morbidly obese, midgets, deaf people, hermaphrodites, tall athletic blond Swedes, autistics, myopic people, Ainu, Puerto Ricans, asexuals, mutes, muslims, Australians, and foot-fetishists?
When do we get them in ST?
Can we just talk about how great Zoe looks in a mega-mini uni?
MJ wrote – “@411 “What about the hermaphrodite? When the hermaphrodite is coupled is sher own kind, their cycles work together – while one is female, the other is male and then they swap their sexes. However, this person’s lover does not change.”
” ahawhops, ughups,
(the sound of me throwing up right now)”
Why would this bother you to this extent?
For this hermaphrodite race, the change of sex/gender would be a natural process and a normal part of their existence. The hermaphrodite may actually find the idea and experience of being one single sex for an entire life strange and limiting. The human partner loves the person, irrespective of the sex they happen to be at any one time and adapts himself. The hermaphrodite may also be a bisexual male which is one of the reasons why the relationship works.
#493 – “It is true that kids will grow up and will eventually be aware of the existence of homosexuality but it’s for the parents to decide when to make them aware of such behavior and it’s for the parent’s to teach their children whether it is acceptable behavior in our society not television not movies and certainly not you.”
What about all the other behaviours that kids learn from television and movies? They certainly learn and see a LOT of violence. Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey Jnr) gives instruction on how to seriously injure another person on the latest Sherlock Holmes movie (PG-13). Star Trek ‘09 showed how four redshirt punks could beat and punch a man in the face several times (again PG-13) and I could go on and on… Yep, good family movies “promoting” wholesome family values like bullying…
Please – give me a break. I’m so sick of this nonsense – young kids can see and hear all kinds of violence, mayhem, noise and not a peep, but show a couple getting intimate who may or may not be of the same sex, or the sight of naked body, and all hell breaks loose. We start reading words like “family values” and “morals”. Where were the morals or family values in the scenes I mentioned in the previous paragraph?
I don’t want anything shoved in my face, but I don’t like the idea of ignoring a group of people because…well, why should that be, exactly, given what is not ignored (the sado-masochistics aspects of the human condition) which in fact appears to be encouraged and condoned even.
So Star Trek didn’t emphasize gay people, did it emphasize black people or oriental people? They were in the show, but their race was not emphasized. Gays in ST have been accepted for so long it’s not a big deal and no reason to point it out… it’s not like you notice gays all around you in real life either except in certain occupations or parts of town.
497. Eff It – January 29, 201
lol! I thought witty political incorrectness died after Bill Maher was the victim of a cowardly corporate firing in 2001? (Still miss that show).
God I wish I was Anthony. January vacation #3… Beeyaaaahhhh!!!
Here’s something to consider. At least the Russians had a valid argument for wanting to put a Russian on Star Trek. They were the ones to invent the first man-made satellite and send it into space plus they came out with the space program so they helped to change our world by moving it up into the stars. So tell me. How did gay people contribute to that? What is your valid argument for wanting to put a gay character on Star Trek other than to give the homosexual community another 15 minutes of fame? As if they haven’t gotten plenty already.
Could this be post 500?
One of my characters in a story I wrote was a mute. She was a throwback from her race where they had been originally pure telepaths and mutes. She was about 5 years old. I guess that would not count. She was not a main character. Her father, though, was an empath/telepath/healer but not mute.
This person, the mute girl’s father, Suranai, manages to save James Kirk’s life through his healing abilities, however this alien character somehow imprints some of his DNA onto Kirk. Kirk falls in love with an alien woman and gets her pregnant. Who knew? Kirk is to be a daddy…YAY! But – Is kirk still be able to get a human female pregnant? Questions. Questions.
You know what – I do not like soap operas!
499: “What about all the other behaviours that kids learn from television and movies? They certainly learn and see a LOT of violence. Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey Jnr) gives instruction on how to seriously injure another person on the latest Sherlock Holmes movie (PG-13). Star Trek ‘09 showed how four redshirt punks could beat and punch a man in the face several times (again PG-13) and I could go on and on… Yep, good family movies “promoting” wholesome family values like bullying…”
“Please – give me a break. I’m so sick of this nonsense – young kids can see and hear all kinds of violence, mayhem, noise and not a peep, but show a couple getting intimate who may or may not be of the same sex, or the sight of naked body, and all hell breaks loose. We start reading words like “family values” and “morals”. Where were the morals or family values in the scenes I mentioned in the previous paragraph?”
“I don’t want anything shoved in my face,”
I think there is a point to be made, whether it is gratuitous sex, violence, or bad language, that when it is IN everything, like high fructose corn syrup, then it IS in your face. I find the claim that the images do not affect us rather dubious. Is that why advertisers spend billions on advertising? Because words and images that emanate from TV and movie screens do NOT affect us? Puh-lease.
Hollywood does engage in secular social engineering projects, as does the news media, that are hard to escape; this wouldn’t be so disturbing if I saw evidence that they knew what they were doing. But I see none. From Hollywood and the other major cities I see the signals of a civilization stuck in a sort of OODA loop without knowing it, a self destructive feedback cycle in which it spins more and more out of control the more controls are tried in order to fix things.
But please don’t mistake me for being a pessimist. I’m not. I’m confident that people will outlast the suicidal technocrats and emerge better for it.
#503 I didn’t know the Russians (or Soviets as they called themselves then) had anything to do with the casting of Star Trek – TOS. This was the Cold War period.
As far as the space programme is concerned, whether it was Soviet or American, it was an ensemble of many individuals with many varied talents who all contributed to man eventually walking on the moon. Nobody could possibly know who could have been gay among those people, but I suspect there would be a few, given that gays make up about 6% of a given population. Why cast a black woman or an Asian? I wonder how many of those people contributed to changing “our world by moving it into the stars”.
Star Trek stopped being true to itself long time ago, it is highly unlikely this abrams thing will be progressive in any shape or form. In fact, I expect it to be just as meaningless as the last twilight trek move.
I should also say that there are exceptions in Hollywood; not making blanket statements about all of anything. The stories we tell ourselves are helpful as well. I thought True Grit and Tron Legacy were the two best movies I’ve seen since summer of 09.
And both had Jeff Bridges, who’s a national treasure.
oh god… please make it stop
@507
Given your history at this site, there is so much irony in your statements in this thread.
You can’t fight hate with hate.
Would you be so kind as to point out the ironic parts? I can’t seem to find them.
I’ve read a lot of thoughtful, smart, and well-meaning comments on this thread. Unfortunately, I’ve also read a lot of ignorant, hateful and hurtful remarks on this site from morons who still have their heads up their asses.
Why can’t an openly gay character be featured in “Star Trek”? Hasn’t “Star Trek” taught us to be open minded?
Writers can create an authentic gay character without ramming it into the faces of the audience. And they don’t need to make him/her flamboyant or butch. Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman, for example, are smart enough to be able to write a character without resorting to stereotypes. All they’d have to do is write the character as if he or she was straight but instead of being interested in the opposite sex, he or she would be in love with someone of the same gender. And we wouldn’t need a sex scene to know that. It could be holding hands, a kiss on the cheek, or simple dialogue. Its that simple.
@511
Irony means ‘an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected’.
I don’t expect people who fight against hatred to also hate.
That’s it’s from me.
Yeah I have to admit I’m finally bored with the whole thing.
BTW
Bob, you know you’re guilty
If you have to remake another movie when you write ST’12, can it be Spaceballs?
The Producers remake did really well. Maybe Blazing Saddles in Space? with a gay hermaphrodite sheriff? (Read Azimov’s Empire series about a subspecies of telepathic humans that self reproduce)
Just one of many youtube videos exposing ST 09 as a SW remake:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd0j97RhZUQ
One more for good measure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M67nnd8FjLk&NR=1
Come to think of it, if you remade Blazing Saddles, you could star George Takei as a gay Asian sheriff…
@514
LOL, yeah I checked in hoping for a new ‘this week in sci-fi” thread, at least.
Sadly, Blazing Saddles is one of those movies I don’t think would even get greenlit these days.
The 70’s were the last ballsy movie-making decade.
512. – “It could be holding hands, a kiss on the cheek, or simple dialogue. Its that simple.”
Been there, done that & more with canon Kirk and Spock…. but some people still don’t believe.
Because neither of the two were stereotypical feminised 100% gay guys.
It is a tricky thing really, if done in a realistic way “they are not gay at all or not gay enough” and if done in a way that pleases the majority of heterosexuals, it will offend the gay population.
“Why cast a black woman or an Asian? I wonder how many of those people contributed to changing “our world by moving it into the stars”.
They weren’t recognized by Starfleet Command as Black Communications Officer and Asian Helmsman of the Enterprise. They were recognized as the Communications Officer and Helmsman of the Enterprise so race was not a concern to anybody except to those that couldn’t get past looking at their skin color. As I said before, you don’t have to tell anybody you’re black, russian, or asian cuz they can tell just by looking at your skin color. But homsexuality? That’s something you would have to tell them because nobody can really tell who’s gay or lesbian on the surface cuz it’s not something that can be visualized physically without words and feelings being expressed to one another. It seems the only thing that’s gonna satisfy the gay community is for Trek to have a starship captain that’s not only gay but also has a nametag displaying his sexual orientation so everyone else knows it too. In that case that would require every Starfleet officer to wear a sexual oriention tag on their uniforms as well. Is that what you’re proposing? Cuz if you are that would defeat the whole concept of diversity because you’re telling the viewers that race, color, creed, and sexual orientation does matter in the Trek world. The only thing Starfleet should recognize is 1) They are all members of Starfleet. 2)They are all people (sentient beings with the same rights as humans) 3) The only diversity that should truly be a message to Star Trek viewers is the different ranks of Starfleet officers and the different talents and skills that these officers possess regardless of their race, color, creed, or even sexual orientation. Star Trek has never needed to do a story about black issues, asian issues, or russian issues so why would they need to do one about gay issues?
#506
LGBT websites claim 6 to 10% of the population is gay, while most of the legitimate (did real research) sites estimate 1 to 2%. (http://www.adherents.com/adh_dem.html)
I am going to go out on a limb here – suppose they have a ‘cure’ in 100 years? Do the anti-eugenics policies prohibit its use? Or, like Dr. Bashir’s parents, go around the feds and get it done on their own?
Lots to think about…. Would you (ONLY STRAIGHTS, now) ‘fix’ your child?
and conversely – gays – would you GUARANTEE your children (however aquired) be gay? Do we have that right?
In order for there to be a cure a simple question would have to be answered. Is homosexuality a genetic trait? Is it something people are born with? It has not been established that people are born homosexual.
520
Technology has advanced to the point where women can choose whether to have a boy or a girl. And that is legal. But whether one is gay or not is not fully known until adolescence, and even then a lot of people don’t fully know which gender they prefer.
Genetic engineering might be helpful not just in straightening out potential gay offspring, but to ensure that people don’t grow up to be serial killers, rapists, burgulars or madmen like Khan. Or it could be used to create the ultimate supersoldier, like the Jem’ Hadar.
On the other hand, we don’t know what makes people gay, and we may never do. Plus a lot of people don’t care what orientation their child is, just as long as its a decent human being that is capable of loving others and being loved.
I’m gay, and that hate I see here makes me hope there is a cure for the future so that ‘normal’ people can see me as one of them. I do nothing wrong, but I am constantly hated. Thanks
@523
Rory, I feel for you man. I can’t believe some of the shit I’m reading here!
#521
Wow… so you are saying we cannot cure that which we are not born with? Cancer? Alcoholism? Depression? Schizophrenia? Cures are not possible unless a genetic link is found? You must know something that the rest of the medical profession does not.
The question #520 posted did not in any way say that homosexuality was genetic or something you are born with (BTW, those are not necessarily the same thing either). The way I interpret the question it is if homosexuality could be detected, would you have your child tested and treated to prevent it or cure it. To that I would answer yes, I most certainly would, without a doubt.
To #522, I would say that I don’t know many people who would honestly say they don’t care what orientation their child is. However, I think a lot of people may say something like that when what they really mean is that they will accept and love their child regardless or sexual orientation because it is not something they have any control over. If, rather when, a cure is found, and I fully believe it will be, THEN a lot of people are going to care about their child’s orientation.
Fast forward 300 years and I expect homosexuality to be history – which makes this whole issue of a gay character on Star Trek so… 21st century. It’s not forward thinking… it’s backwards.
I’m a Gay man and am proud of it. Yes that’s the phrase that we’ve been needing to say. I’m out of the closet and I believe that It is fine and okay. In fact I’m tired of us being in the minority. The President should make gay legal everywhere and show gay weddings on prime time to spread the word to everybody, that’s it’s better than okay. It’s the Way my friends. I’m hoping that new laws and many other tings can be done that will help the Gay community be spread around so that it will finally be excepted by everyone and that everyone else can become like us. I’m so sick of all the name callings. It’s about time people know that we’re here, and we’re querr. so get used to it. All those little minded straight people are just a bunch of biggots. They think that they are the only ones who know a good time. When I was a little boy, I had a friend who dared me to do some things that I was ashamed of. I did them with him, but now I don’t feel ashamed about them anymore. He said that I was putting it where it didn’t belong, that’s why I felt bad. But now that I know that it’s right, it doesn’t feel sick anymore. I just have to get all this off my chest. I’ve never felt so alive as I do now. I’m just going to live it up one day at a time. That’s what my grandmother told me. Anyway, thanks George T. for giving me the courage to be ME! yea! I want to be just like you. Gay and loving it, yea. All those name callers can just, you know what … LL&P my many friends.
Hear, hear!!
Where do I sign up!?!
#526 – Jimmy, I’m afraid gays may never be totally accepted because there will always be bigoted idiots in this world, but a lot of progress has been made, and more will come. I know that may be cold comfort now, but I hope it gets even easier for you.
Being gay is not a disease, it is not something that needs to be “cured.” Only idiots believe that. I’m a straight male and am educated enough to realize this. I have gay friends of both gender and clearly see there is nothing more wrong with them than any of my hetero friends. Unfortunately, societal evolution is a very slow process, but it will change over time.
Why does someone need to tell others they are gay?
First, Brannon Braga is a hack who nearly killed Trek, Sure he wrote a ton of scripts, mostly CRAP. The man butchers science for a living. Anybody remember Janeway and Paris ‘evolving’ into giant lizards and having babies? Yep that was Braga.
As to the Gay thing, I am glad that Braga did not do it… yes on BSG and other shows it was done well, but Braga would have had whole episodes revolving around the fact that being Gay was the next step in human evolution or some crap. I am not gay, but if I were I would want the subject dealt with maturely not by someone who thinks sexuality is something we all should be giggling about.
#529
Because they are sick and tired of people sending them on blind dates with members of the opposite sex. I imagine that gets annoying real quick.
528: I have a gay relative. I’m not going to out him because outing others isn’t polite. I did get up in front of my college’s LGBT club and speak in support of them because I felt it was the right thing to do. Having an LGBT character (even a one-line walk-on) would add to IDIC.
529: Because it’s a relief not to hide anymore. Imagine having a really hot friend you’d like to date, but you don’t shwing the way they do. Awkward, eh? Coming out eases the awkwardness.
If an openly “gay” character is introduced, would it be ok if an openly Christian one is?
#519 You are taking what I wrote out of context. You asked what contribution gays made to the space programme and I said, no one can know that, but I think that it is very possible that there may have been some. You could have as easily asked how many black people or Asians made a contribution to the US space programme. Why didn’t you?
No, I have never been someone who thinks that anyone needs to wear a badge proclaiming their race, their religion, their politics or their sexuality, nor should they necessarily have to hide it either, because another demographic (in this case, yours, trekforever) feels uncomfortable, not ready or whatever… This is not about what may be “natural”, “no big deal” in the 23rd century. For some here, it is about not having to see, to hear, to know a character even briefly who may have a different take and experience of what it is to be a (sexual) human being or, as an example in the context of Star Trek (”exploring strange new worlds…”) be in a relationship with someone like a hermaphrodite, where bisexuality is part of that relationship.
I think some people have a little too much confidence in what can safely be done in terms of genetic manipulation. As I said before, Mother Nature is all about checks and balances. There is a reason why people have the sexual orientations they have. Having a gay character on Star Trek would not be opening Pandora’s box, but genetic manipulation, which is what it would take to effect a “cure” in many cases, would be. Unfortunately, the same may go for some diseases that really are painful, debilitating and life threatening, unlike homosexuality (except when others sh*te on those who happen to be or have homosexual tendencies).
All I can see coming from this kind of interference is people aborting babies they think may be born gay or aborting those they think may be born straight…Any other method of “cure” would not be that straightforward, and would be expensive and not totally fullproof . Don’t think, for one minute, that it would not happen that way with a lot of people.
533: I would actually be an interesting idea to develop two characters — one openly gay and one a conservative christian. You could demonstrate how while the two never meet eye to eye on the sexuality question, they develop a respect for each other and learn to understand where both sides are coming from. It could also show the audience that the conservative christian isn’t ignorant or bigoted, and also that the gay person doesn’t fit the stereotypes that the conservative Christian community sometimes places on them.
I think both sides get it wrong when they demonize each other. I know many conservative christians who would love and support a gay individual even as they fully disagree with homosexuality. And that to me is what tolerance means. It means accepting others for who they are, even as you yourself disagree with their choices (or perceived choices where choice isn’t a factor.) I have this issue with my sister. I love her with all my heart but she has made some very bad decisions in her life concerning boyfriends– doesn’t change my love for her but I can heartily disagree with her.
Keachick
Earthworms and fish are hermaphroditic.
They say there are some humans that are, but I’ve never seen any.
mammals just dont fit the bill.
Read the last 2 Foundation and Empire novels writen by Azimov himself.
He puts his hero into a strange situation where because of the hostile environment, humans that colonized that world evolved into females with ovaries and a womb, and testes that impregnate themselves and have talosian type brain power.
I’m telling you, everything you think you thought of has already been thought to death.
Might as well write a touchy feely vampire novel.
Next, they go to Solaria, where they find what the Solarians — who have survived the Spacer-Settler conflicts by clever retreat detailed in Asimov’s novel Robots and Empire — have evolved into self-reproducing asexual beings, who have remained generally intolerant of human physical presence or contact. They have also modified themselves to have a natural ability to mentally channel (”transduce”) great amounts of energy, and utilize this as their sole source of power. The Solarians intentionally avoid ever having to interact with each other, except by holographic apparatus (”viewing”), and reproduce only when necessary to replace someone who has died. Bliss, Pelorat, and Trevize are nearly killed by a Solarian named Sarton Bander. Bliss, however, deflects the transducer brain-lobes at the moment Bander tries to use them to kill. Bliss intends to knock out Bander, but has not had sufficient time to learn the full workings of the transducer and accidentally kills him instead. While escaping, they find what they assume to be Bander’s immature child, Fallom, in a state of panic because its robotic nursemaid, like all other robots on the estate, has stopped functioning. The child Fallom cannot inherit the Bander estate, as would normally be the Solarian custom, because it is too immature to be able to use its transducer lobes. There being no other place for the child on Solaria, the decision of the robots who immediately arrive to investigate the loss of power is that Fallom is to be killed. Upon learning this, Bliss insists that they take Fallom with them.
Finally 535, a voice of reason. I am a life long (41 years) Trekkie. I am a conservative and a Christian. I also have several gay friends. One of them is my boss and I’d leave the house right now if she needed my help. I don’t understand or agree with her sexual orientation but that doesn’t stop me from being her friend. I have many friends that do a lot of things that I don’t agree with but I’m still here for them. As a Christian I understand that Christ never forced his way on anyone, but only offered it as a gift. I believe in salvation through Him. I tell others about Him. If they ask me to go away, I do. Doesn’t mean I won’t continue to pray for them or that I’ll stop being their friend. So many people call my opinion “hate” yet I don’t hate any one of them. I’d dare say most Christians are like me. I live and work and pay bills and run the kids to ball practice and spend time with my wife and really don’t have a lot of time to cause trouble for anyone. Sadly, it’s the extreme fringe (the ones that picket soldier’s funerals) that end up getting most of the publicity. This debate is pointless. As long as their are humans on this planet we are going to disagree. Some are much louder than others and some are downright mean (on both sides). I’ve always watched Star Trek because I can go with my heroes to far flung worlds in cool spaceships. They take me out of the rigors for just a little while and help me escape. There’s enough politics on TV without Trek becoming bogged down in too many deep issues. Please just leave it a fun show. The one I’ve loved all along.
So now I’ve said my piece. Let’s see if I receive any tolerance my way.
#533 Why not? In the Enterprise’s multi-denominational chapel/meditation room, a crew member is doing some readings and leading a group in prayer, when the Red Alert siren rings. He finishes by saying, “Go in peace. In the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit”. Everybody moves quickly out of the room and to their respective posts.
533. Christianity is a choice;)
538 – So, based on your logic, I could change just a word or two in your post so it reads: (my changes are bracketed)
Finally 535, a voice of reason. I am a life long (41 years) Trekkie. I am a conservative and a Christian. I also have several [black] friends. One of them is my boss and I’d leave the house right now if she needed my help. I don’t understand or agree with [her skin color] but that doesn’t stop me from being her friend…..
So, what do you think? Does that paragraph still work for you? I hope not.
“I don’t understand” I take as code lingo for “I don’t approve.” And “or agree” seems pretty close to “or like”. I am homosexual, but have stopped using the term “Gay” to describe myself, due to the term’s association with the far left. But I can tell you that bigotry hiding behind religion is still bigotry.
540 Christianity is a choice;)
————————————————–
I’m asking that if someone on the show were to become a Christian and choose to share their faith with someone, would that be acceptable as well.
I know that Christianity is a choice. What does that have to do with my question?
to paraphrase u at529, why would someone need to tell others they are Christian?
Im just teasing you.
Haven’t you figured out by now that Bob.O doesnt ever answer a direct question? He plays fey little mind games like that. That’s right, I’m outing you as writer! Damn writers always writing in metaphors and such! :P
Has anyone else seen that Geri of facts of Life came out recently?
I’m too tired and bored to factor that into a Trek Chat, but I’m sure someone will.
542.
I think Bob is obviously pointing out that people are born gay, they CHOOSE a religion. You implied that both are interchangeable, but such is NOT the case.
Obsidian doesn’t like my opinion so he/she is apparently intolerant of me. You have a flair for the obvious Obsidian. You are correct, I don’t approve but it doesn’t mean I hate you. Your changes in [brackets] have little to do with this argument. I also expected to be called a bigot. It’s a typical response. That’s OK you’re entitled to your opinion as well.
BOB.0,
Judaism as I understand it is NOT a choice (Sammy Davis Jr not withstanding)
As it has been explained to me, One can only be a Jew if it’s inherited through the maternal line.
So have a character come out as a Jew
And something I noticed earlier but failed to mention,
The “Ads by Google” are trying to turn me gay! Offering all kinds of gay dating & what not!
damned google & their not so intelligent AI.
The first ad under the header says “Star trek ship” and the rest are about gay dating.
c’est la vie
Born gay, choose gay? I’m not debating that. I only want to know if a practicing Christian that prays for his crew members openly and tells them about faith in Christ would be accepted by fans of the series. I know many Christians that love the series as well. Are they unworthy of acceptance?
they would be worthy of acceptance. imho.
@550 Thank you.
That should settle everything, I think…..
Now Mr. Orci, a bit off subject but are we ever gonna see an Abramsverse Excelsior? Pleaaaasssseeee!
Sure, have every crew member take turns explaining their religious beliefs, and instead of an entertaining movie, we have a 2 hour religion infomercial! Yeah, Paramount will LOVE that!
…and maybe Erica Durance could be a Chaplain and you’d even like it Harry.
549.
That would only work if you gave equal time to every other religion out there to do the same thing, which would be ABSURD!
Religion was entertaining in DS9. It fueled a lot of stories.
Durance doesn’t have the “acting chops” to pull off playing a Chaplain!
The only religious tone I like to see in Star Trek is along the lines of TOS, where they illustrated how hollow and misguided it was to worship any “supreme being”.
Durance doesn’t have the “acting chops” to pull off playing a Chaplain!
————————————
I knew that was coming.
@559 So you are intolerant of who you choose to be intolerant of? My beliefs offend you.
557
Yes, but it wasn’t an existing religion. If they were to portray Christianity, Judaism, or Islam in Trek, it would no doubt cause controversy even if the writers studied religion and did their best to respect peoples’ beliefs.
558
Erica Durance doesn’t have the chops to even be in Hollywood but there she is! Talent doesn’t seem to matter unfortunately.
557
Yes, but it wasn’t an existing religion. If they were to portray Christianity, Judaism, or Islam in Trek, it would no doubt cause controversy even if the writers studied religion and did their best to respect peoples’ beliefs.
————————————————-
I thought all of you on here were promoting controversy. Doctor Who has a Christmas special. They say Merry Christmas in it. No one is up in arms about it. They have Captain Jack. He’ll do anything with a pulse or power pack. I cringed when he kissed the Doctor because I don’t want to see a man kissing another man in that way but I still think Jack’s a kick butt character. They’ve walked fine lines and told fantastic stories. Why couldn’t Trek?
561.
Your beliefs don’t offend me, but showcasing any ONE religion in Star Trek would deeply offend me, along with a couple of billion other people.
#536 I don’t really like vampires. The only vampire I will bring myself to watch is Edward Cullen, because Robert Pattinson is kinda cute, but not nearly as cute as “my captain” CP!
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001669.htm
Imagine a planet where the humanoids with such a “condition” were completely healthy and normal in every sense. My hermaphrodites are not human beings…
I have not read Issac Asimov’s take on the subject. Why should I have to? Is it that essential? Anyway, as I said before, it is about what could go on the next movie, not what’s been written in books etc, which are not Star Trek canon anyway.
So offending many with a homosexual display (even if you believe it’s ok) is acceptable?
You can count on many being offended by that.
I doubt billions watch the show in the first place.
@564. Usually agree with you Harry, but Star Trek has covered multiple religions over its different series over the years. Heck, DS9 had a huge religous deal with Bajor. Didn’t really offend me.
From just and argument standpoint about covering mutliple special interests in Trek, I would be fine with Gay, Chrisian, Muslim, Hindu, Athiest, Agnostic, handicapped, mentally challenged, etc. etc. etc. Go for it Trek!
Exactly 567. If you’re gonna cover one then cover em all.
566+567
Which is why, in the next movie, we’re NOT going to see either issue addressed. Sheesh, it’s hard enough to crank out a compelling script without purposely entering into those respective Viet Nams…..not worth going there at all! How about just a fun, thrilling, dramatic and engaging story?
Nah, that makes too much sense!
569 – Which is why, in the next movie, we’re NOT going to see either issue addressed. Sheesh, it’s hard enough to crank out a compelling script without purposely entering into those respective Viet Nams…..not worth going there at all! How about just a fun, thrilling, dramatic and engaging story?
———————————————-
Agreed. I’m always for some fun Trek. I enjoyed the last movie. It wasn’t my old Trek but if was fun. Still trying to get used to those nacelles though.
Erica Durance as Janice Rand? Anyone?
570.
We are in complete agreement about the nacelles! Every exterior shot of the ship looked FAKE! They can do so much better on that front!
571.
Make Durance a red shirt so they can kill her off before the opening credits!
@ 572 – I’m like a big kid and still collect the toy ships. I’ve accepted the new E but I keep wondering why they had to drastically alter those bussard domes so much. The ship resembles the re-fit so much when I put the two side by side but then to see those nacelles. A cross between the original and the re-fit nacelle would have worked perfectly in my humble opinion. Oh well, maybe the Excelsior will be better. YA HEAR THAT BOB? I wanna see the Abramsverse Excelsior.
OK everyone. Keep debating. I’m beat. Gonna turn in. Goodnight.
This is a ruse. We all know that you, Harry Ballz, are secretly, hopelessly and very deeply in love with Erica Durance. There is no use staying closeted. You need to come out. Just imagine the relief. Admit the truth already.
I’m an Erica Durance fan. I’m just messin’ with Harry.
540 – >;>}
@575 – Just read it again. You were only typing at Harry. Shows how tired I am. The lines are running together. That’s it. I’m gone for real this time. Night all.
575+576.
Actually, I have her in a hologram program on my computer. I use it to test my patience. When I have finally had enough, I tell the computer, “End Durance test”. The computer always replies, “Yes, and you’re doing quite well with it”. Obviously, my computer hates her guts as well! :>)
I think some of you take “Star Trek” much too seriously as a guide to life. It’s 43 minutes per day of decent sci-fi about people with ‘good moral fiber.’
Let’s go back to ‘Balance of Terror’ and extrapolate it as the moral basis for all 700+ shows that followed for showing the ugliness of bigotry, and the possibilities in diversity. The whole message is right there.
If you keep “BOT” in your pocket as you watch any Trek, you don’t really need anything else.
Most people don’t want to see gay stuff in Star Trek. It’s just plain icky to most Star Trek fans. Im not saying it’s right…just seems to be true. Therefore it’s economics. More gay less viewers. Unless of course its hot very feminine looking lesbians. Society seems to have a different opinion of this. It the future,100 years or so, people will be marrying dolphins, and whales. Hey there smart right? Now thats forward thinking! Inter-Earth species relationships!
Tonight’s? Every night my man. Every night.
PS I’m not so smart…there = they’re
559 – Hollow and misguided? Really – you must have forgotten Bread and Circuses – where the sun worshippers were really Son worshippers… obviously Kirk and Uhura worship Him too.
Kirk is Scottish for Church….
#580 has hit the nail on the head.
Femine looking lesbians? Tell me something. If you who represent the straight man are supposed to be offended by gay stuff then why is two men making out totally offensive to you while two women making out is socially acceptable to you. IMHO it’s that double standard that hurts your case in your argument concerning homosexuality. And this is coming from someone who shares your views about gay stuff in Star Trek. I for one have DS9’s “Re-joined”, TNG’s “Outcast” on my SKIP AND NEVER WATCH AGAIN list and if any future Trek movie or episode features any display of homosexuality of any kind it better not be so integrated into the movie that I can’t buy a DVD and burn my own edited copy by cutting one or two scenes from it. If I have to cut 3 scenes from it then I won’t buy it all (I live by the 3 STRIKES AND YOU’RE OUT rule). What I’m saying is if I buy a ticket to see the movie and the homosexuality becomes an ongoing reference that I have to keep hearing about over and over again throughout the movie I will walk out of that movie right then and there because I no longer consider it watchable. If I have to deal with the same thing on a future Trek episode, I will change the channel and never finish watching the rest of the episode. And if I have to do this for a third trek movie or a third future trek episode then I’m done with today’s Trek (unless they decided to change their ways and not use it ever again THREE STRIKES people.)
Brannon Braga is a hack, and bullshit on his revisionism. Here’s what David Gerrold said recently about Gene Roddenberry’s pro-gay attitude for TNG in 1986, from http://www.startrek.com/article/trek-writer-david-gerrold-looks-back-part-2 –
” … a month after Next Gen was announced Gene and I were at a convention in Boston. We’d both been invited before anyone knew there was going to be a new Trek series, so there was a lot of excitement at the convention because this would be the first time Gene would speak in public about the new series. There were 3,000 people in the room waiting to hear the news. They had a lot of questions. But there wasn’t really anything to say yet. We were still getting moved into offices and had not really made any serious decisions about what the new show would be. So it was mostly just promises that we were going to do our best to catch lightning in a bottle again.
One fan asked, ‘Well, are you going to have gay crewmembers, because in the 60’s you had Black and Asian and Latino, etc.?’ Gene said, ‘You know, you’re right. It’s time. We should.’ I was sitting on the side, taking notes, of course. So there it was: Gene had said it in front of an audience of 3,000 people in November of 1986. I was a little bit surprised and delighted that Gene was willing to go there. We got back to L.A. and Gene said it again in a meeting, and somebody in that meeting – I won’t say who – said, ‘What, we’re going to have Lt. Tutti-Frutti?’ Gene balled him out and said, ‘No, it’s time. And I promised the fans we’re going to have gay characters.’ “
#76: Malcolm was never pregnant, but Cmdr. Tucker was. Get your facts right.
Here’s the real problem. Everyone wants love and acceptance. Truth is appreciated. Family and friends are valued. Comfort from our children is rewarding. Smiles on our faces, coming from a peacefull mind is a real joy. Building a household with the dynamics that foster new discoveries on a daily basis, because of a diverse relationship is never ending, and is a delight. Never having to feel strange with anyone including strangers makes life harmonious 100% anytime of our lives. We might not care very much where all the good comes from. If were honest, we’ll admit that none of us ARE good. But somehow after Centuries old have come and gone, the only thing that matters is still the same thing. Love and acceptance. Everything else does NOT matter, unless of course we were to travel above the Sun, Like Trek does on every show. If we were to travel someday, THAT far away. Could we finally be objective enough to see the sorce of all this Love and true Peace that we’ve been granted? Here’s The secret of Life, that I’m glad to share with you.We don’t have to travel anywhere to know where L.o.v.e. comes from. We don’t have to wait until the next life to discover it. We can reap the benefits of finding out that it all originated from someone who called himself, “Love.” Yep, you’re thinking about him already. …. …. He’s Jesus…. It is offensive that one person wants all the credit for “Love.” But why not try to just call him Love and forget all the relegious crap. He didn’t like religion anyway! He persecuted the religious Biggots of the time. As he does today. Everyone please, like the actor said in the movie Ghost. “Love,… you take it with you.” And. Happy is the person who does not stumble on accout of me.” matt.11:6. Forget religion, just accept Mr. Love alone. It’s really simple wheather you’re straight or gay, does NOT matter. This is the only test we have in life. Do you love, or do you hate. And do you know where Love really comes from. The Author of Love is waiting and will Never give up on us. Because he IS Love.
Sorry, Landru. I am not of the body. Time for a drink, I suppose…When’s Festival?
Let me explain some details about ‘born with’ vs. ‘choice’:
So far the best hypothesis is that hormonal influence before birth can alter the brain development, creating if you will ‘female’ brain centers in a male baby and vice versa. The INAH3 was found to be sexually dimorphic and presented a morphology closer to the opposite sex in homosexuals. This is not absolute proof, however, because other researchers could not confirm that observation.
Look at it like handedness. Some people are left-handed because their motor system wiring apparently was laid out differently. In essence, this debate is about whether or not you should discriminate people because of their brain structure. My vote then is: as long as the actions of that individual do not harm others against their will (which is not the case for left-handed, gay or lesbian people; but is true for pedophiles), who are we as a society to exclude them from a positive vision of our future?
580. AJ – January 30, 2011
;-)
In countries without toilet paper, left handers are forced to be righties because you eat with your right & wipe you ass with your left.
your argument fails
I still equate it to alligator eggs. too much T in babies makes them masculine regardless of gender, too little makes them femme regardless of actual gender, just like alligator eggs have to be at a very narrow temperature band to be male, a few degrees off of center, and they’re all female. And that’s something you cant change, ever.
Boy, do we need a new thread and topic to discuss!
592: I agree with you and you make an important distinction when you state that pedophiles should be excluded when we speak of how our brain has been structured. The pedophile may be born the way he is but he is harming children and so we protect the child.
I agree that people should be allowed to be gay and there should be no laws against it because nobody is being harmed except the two people who are practicing homosexuals.
On the other hand, and this is the conservative christian position: Just as pedophilia harms children, and the person is “born that way”, ALL sin is harmful to our relationship with God. What religion is all about, is teaching people how to be right with God. In that sense, we ask all people to turn from their sins, trust in God for salvation, who it is we are “hurting” when we sin.
Christians are simply saying, “I am born a sinner, the Bible tells me these things are sins, and I need to turn from them because they are hurting my relationship with God.”
It’s not bigotry and I agree that gays are born that way. I am born with a heart that lusts after woman. I am married and must fight my inborn nature not to look at other woman than my wife because Jesus says, ‘If you look on a woman with lust, you have committed adultery in your heart.”
I could say, “I was born with an over-sensitive attraction to woman and therefore I don’t need to fight it or it’s not sin,” or I can say, “I was born this way, but for the sake of my love and relationship for my God, I desire to please Him and therefore will work to put to death the weaknesses of my flesh.”
Please, I am not asking you to agree with me, I am asking that you understand where the conservative christian is coming from and not just put labels of bigotry on them.
I have nothing against gays and I don’t think there should be any laws against homosexuality, just like I am very glad there are no laws against lusting. If there were, I have failed enough times to give me life in prison but when I fail, I don’t call evil good. I ask for forgiveness from my very gracious God and Savior who died on a cross for my sins and work at doing better next time.
546 – I admit I am intolerant of bigots. But not offended. Being offended means that you have given someone the power to offend you. I don’t claim to be perfect, btw. I have my own prejudices I am dealing with, along with my own shortcomings, which there are many.
You have constructed for yourself an equation that finally has a result you want to the right of the equal sign. That being: “my religion + my bigotry = it’s ok for me to be bigoted and proud of it.”
As for religion and ST, it wouldn’t bother me a bit, no matter what religion was portrayed. I like all the religions. I have a theory that every religion has a piece of the truth buried in its’ scriptures. Any religion that favors peace and kindness is ok by me. My own sprituality leans toward an afterlife of rest and reflection in the setting of your choice prior to reincarnation. Whether reincarnation is voluntary or mandatory, I don’t know. Whether we have to come back to Earth, I don’t know. I hope not.
Christianity used to include reincarnation, btw. It was removed hundreds of years ago (either prior to or at the Council of Nicea–or after?) to instill fear of an eternal damnation, and the carrot of eternal bliss. There was a Gospel of Judas, too. I have not read it though. But I think it’s available now.
PS – no new story on treknews in a while. Technical difficulties? Illness? Hope everything is ok….
Well…I guess dmduncan ain’t getting any more fun clues from boborci.
oops… *trekmovie, so sorry…
You’re forgetting something. We are not the equivalent of alligators so that comparison does not apply to us.
New ‘Superman’ actor
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/30/superman-henry-cavill-cast-as-clark-kent-and-superman_n_815996.html
472. boborci – January 29, 2011
so, what have we learned?
Bigotry and intolerance will be with us, always?
mammals evolved from reptiles
check the structure of the brain for proof
Pedophiles and cold blooded murderers are missing the amyglada
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala
601.
And, of course, keeping with the theme of this thread, will Clark Kent be dating Louis Lane?
I’d pay real money to see THAT!
584.
Nonsense. Uhura was simply pointing out the misunderstanding of words and Kirk reacted by marvelling at how the same belief happened on another world and wouldn’t it be something to see. You might make an argument that Uhura drank the koolaid, but Kirk gave no such indication.
591.
AJ, CLASSIC! I wish I had posted that!
Beautiful! It’s us versus the “talking snake” believers!
Homosexuality is not a choice, but a genetic flaw. It is with them from birth, their brain is mis-wired.
Different doesn’t mean flawed.
You are obviously one of those god followers, and if they are BORN that way…
GOD DOESN’T MAKE MISTAKES!
(or are you admitting that he does?)
608 – Although you’re wording is a tad troll-y, I suspect you are correct. It is genetic.
Homosexual behavior also occurrs in many species in nature, mostly during times of overpopulation. Which implies that the DNA for homosexual behavior is always there, and gets “switched on” during certain conditions.
Homosexuality is a natural condition, and therefore IS as natural as varying skin tones.
…and we all know how tolerant some people are of “varying skin tones”!
What I get sick of is fans declaring that certain characters are gay because they’re good friends. Particularly Kirk and Spock. What, you can’t have close friends of the same sex without being gay?
And there is even an evolutionary explanation: When there are enough individuals around to ensure reproduction, some are born without the drive to produce children (classic hetero sex) – they support the family, care for their brothers’ and sisters’ children, go hunting etc. They simply have time for those tasks because they don’t have childs. So nature doesn’t let us have “homo” and “hetero”, but rather “breeders” and “special operations” ;P
I am seeing the work homophobic being tossed around in this discussion as a label to quiet those who do not want to see homosexuality being paraded around on their favorite show. My impression is that the word “homophobic” is intended to shut up the opposition by claiming that they are afraid of homosexuals of homosexuality. I think that a more accurate description, is not that they (myself included) afraid, but repulsed, by homosexuality. Which, in my opinion, is not unreasonable.
Whether, you like it or not, homosexuality is not natural, nor normal. Just because a very small percentage of people practice it does not make it so.
I don’t expect very many people posting on this board would agree that pedophilia, necrophilia, or bestiality are normal or natural practices.
Would this make you “pedophobic”, “necrophophic, or “beastiophobic” (or whatever the proper Greek term would be) . No, most people would be repulsed by these unnatural and abnormal acts.
I just don´t understand where do you fit Jar Jar Binks into it.
610. “Homosexuality is a natural condition, and therefore IS as natural as varying skin tones.”
Obsidian again, what is your evidence that supports your statement that homosexuality is a natural condition? Cuz the last time I checked we are not animals. We are not species of any kind. We are humans. Add to the fact, the last attempt to explain homosexuality as a natural condition was a scientific argument presented by NCC-73515 but even he himself said the argument was not absolute proof so how can you say homosexuality is a natural condition when there is so little absolute proof to support that statement?
616: Homosexuality may be a natural thing, a system of control by mother nature.
Humans are reproducing too much, so it creates a “bug” in the brains of some humans so they can´t reproduce.
Their “sex target system” are scrambled so their missiles hit the wrong destination.
So the hetero humans are pissed because it´s a waste of good DNA.
617. “Homosexuality may be a natural thing, a system of control by mother nature.”
May be a natural thing does not say it IS a natural thing.
“Humans are reproducing too much, so it creates a “bug” in the brains of some humans so they can´t reproduce.”
Oh? Do you believe humans are reproducing too much?
“Cuz the last time I checked we are not animals. We are not species of any kind.”
Of course we are animals. Our species is Homo sapiens, belonging to mammals, tetrapods, vertebrates,… better check again, and this time: scientific sources. Basic biology textbooks should suffice.
“Just because a very small percentage of people practice it does not make it so.”
Hm, then what about all the other 500-1500 animal species that practise it?
“even he himself said the argument was not absolute proof so how can you say homosexuality is a natural condition when there is so little absolute proof to support that statement?”
Simple logic: There is stronger evidence for ‘born with’ than there is for ‘choice’. I don’t know any evidence for the ‘choice’ theory at all. Do you?
It’s like the evolution vs. creation debate – one has a large series of hints, evidences and logical connections (but is not proven), while the other has no evidence at all beside statements from an old book that might be mere fiction.
619: of course humans are reproducing too much, like 7 billions humans too much.
Specially those without internet, they´re having sex while we´re arguing on the internet and watching Star Trek.
My daughter is wearing real peacock feathers. She has them stuffed down her back between her shorts and her nickers. Should I be worried?
Who are these pervs who keep bringing up bestiality and paedophilia when it is a discussion about whether Star Trek should have a minor gay/lesbian character in the next movie? Sheesh. Keep it clean, please.
I dont understand this talking snake BS
harry, whatever your personal beliefs are, the jewish bible was the “general hospital” of its time.
It’s an epic poem, told in metaphor to uneducated farmers.
There was no “talking snake” it’s a metaphor. Even someone with a stone age education knew what a snake was.
I know you’re not really that stupid, now stop acting like it.
@619 The incidence of homosexuality in those 500-1500 species you talk about is very rare and far from the norm. According to one source, there are between 3 and 30 million animal species on Earth. So by using your highest figure (1500) and my lowest(3 million), the percentage of species that exhibit homosexual behavior is 0.05%. Very rare indeed, I would say.
And against the argument that “they are born that way so it must be natural or normal.” If a person is born with only one arm or leg, is that natural or normal?
no other animal practices homosexuality
male animals “hump” other male animals to show dominance, not for love, and not to get their rocks off.
Animals dont even know what sex is, they have to be compelled to do it. They have to go into heat.
Witness those crazy Cuban crabs that are going extinct. Why? because Cuba built a road by the only beach that they breed at, and they are compelled to go to that beach. They dont have a choice. They’re numbers are dropping because too many of them are being squished by cars and they dont even have enough brains to try to take a different route.
I wish I could remember which philosopher it was during the 19th century no less that compared animals to mindless machines that just do what their programming tells them.
No animal on earth except men are “gay”
the only animals that might come close are chimps and dolphins, and they dont swing that way.
If you can show me two wild male chimps that shun all females, please do.
And to clarify my position,
I am in no means, think that homosexuals should be hated and discriminated against. But, nor should society as a whole be forced to bend to the demands of such a small minority.
My position is that I, and those who think like me, should not be forced to accept and condone homosexuality as normal when we feel clearly that it is not. We should not be tarred and feathered as bigots because of our views.
The bonobo alone should be argument enough, but here’s more…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior
Nathan W. Bailey, Marlene Zuk: “Same-sex sexual behavior and evolution”
Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Volume 24, Issue 8, August 2009, Pages 439-446
@608
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgiZX1wNsAU
So….How many of you have snow on the ground where you live?
Also what kind of planets and creatures do you want to see in the next Trek sequel?
We are all just juicy pieces of pondscum, condemned to move like fetid slime across the surface of this planet. We consume and spew waste and reproductive fluids like giant slugs, and then reproduce. In an instant, we are dead, and are sucked back into the planet like a drop of rain, our culture and beliefs no more significant than an anthill in a playground.
All the more reason to lighten up.
Like it or not, we humans are normative beings. We can’t look to any other animal as a guide for how humans ought to behave, because we are human, not something else. If only it were that simple.
I still remember the gorilla at the Bronx zoo as a kid…how he pulled his shit covered hand from his butt and held it under his nose smelling it.
Some of you can act that way too, if you like. Some of you may act even worse. But ought you to? That is a question it seems no gorilla can ask itself. You can, because you are human. The only apes going into space on the tips of rockets are the ones WE send there, because they cannot do what we can.
And because you can ask those questions and deliberate on answers, you have a freedom and an obligation that comes with your level of consciousness that no other known creature has, at least not to the same extent. So there are no human answers for you in the behavior of beings with lesser potentials.
Sorry.
Well. I see we have a long way to go.
625 “The bonobo alone should be argument enough, but here’s more…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior
Nathan W. Bailey, Marlene Zuk: “Same-sex sexual behavior and evolution”
I’m sorry but I simply don’t subscribe to your belief that we’re animals because animals don’t have the capabilities we do. They can’t become doctors, lawyers, engineers, police officers, rocket scientists, and many other complex careers that exist in our world. You can try and train them to acquire such skills until you’re blue in the face. It ain’t gonna happen because we have something they don’t. Does your biology textbooks explain that? And again your argument that homosexuality is a naturally born characteristic in humans is still not absolute proof according to your own words unless you wish to change your testimony. Without absolute proof you don’t have stronger evidence. you have no evidence of any kind.
620 “of course humans are reproducing too much, like 7 billions humans too much.”
you care to tell me what makes you the authority on deciding whether human beings are reproducing too much or too little? Cuz the last time I checked nobody elected you the leader of this world. I believe there was a Star Trek episode where on an earth colony a leader thought the way you did and acted on his beliefs by ordering the execution of 4000 people. In the end it was irony that made him pay for those deaths. The irony of having his own flesh and blood go to great lengths to protect him only to be the one that kills him in the end. Simply put he also believed humans reproduced too much and what it got him was death at the hands of someone who was the result of his own reproduction. Think about it.
“I wish I could remember which philosopher it was during the 19th century no less that compared animals to mindless machines that just do what their programming tells them.”
Probably just as well you can’t remember the philosopher’s name because he is more than likely wrong. I think they are finding now many examples of where animals, especially the “higher” animals and some birds, are not merely “mindless machines”.
No, we don’t have to necessarily behave as animals do, or appear to. However, genetically we are more closely related to most animals than many around here would like to believe. Humans actually have approximately 85% in common with the plant life of this Earth and with animals it is higher. Therefore, we cannot just dismiss (animal) nature nor does it need to be denigrated either.
Anyway, I can see now why Gene Roddenberry then Brannon Braga, irrespective of their own personal opinions on the subject of homosexuality, veered away from having even minor characters who were more or less openly gay. What a nightmare!
Sometimes, I get the sense that some people are threatening the writers, studio and co, with some sort of boycott, if they were to include a gay character. I suspect the same with the more extreme members of the LGBT community as well. After all, did not some of the LGBT protest with a march, placards etc about Avatar because it did not include a gay character in the movie?
UGH!!!! Give over, already.
619 “of course humans are reproducing too much, like 7 billions humans too much.”
I am not sure how many is too many, but I think Earth can adequately handle a few million humans at the very least.
#632 – “you care to tell me what makes you the authority on deciding whether human beings are reproducing too much or too little? Cuz the last time I checked nobody elected you the leader of this world. I believe there was a Star Trek episode where on an earth colony a leader thought the way you did and acted on his beliefs by ordering the execution of 4000 people. In the end it was irony that made him pay for those deaths. The irony of having his own flesh and blood go to great lengths to protect him only to be the one that kills him in the end. Simply put he also believed humans reproduced too much and what it got him was death at the hands of someone who was the result of his own reproduction. Think about it.”
You are referring to the TOS episode, “The Conscience of the King”. What has this got to do with homosexuality? Who is suggesting that anyone kill anyone in this discussion?
WHERES THE NEW THREAD?
THIS HAS GOT RIDICULOUS AND PETTY.
In the Conscience of the King, Kodos was faced with an unprecedented food shortage, if I remember rightly, and supplies of food were not quickly forthcoming via the Federation, which meant the slow starvation and death for at least half the population. He decided to select half the population and put them to death, so that the remaining would have enough food until the new supplies arrived. Kirk (and the others like Riley) were among those who got to live and the daughter was afraid they would be able to identify her father, who had changed his name etc, and then have him arrested for the crimes.
Having a small percentage of any given population who have no interest in the opposite sex means that they are less likely to procreate, thereby creating a levelling effect on population numbers. Why is that so hard to understand? At any given time, part of the planet may have difficulty in providing the various populations, human and animal, enough of the necessary resources, hence malnutrition and/or disease, affecting the most vulnerable first, the young and the old and so on. As I said in a previous post, having a number of gay/lesbian people in a population may be a kinder way of reducing a population, than even more maternal and infant mortality rates etc.
I didn’t say anybody has to like it. I think this is just the way it is. We can either bitch and argue or we can step up…
Anthony has abandoned us again. What to do?
Of course, there is another matter of “concern”. In downtown Los Angeles a few days ago, a *Kirk* was seen driving a large red convertible. I don’t think it was a Corvette, but it looked as if it could be a car from the late 60s/early 70s period. It was a BIG car – big arse and a big frontal package as well – wow, why do Americans make such big cars?… Well, anyway, I am not so concerned for the driver as I am for the car. I know that this Kirk fella is good hanging off cliffs and ledges and pulling himself back onto safe ground. He can even say “I got your gun”, even after being almost strangled…again! The red car, though, is a total write-off.
Now if LA does not have a big quarry, ravine, whatever, given that the Kirk man is driving such a vehicle would surely mean that one could emerge anywhere, at any time and the nice car will get totalled…
Anyway, gotta go.
Uh… no, homosexuality is not a means of population control. The growth of the population is determined by the people who are reproducing, the rate at which they reproduce, and the how long they live. Assuming the non-reproductive portion of the population is a constant percentage, then it can not have any impact the growth rate.
Now, if you are proposing that the percentage of homosexuals will shoot up at some point through some random gene mutation and effectively, and drastically, reduce the number of heterosexuals that are born, then obviously that would temporarily reduce the overall population for a number of generations – much like a catastrophic event would. I’d say the odds of that happening are less than the earth taking a catastrophic meteor hit.
637
as reported by sixty minutes:
http://www.libertyeducationforum.org/IsItaChoiceTheScienceofSexualOrientation.htm
most interesting part, the evidence that odds of having a homosexual child go up with every child a mother has.
From that link:
“The best evidence right now is that genetics play a significant but not determinative role in sexual orientation, and in this respect, it is similar to many traits affecting a minority of the population.”
In my experience, it is usually true that the reality rarely matches the either/or scenarios we create to explain a phenomenon that become ingrained in the popular discourse about it, whatever it is; in this case, the either/ors have become choice/nature or else nature/nurture.
We seem to have real trouble admitting that we are what we are by a little of both nature AND nurture, not exclusively one or the other.
And in any case, if I am heterosexual by nature that still doesn’t mean I am compelled to jump onstage and try to have relations with Nicki Minaj at a concert because she is beautiful and I am attracted to her and I cannot control my behavior. We are never free of the choice about how and where and with what skill or elegance we express what we are, whatever the cause for our being whichever way we are.
There is no easy escape from being human.
Ok. So you know The Record number of post for any thread was done on Dec 19th it has 2060 thus far.
Hey Bob Orci. I don’t care if you write in a Gay Story. But what ever you do please give us a Real Engeneering room.
Great Saturn’s Balls! I believe Star Trek already speaks to us from the 60’s on that point! Plato’s Stepchildren, of course. Kirk, Spock, Uhura, and Chapel all forced to act against their wills to be what they already are but in a setting and at a time not of their own choosing, and winning the contest. Far ahead of its time, that show.
Hey Bob Orci. I don’t care if you write a Gay story. But Please give us a Great Flyby of the Enterprise.
Hey Bob orci. I don’t care if you write a Gay story. But Please have Dr. MCcoy say He’s Dead jim!.
638 – Thank you for that article, Bob.
I wish people would learn that in order to feel right about yourself, you don’t need to try to make others feel wrong about themselves. Don’t put others down to bring yourself up. I don’t think it’s a winning strategy in the long run.
Now, about that engineering room….. kidding. My -real- question if you’re still on would be, are you guys ever tempted to film the ST movies back to back a la Back to the Future or Lord of the Rings? Think about how many original cast movies could have been made. Maybe twice as many? I’m talking about more quantity with, if careful, not a lot of loss of quality.
Hey Bob Orci. I don’t care if you write a Gay story. But please have more then one red shirt die.
Hey Bob Orci. I don’t care if you write a Gay story. But have Sulu say. We’re Losing power Sir!.
Hey Bob orci. I don’t care if you write a Gay story. But have Kirk use the Corbomite Manuver. if possible.
Hey Bob Orci. I don’t care if you write a Gay story. But give Admrial Pike a Good Story.
Hey Bob Orci. I don’t care if you write a Gay story. But get Tom Hanks to play Commodore Matt Decker.
Finaly. Bob Orci. I don’t care if you give us a Gay story. But Give us a Great Trek Story. if not. The Agoniser booth will have your name on it.
So, Commodore Mike, I just have one question… do you care if they write a gay story? :)
#652. No. As long as they write a great Trek Movie. Then I’m Kool. If not then The Court will all have an Agoniser Booth with there name on it.
That’s annoying.
It is SO flagrantly obvious that people are born gay, and it is NOT a “lifestyle choice”. A lifestyle choice is deciding where to live, what line of work to pursue, what car to drive, which drapes to pick for your living room, etc. Choosing a sexual preference is NOT on this list.
It’s not like some guy has had a run of bad luck with dating women and, one day, says to himself, “Gee, this is frustrating! oh, I know, I’ll try sucking another man’s _____ instead! That’ll work!”
Anyone who believes THAT should have themselves committed!!
Nature vs Nurture? If you’re still debating this, one thing’s for sure…..you were obviously born STUPID!
633 “You are referring to the TOS episode, “The Conscience of the King”. What has this got to do with homosexuality? Who is suggesting that anyone kill anyone in this discussion?”
I’m not suggesting killing anybody. I’m just saying that that way of thinking (believing that humans reproduce too much) can lead to serious consequences when one is in a position to act on that belief.
I hope they skip the gay thing the same way I wish they had of skipped the entire “sex scene” with Kirk and the Orion in the last movie. As a parent of young children who we are trying to raise with a healthy respect for their own self image and one that is modest and not forced to grow up faster than they should– I find the entire discussion disturbing. In a nation that is obsessed with sexualizing everything, I’d love to take them to a movie which they can enjoy without having to deal with all the social issues.
And hopefully I’m not called a bigot because I don’t want my kids to have to deal with sex at their ages whether straight or gay. Unfortunately, romantic relationships on television are usually from the sexual perspective and not the relationship perspective. It’s the in your face, two people making out that’s disturbing– and something I don’t want my kids to see– and whether its same sex or opposite sex isn’t really the issue. It’s the entire, “We met 5 minutes ago and now we are having partial nudity sex onscreen” that sends the very wrong message to our children.
But as every marketing department in the world will tell you, “Sex Sells.”
I have to say, overall, a large number of the responses on this thread are downright embarrassing, if not insulting.
From those saying being gay is a choice to population control (ya know, we’re rapidly approaching seven billion people on this little blue ball so I sincerely doubt the gays are going to put a significant dent as we rush for 9 billion 40 years from now).
To those of you who get the creeps seeing two women or men kiss, get over yourselves… and to those who immediately think of sex the minute you hear the word gay need to get your minds of the gutter.
Being straight doesn’t equate to 24 hour non-stop sex, it’s no different for gays and lesbians.
To those who think a small minority’s rights are not a big deal or worthy of fretting over, I am reminded of the words “A right delayed is a right denied.’ –Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. … or “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” also Rev. King
I swear Mr. Roddenberry has to be spinning in his grave reading all these backward, ignorant bigoted comments. Whatever happened to IDIC???
655 “It is SO flagrantly obvious that people are born gay, and it is NOT a “lifestyle choice”. A lifestyle choice is deciding where to live, what line of work to pursue, what car to drive, which drapes to pick for your living room, etc. Choosing a sexual preference is NOT on this list.”
Again where’s your evidence that people are born gay? Just because you believe it doesn’t make it true.
658 “To those who think a small minority’s rights are not a big deal or worthy of fretting over, I am reminded of the words “A right delayed is a right denied.’ –Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. … or “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” also Rev. King”
you talk about rights. The right to what? The right to getting an education, having a career, having a family, having a life? Is that what you think gay people are entitled to? Well of course they are. Nobody’s denying them that at least I hope not. Or are you talking about the right to have your minority group be endorsed by a popular TV phenomenon just so they can feel good about themselves. Cuz if you are I gotta tell you, that right does not exist for any minority.
659.
What, you really believe that someone, when their sexual drive kicks in, actually gets to think/pick/choose/decide which sex to be attracted to???
Assuming you are a heterosexual male, can you, even for a nanosecond, think that when puberty came along, you had any hint of a choice as to which direction to point your erection?
How do I know this? To quote an old Star Trek line, “I trust my instincts!”
Hey Harry. Think we can get this Gay thred to 2,000.
No sweat!
Just hit me. If the sequel is a reboot of The Cage, I just realized that The Cage is actually a preboot of Forbidden Planet. Watching it right now. Never noticed that before.
Bob, you happen to catch comments 777 & 778 @ http://trekmovie.com/2011/01/14/jj-abrams-star-trek-sequel-still-being-written-paramount-wants-it-in-3-d/
?
“What, you really believe that someone, when their sexual drive kicks in, actually gets to think/pick/choose/decide which sex to be attracted to???
Assuming you are a heterosexual male, can you, even for a nanosecond, think that when puberty came along, you had any hint of a choice as to which direction to point your erection?
How do I know this? To quote an old Star Trek line, “I trust my instincts!””
So you don’t believe a homosexual can turn straight? Is that what your “instincts” tell you?
665.
No, and I’m surprised you would even ask. If you try to cite an example of someone you know who was “gay” and then converted back, I would suggest that they were never really homosexual and simply went through an “abberation in thinking” while experimenting with their first adult years.
Ok everyone, lets go for 1000!! (And see if anyone changes their stance)
HAHAHA
Yeah, like THAT is going to happen!
665–Many people have gotten drunk or whatever, perhaps in college, and done something they would not normally do. For me, I slept with a few women in HS and college. Wishing, praying, hoping for a change. It didn’t happen. I also know for a fact a few straight guys (and gals) who had a few too many and may have played a couple innings on the other team. That did not make them homo. Nor did my youthful dalliances make me straight.
It is all in your mind, soul, and heart. I could have gotten married and had kids, but I would have never felt right. Many homosexuals still go that route, and end up cheating on their wives later on. Yes, I know this first-hand too. (Not myself, but I have known -many- others)
Never thought I’d say this, but I am as embarrassed by Harry right now as I usually am by C.S. Lewis. *I* would suggest you (and quite a few others on this thread, for that matter) stop labeling “sincere disagreement” as “hatred,” “bigotry,” or “homophobia.” The amount of amateur psychology of the religious mind (read: flaming, outright, proud, downright arrogant ignorance) on this thread is every bit as disgusting as a number of the silly arguments being lobbed by said religionists.
The wisest thing I think I ever heard anyone say in this grand national conversation was a gay friend who said that the only thing necessary to make progress is for people to *listen* to GLBT people and to *believe* what they say about their own experiences, beliefs, feelings, and motives. Accept that they have *something to say* and that it is the result of serious thought, not intolerant ignorance. That’s a *precondition* for conversation — the most important one. The only one.
You and your lot would do well to adopt the same advice about religious conservatives. Here’s a place to start: their IQs average the same as yours, and they don’t stay up at night wracked by the fear that *somewhere* in the world, a man might be kissing another man.
People keep mentioning IDIC. Good. IDIC is the core Trekkie principle. We do well to mention it constantly. But if you say, “Well, I believe in IDIC unless *their* view of IDIC gets in the way of *my* view of IDIC,” then you don’t really believe in IDIC at all. IDIC goes both ways or it means *nothing*.
Grrr. Rant over. Going to bed now. Good to see BobOrci still following this utterly disheartening discussion 600 posts later. If we needed any more proof that he cares deeply about what the fandom thinks — even when the fandom is collectively being a frakhead — I think we have it.
Hey Bob Orci, I don’t mind if you write a Gay story but it better be better than the 1st movie and that’s a big challenge. (Have Elton John and Ellen DeGeneres consult how what it’s like being gay to truly tackle this issue once and for all.) What I don’t want is for the the Star Trek cannon to be used as a political platform for 1 group. I enjoy the ST universe to be thought provoking, exciting, dangerous, adventurous, positive, and with a bit of satire that brought the crew of the Enterprise together with a fan base that spans the globe. If you incorporate a gay character, please don’t cheapen the movies plot for a over the top “look at me everyone I’m proud I’m gay character.” If you do that, you might as well make up a character like Jar Jar Binks and look what that did for Star Wars. Gay ST fans please take no offense because I truly believe that it is possible to make a script that challenges this issue without forcing it. Keep in mind, ST isn’t just the forum to boldly push social issues…never forget that there are always Klingons, Romulans, and the Borg to confront. Not to mention the most important part of the cannon….”To boldly go where noone has gone before”.
#670 Christ almighty, you can’t ’sincerely disagree’ with being gay. It’s love, just like your straight love. There is no sensible argument to say you disapprove. When will these American bigots learn. It’s blind hatred for anyhting that doesn’t compute with your twisted family value principles.
And may I add one more thing> PLEASE BOB ORCI PLEASE TAKE THAT BUMPY EWOK OUT OF THE NEXT MOVIE! Even kids thought that character was pointless. Thank you for the otherwise awesome job you did on the 1st movie….thanks to you guys we have a whole new ST universe to discover and I think it’s amazing!
670. “I am as embarrassed by Harry right now as I usually am by C.S. Lewis”
James, no worries, you’re not the first to be embarrassed by Harry Ballz!
@ 673
You’re really complaining about that little guy in the movie? Why? It’s not like he was the Jar Jar Binks of Star Trek. He was just a tech assistant to Scotty and he only had one line. Big deal. He could have been played by any extra but they chose to make him an alien so you’re going to get all upset over it. He didn’t steal the movie or do something stupid like stop Nero all by himself.
Here we go again, no more updates for weeks!
It’s enough to turn you gay!
Or straight if you are gay!
@10
“I’m disheartened to see that the no’s are at 29%. We have a very long way to go it seems and if Trek fans can’t get there then perhaps we never will.”
I’m not against gay or lesbian but I voted “no”. To put it simple – it’s so unnatural that every TV series has to have a gay character. If they are introduced in a way it doesn’t feel forced – I’m O.K. with that. By “forced” I mean – just because it’s passé not to have a gay character on the show. The other thing – as somebody already mentioned – there are gay on Star Trek but they don’t stand up and say they’re gay on every occasion.
the slump is back at trekmovie.com… :-(
#664 dmduncan
The Talosians would be great arch villians, and its a way for Pike to have a larger role as well. The Cage Rocks!
When will little people rise up and ask for a main character in the next film that doesn’t involve a costume. Where is their cry for inclusion going to be made the focal point of a sci fi adventure film? If you aren’t happy with the writers who are hetrosexual males by the way. You may want to approach them with a Trek worthy LGBT script. Or you could do what so many other fans have done to appease their need to have the TOS live on Make your own LGBT movie the way you want it. Just a thought. So not homophobic but I am so very tired of being force fed a political agenda. I am actually for a love sub story with to males, or two females but the story has to be complelling, has to be taken seriously and not be turned into the bird cage. Homosexual males were highly prized warriors in Caesars army and very deadly to encounter. So it’s not that I’m against it. I’m not. It just has to be so that the movie doesn’t stink. I love ST and I just don’t want it to be ruined by politics of any one particuliar group. So Bob Orci, this is a real challenge.
#156: “We have never seen a character have to deal with any mental illness on Trek (to my recollection- someone please correct me if I’m wrong).”
You are incorrect.
Have you forgotten about TOS “Dagger of the Mind” or “Whom Gods Destroy?”
DS9 had two episodes with Dr. Bashir working with individuals who suffered from mental conditions due to their genetic engineering.
I’m sure there are additional episodes, but these two do come to mind.
631. trekforever:
You think about it, just look at how countless other species on this planet were irrevocably extinct by ours, who doesn´t exist on any other planet and never will.
Watch some BBC once in a while.
@683 And don’t forget the megalomania of one… Singh Noonien Khan!
.
And the paranoid schizophrenic, Janice Lester!
.
among other disordered minds seen throughout TOS…
Leonore Karidian, Bele & Lokai, etc.
@682 I’m all for little people in Trek, but that’s been done already:
the little copper dudes in JtB, Alexander in P’sS, etc. Alexander was wearing a costume sure, but the same clothing the other Platonians had.
I’m shocked, shocked, shocked that all this Star Trek talk about gays insists on having a gay male character it seems. Where are the LESBIAN characters in TOS? I mean, we don’t know what the sexuality of Number One is, for example. She could be in the next film and her orientation could be key to the plot.
“You think about it, just look at how countless other species on this planet were irrevocably extinct by ours, who doesn´t exist on any other planet and never will.”
Wow you’re a real piece of work. you gripe about how the human race is killing animals but yet you’re fine with them killing unborn babies in abortion clinics. Pro-choice or Pro-life? I’m both. I’m pro the unborn baby having life and pro making the choice to point out how misguided your concerns are.
hmm… ZUNFT!
666.”No, and I’m surprised you would even ask. If you try to cite an example of someone you know who was “gay” and then converted back, I would suggest that they were never really homosexual and simply went through an “abberation in thinking” while experimenting with their first adult years.”
I suggest your “instincts” are nothing more than a weak attempt to hold on a to a belief that you can’t back up with real evidence.
“Christ almighty, you can’t ’sincerely disagree’ with being gay. It’s love, just like your straight love. There is no sensible argument to say you disapprove. When will these American bigots learn. It’s blind hatred for anyhting that doesn’t compute with your twisted family value principles.”
So you consider believing in a family where children have a mother and father who are still married and still living together a twisted family value principle? Well you know the story of the Fox and the Grapes. The fox only complained about the grapes because he was bitter about not being able to get them. Same thing goes for those who complain about our “twisted” family value principles.
Oh and as far as having gay characters on Star Trek is concerned. Here’s something else to consider? Is it worth it? Is it worth giving a minority group another 15 minutes of fame? Is it worth sacrificing the majority of Star Trek fans just to please the minority that wanna get noticed by society? Every action has consequences and Mr. Orci you are faced with a decision to either make a great Star Trek movie or just a Star Trek movie that everyone will talk about. They say any kind of publicity is good publicity. I don’t know about you but I would not wanna be remembered as the one that turned Star Trek into Gay Trek so think wisely my friend.
#689 It’s twisted when that family value is used to prevent others from that way of life. For instance, when gays want to marry and have children. I come from a very nice home, yet I don’t feel the need to discriminate and bash gays.
#690 “Is it worth giving a minority group another 15 minutes of fame? Is it worth sacrificing the majority of Star Trek fans just to please the minority that wanna get noticed by society?”
You’re forgetting that surely about half of these comments are from people who know how the world works, and that same sex relations is a common thing and will accept gays in their Star Trek because it’s part of the human experience. We here in The Netherlands love the gays and we have the most tolerant(terrible word) society on the planet and our children are the most happy of any nation in the world.
But this is all useless, you’re probably 16, never even met a gay person in your life. If you had, then that’s even worse, considering your hatespeech.
Considering all the homphobic reactions on here, Freud would say there is quite a lot of sexual uncomfort among those commenters.
691:
“Is it worth giving a minority group another 15 minutes of fame? Is it worth sacrificing the majority of Star Trek fans just to please the minority that wanna get noticed by society?”
Good, honest hatred.
691. CaptainSubtext
Considering that the Netherlands are the epitome of deviant sexual behavior and drug abuse I’ll take your comments with a grain of salt. I’d hardly look there for a paragon of family values if you want to espouse the gay lifestyle. If you want to consider my opinion to be “hateful homophobic bigotry” then that’s your problem.
Good Grief. Some People on here realy need to Grow up!!!!!. Just because somkeone is Gay does not make them a bad person no more then being White or Black or Green or Pink. As long as that Person or Alien is Nice and Respectfull that is what matters to me most. Not there preference or what they do in the Lives.
As I have Stated on here. I don’t care if there is a Gay Sub Story weather it be in Trek or any show for that matter. As long as it is a good story I’m for that.
As I have Stated on here. I don’t care if there is a Gay Sub Story weather it be in Trek or any show for that matter. As long as it is a good story I’m for that.
This stupid thread is approaching 700!
691 – considering your hatespeech.
Considering all the homphobic reactions on here
we have the most tolerant(terrible word) society on the planet
———————————————————————–
I’ve read a lot of comments on here where others are in conflict with you. It’s not “hate” from most. It’s just opinions and civil conversation. Can’t they have an opinion as well?
In a tolerant society (as you referred to it) all opinions are considered. It seems to me, with you as an example, that maybe those that live in the Netherlands only tolerate what they agree with.
HAS ANYONE NOTICED HOW THE NO’S ARE GAINING????
700
Back in the 60s when Star Trek had the first ever Interacial Kiss that was a Huge Taboo for that time. Also on the Ep Let that be your last Battlefield was an Incredable Ep. Half White and Half Black was a great Commentary on the Scoial Commentary for that time. It took years and a lot of Marches to get to the point that we now have a Presedent who is Black. Flash to today. The Gay Rights have also come a long way and have more to go. Back in the 60s just haveing a interacial kiss was taboo and a gay kiss would never have been allowed. Now it is more common. I’m not Gay at all but I have many friends who are and they are just normal People trying to make there way in this world as we all are. it is People who are Scared that have the most Problems. Like Kirk Said in Trek 6. People are afraid of change.
Hey DS9. The record is over 2,000. No danger of that happing here on this Thred. Right Harry.
People are Frightned of Change. Kirk Star Trek 6.
Ifinanate
Diversity
Infinate
Combanation.
People are Frighned of Change. They were back in the 60s during the Civil rights movement. But it worked out pretty well. Still a bit to go. But almost there.
Hey Bob Orci. I don’t care if you write in a Gay Story in the next Trek.
But have Kirk say. People are Frightend of Change.
Let’s see……
some here are preaching HATE and ISOLATION.
others are encouraging LOVE and ACCEPTANCE.
I suggest that most of us choose the latter and let the hate-mongers stew in their own venom.
702.
Right, Commodore Mike!
Slow news week???
Kirk. Here is one thing you can be sure of. Leave any Bigatry in your Quartes. Do I make my self Clear.
Lt. Styles. You do Sir.
Dont forget Metamorphisis –very clever script commenting on “DIFFERENT LOVE-Union Coupling”"” Mccoy gets to say THATS SICK or something like that, dont remember…unnatural? That script was sooo clever cuz it got to have its cake and eat it too so to speak…The companion loved Zefron Cochrane but it was a different creature and the two would MERGE—-soooo after showing the sick different love The story had this different love change into a normal hetereosexual woman and he was happy with her forever after….
Kirk. Here is one thing you can be sure of Mr. Leave any Bigatry in your Quartes. There is no room for it on the Bridge. Do I make my self clear.
Lt. Styles. You do sir.
Sorry I had to repost. Spent some time in the Agoniser booth. Realy don’t want to go into why.
#230: “Homosexuality violates the law of “Survival of the Fittest.” If, as we evolve, the species is becoming more and more perfected for the purpose of continuing as a race, the homosexual component which does not exactly reproduce as efficiently as heterosexual relationship are doomed to fail. So give it a few million years and homosexuality should be weened out of the species as a genetic aberration.”
What rubbish!
To quote another: “In the year 2525, if man is still alive, if woman can survive, they may part…”
I’m not saying man doesn’t need a woman or visa versa. I AM saying we ALL need eachother and this hateful diatribe I am reading, as Ilia/V’ger said, “Serves no useful purpose.”
The poing in the Tos Ep Ballence of Terror was that Lt. Styles had a little Big in him. But latter came to respect Spock after he saved his Life. Yes it was based on the fact that the Romulans killed some of his Ancesters a 100 years ago and the fact that the Romulans were an offshoot of Vulcans. But the point of the story is that once you get to know someone from a different race or creed the Bigatry tends to go away and then it be replaced by at the least an understanding and maybe even respect.
Actually what Kirk said was. “People CAN be frightened of change” not “People ARE frightened of change”. If you’re gonna quote something at least quote it correctly, otherwise it’s not a quote.
691. Oh and Captain Subtext, it’s not a hate speech. I’m simply considering the consequences of sacrificing the quality of a TV show or movie just for the sake of pleasing a small group of people that are pretty much overexposed and overused in the entertaimnent industry already. Like somebody said earlier. Gay people don’t have to be in everything we watch. They don’t have to be in every TV show or every movie anymore than blacks, asians, russian, or whites have to be in every TV show or movie so enough already. We get it. There are gay people in this world and they are proud of it. Fine, whatever. But don’t keep forcefeeding that fact to us cuz we’re pretty much tired of hearing it already. All you’re doing is drawing attention to yourselves when pretty much none of us really care.
Hahaha – this thread is hysterical. For those of you who believe homosexuality is wrong … why do you watch Star Trek?
Humans, as with many species are social animals. We seek bonds, both emotional and physical. If we didn’t have reproductive organs, we’d still seek out massages and other pleasurable physical connections.
Now consider Star Trek if you will, specifically the last 45 years of stories that preach (yes preach) tolerance among, not just ourselves, but the many species that make up the Federation and beyond.
How would those of you who think Homosexuality is wrong, deal with an alien species that reproduces asexually (as depicted in a few Trek episodes), where no pairing is necessary to reproduce, yet has a social system that provides for pair-bonding, and physical intimacy? It’s not beyond the realm of possibility, even on this planet.
Seriously, when I see the Bible quoted as the basis for rejecting Homosexuality, I have to wonder … how will the Bible be interpreted when the first extraterrestrials arrive on Earth, or we arrive on their planet? The Bible does not explicitly reference aliens. Or does it? If you Google “the Bible and aliens” you will find many references to scripture that suggests aliens are equatable with the Devil. If that’s the main interpretation, then no one can believe in the Bible and Star Trek.
Bottom line for me is that humans are by nature a very intolerant social animal. But our intelligence helps us become more than the sum of our parts. As we expand our acceptance and tolerance of other’s beliefs and philosophies, not to mention race and sexual orientation, we overcome fear and ignorance that are the underpinnings responsible for our primal survival. And only when that happens will we even be remotely close to being ready to meeting other intelligent beings from other planets. From where I stand, I can’t really see that happening within a mere 50 years, or even 100 or 200 years.
715:
So I guess ‘Star Trek’ is about white American/European males just giving their ‘15 minutes’ to women, and ethnic minorities, but we draw a line at the gays because ‘we all get it, already.’
WE DO get it. Do you?
HATE versus LOVE………………guess which always wins?
(all together now)
“All you need is love la la la la……..”
715 “Seriously, when I see the Bible quoted as the basis for rejecting Homosexuality, I have to wonder … how will the Bible be interpreted when the first extraterrestrials arrive on Earth, or we arrive on their planet? ”
How will the Bible be interpreted if there are no extraterrestrials period? “The other side of the coin, doctor”
@715
As we expand our acceptance and tolerance of other’s beliefs and philosophies, not to mention race and sexual orientation, we overcome fear and ignorance that are the underpinnings responsible for our primal survival. And only when that happens will we even be remotely close to being ready to meeting other intelligent beings from other planets. From where I stand, I can’t really see that happening within a mere 50 years, or even 100 or 200 years.
Haha, so much agreement here.
I can imagine that if there are peaceful intelligent species watching and listening with the capabilities of communicating with us, that the last thing they would choose to do is initiate any contact with such a dangerously intolerant species.
717 “HATE versus LOVE………………guess which always wins?
(all together now)
“All you need is love la la la la……..”
yeah love always wins. But homosexuality isn’t about love. It’s about lust which is defined as a self-indulgent sexual desire which is the basis for all sex crimes such as rape and child molestation.True love is not self-indulgent. True love satisies both people involved, it thinks before it acts, and most of all, true love is patient, it waits for the right person to come along. I have never heard a gay man say, “I’m saving myself for the right man” or a lesbian say, “I’m saving myself for the right woman”. Have you?
It’s just a book… one of many.
It’s so weirdly funny that the one who demands absolute proof for scientific theories about the development of sexual orientation is also the one who accepts a simple work of fiction as absolute truth without proof XD
#720
Love is the emotion of strong affection and personal attachment.[1] In philosophical context, love is a virtue representing all of human kindness, compassion, and affection. In some religious contexts, love is not just a virtue, but the basis for all being, as in the Roman Catholic phrase, “God is love”[2]. Love may also be described as actions towards others (or oneself) based on compassion.[3] Or as actions towards others based on affection.
Something which you lack trekforever for you are filled with hate and ignorance.
“It’s just a book… one of many.
It’s so weirdly funny that the one who demands absolute proof for scientific theories about the development of sexual orientation is also the one who accepts a simple work of fiction as absolute truth without proof XD”
a simple work of fiction? what do you base that belief on?
720 “Love is the emotion of strong affection and personal attachment.[1] In philosophical context, love is a virtue representing all of human kindness, compassion, and affection. In some religious contexts, love is not just a virtue, but the basis for all being, as in the Roman Catholic phrase, “God is love”[2]. Love may also be described as actions towards others (or oneself) based on compassion.[3] Or as actions towards others based on affection.
Something which you lack trekforever for you are filled with hate and ignorance.”
hate for the act of homosexuality not hate for the homosexual. If you can’t tell the difference between the two then I submit it is YOU who is filled with ignorance.
Has anybody ever played the game where you whisper a sentence into somebody’s ear, then they whisper the same thing to somebody else and so on and so on? The last person says the phrase out loud, and it is fairly twisted from the original phrase.
How many of us have told something to somebody, only to hear it misinterpreted or exaggerated later on?
The first gospel of the canon of the New Testament wasn’t written until 80 years after Christ’s death. Before then the story of Christ was passed by word-of-mouth.
In case you don’t get my point – anybody believing that the New Testament has anything to do with reality is a great fool, or at the very least quite gullible and uneducated on the historicity of the bible. Believing it to be the truth of any kind is a willful act of ignorance and is the mark of a very weak mind.
It’s no surprise to me that those who believe the bible to be “truth” are the most intolerant toward gays and many other people. Bigotry always arises out of ignorance and fear.
Strange how all the people who claim to believe in Christ don’t want to follow any of his teachings.
Love, acceptance, do unto others and all that stuff.
Another week off with no news? Trekmovie will start to loose readers thinking Anthony is neglecting this site and start going to Trekweb.
#724
$100 bet you love watching 2 females go at it, hypocrite ;)
But where does the Lord empower you to hate the act either? The Lord instructs us to live our own lives in peace and goodwill to all, even if they are sinners, or evildoers, or people we don’t agree with, or little copper dudes that don’t ever seem to have any dudettes (even the Smurfs had at least one Smurfette). It’s not that the Lord instructs us to mind our own business… but that we concern ourselves with what’s in our own eye.
.
Judge not, lest ye be judged.
.
But NCC-7734, calling the biblical texts works of fiction is a very fraudulent argument, designed only to insult. There’s plenty of scholarship to back most of the history contained in the biblical works, including the Judaic Old Testament, the History sections of the post-Moses Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Koran. DNA studies even strangely confirm the haplotypes of a group descended from Isaac (Jews), and a group descended from Ishmael (Arabs). Tidal studies show the Reed Sea would have provided the Exodus a brilliant escape over the long sandbar at low tide that would have caught the Egyptian chariots as the tide came in. Historical records confirm most of the kings and places from the time since Moses. Get a better argument than calling someone’s bible “fiction”. Do you know how a crowd of Muslims would react to you calling the Koran a work of fiction? Hmm?
You can tell that the cat’s away because all the mice are out of control XD
Our bible guy would have been banned long ago.
Ok. Trekforever. So I mispelled a word and forgot to ad one. it is still the same. Some people can be frightened of change and some are frightened of change. You are one who is frightned of change.
I always hate when stuff like this is posted, it just devolves into some right wingers being right wing in a forum where it is not justified and to a bunch of people who are fans of a show that preached tolerance from it’s very inception. You would be better off trying to convince us that Star Wars is the better franchise and that Enterprise was the best series.
Daoud: Simple logic. Magical events, a lot of fantasy, heroes and demons… paranormal events – that clearly makes it fiction.
Imagine in 2000 years someone finds a copy of LotR and bases a religion on it.
@725 That’s the worst of it. Calling all Christians as believers in thrice-told fairytales. You’re quite wrong. There are countless supporting histories written contemporaneously describing the A.D. 30 timeframe forward. The Council at Nicaea worked hard to limit the many written versions down to those that could be corroborated (the similar Matthew, Mark and Luke, along with the dissimilar John), or were corroborated in the epistles written in the time of Paul and Peter. So, it’s not like there weren’t many other books and epistles written in the 70 years after Jesus was historically known to be crucified to death.
.
But today, “most critical historians agree that Jesus was a Jew who was regarded as a teacher and healer, that he was baptized by John the Baptist, and was crucified in Jerusalem on the orders of the Roman Prefect of Judaea, Pontius Pilate, on the charge of sedition against the Roman Empire.” as Wikipedia notes include at least 10 scholarly references to back that up….
.
Plenty of evidence for those aspects. Everything else, is left to the eye of the beholder, but to deny what *historians* agree upon is intellectually dishonest.
728. “$100 bet you love watching 2 females go at it, hypocrite ;)”
Fine I’ll take that bet. Now how about reading post #587 on this thread? It says you owe me a $100 buddy.
I am a Christian fror one. But Christians can be the most Hipacritical of all. Christians Speak of Love and Forgiveness but they are the first to Shun you if you go outside of the Box. I belonged to an Evangelical Church for many years and I do still believe in about 90% of what I was Taught. The Way I see it is this. God will be the one Judgeing and not me. He did say not to Judge or you will be Judged. So I will never Judge anyone on what they do unless they commit a crime. For the Gays out there it is not my place to Judge them and I won’t. In fact I support them in being Married and having children as long as they are Consenting and of Legal age. They are Humans just like us and I will treat them no different then I treat anyone else except for Harry of Course. Ok. Just kidding Harry.
Something good to get this thread to end would be a brand new story!
@733 There’s no historical text supporting the historical details of Lord of the Rings. There’s plenty of historical text supporting that it is the work of J.R.R. Tolkein.
.
If you find it necessary to ignore that the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim faiths are filled with valid moral arguments, case studies, parables–and that these faiths in their best natures and best expressions provide compassionate examples for humanity to help one another… I find it very disappointing that you’re missing the point of a shared common morality through the texts these faiths use as their “constitutions”.
.
Instead, you seem to want the Marxist point of view that religion is just the opiate of the people. No, it’s an imperfect handing down from one generation to the next of a common code. The perfect case in point is the Semitic case against eating pork: both Jews and Arabs avoid it for rational reasons… undercooked pork easily leads to trichinosis, and pigs although not by nature dirty animals, do have a dirty habit of often defecating in or near their food and water supplies: this means that large herds of pigs easily (as wild pigs do in the US) cause E. coli outbreaks as they’ve done recently with spinach in California, and green onions from the distributor Taco Bell used in the southern U.S.
.
Christian doesn’t automatically equate with right-wing, or homophobic, or homopathic. There are Christians of all points of view. I’m very pro LGBT rights, Christian, and center-left. If you want to nail the guy’s gay-hating arguments, using the very texts he claims support his argument are always the best. “There is but one commandment: love one another as you would be loved.”
731 “Ok. Trekforever. So I mispelled a word and forgot to ad one. it is still the same. Some people can be frightened of change and some are frightened of change. You are one who is frightned of change.”
Not all change is good. The 911 attacks in New York changed the security we once felt as a nation. Not a good change. The increase of crime and immorality in this world due to bible guys and bible beliefs banned from our government (yeah I’m talking to you NCC-73515. Again not a good change. The price of gas going up also not a good change. Considering the consequences of one’s actions is not being frightened of change it’s using one’s ability to think things through which you and NCC-73515 seem to be out of practice with.
737. DS9 IN PRIME TIME – January 31, 2011
“Something good to get this thread to end would be a brand new story!”
It’s only been a week….give it a few more days! :)
736. Commodore Mike “except for Harry of Course. Ok. Just kidding Harry”
Oh, a wise guy, huh? Why I oughtta…….
WOO WOO WOO WOO WOO!!!!!
(whenever in doubt, simply invoke the logic of The Three Stooges)
Granted that some parts of religious texts are “filled with valid moral arguments, case studies, parables–and that these faiths in their best natures and best expressions provide compassionate examples for humanity to help one another” – just like Star Trek. Some good examples and guidelines. But taking the fictional order that gays should be put to death as a reason for fighting them in the real world… that’s a crime.
@720 Trekforever
“yeah love always wins. But homosexuality isn’t about love. It’s about lust which is defined as a self-indulgent sexual desire which is the basis for all sex crimes such as rape and child molestation.True love is not self-indulgent. True love satisies both people involved, it thinks before it acts, and most of all, true love is patient, it waits for the right person to come along. I have never heard a gay man say, “I’m saving myself for the right man” or a lesbian say, “I’m saving myself for the right woman”. Have you?”
Yes, I have. Myself. I dated a few guys to see what the world had to offer and then I found the man that I have spent over 13 years with in a monogomous relationship. I wasn’t a slut. How do you explain me?
AND REALLY…How many straight men have ever said that they are saving themselves for the right woman? Men by nature are at the mercy of their own hormones to feel the need to spread their seed around as much as they can. Lucky we have the capacity to control our urges (some more than others).
…and getting back to the poll….its simply asks whether a gay character should be in trek…it isn’t asking if there should be two guys having sex in an episode… just a simple hand hold or some guy making dinner for his husband after they get off of their shift or somthing like that. Is that too much to really ask?
Too much to ask? From a small-minded, hate-filled bigot? Probably, yes!
@ 739
Actually if you adjust for price inflation, Americans are paying less for gas than they were in the 1950s. Even if you look at the nominal rate, it’s going down.
If you’re going to come out with gross generalisatons at least do your research.
Kirk and Spock pass by. Focus on two young ensigns, one male and one female.
Girl: “Spock is so cute!”
Guy: “Nah. Kirk has sweeter eyes.”
Girl: “Since when do you focus on eyes?!”
Guy: “Since when do YOU focus on ears?!”
Cut to the rest of the movie.
#739. You took what I said and blew it way out of context. I was not and you knew this speaking of Wars and things of that nature. I was speaking of Social Change. So weather you like it or not there will be Social change. The Oly question is. Will you be on the Outside looking in.
Harry!!! I love the 3 Stooges. Well. Maybe because i am one. Woo Wooo Wooo Woooo!!!
“Trekforever” is both an idiot as well as a bigot.
Homosexuals are capable of feeling both love and lust just like heterosexuals are. Gay men and lesbian women are humans, just like the rest of us are. They deserve dignity and respect.
Wooo wooo wooo, indeed!
748 “You took what I said and blew it way out of context. I was not and you knew this speaking of Wars and things of that nature. I was speaking of Social Change. So weather you like it or not there will be Social change. The Oly question is. Will you be on the Outside looking in.”
I didn’t take anything out of context. you just need to be more specific when you speak. you seem to be of the belief that one day homosexuals will take over the world and I’ll be one of the few on the outside still trying to fight it. I got news for you pal, I’m not gonna be one of the few fighting it. I’m gonna be one of the many that won’t stick around on this ball of dirt (if you’re truly a Christian, you’ll no exactly what I’m talking about)because I won’t be the least interested in how to solve the chaos that your buddies on the inside caused. So enjoy your so-called social change until you’re blue in the face but don’t come running to the bible guys for help because they won’t be around to clean up the mess that your buddies on the inside will have made.
i want other content
please
#752. That is why I quit going to Church. People like you. The Bibble says not to Judge. But you are Judging and going against the Very Bibble you claim to believe in. So rant and rave all you want. Because I’m just not going to listen to you’re rants and raves. Good day to you
Oh, great, now he’s bringing up this “rapture” garbage!
At this poing I recomend to everyone that Trekforever be Ignored on this Thred. I will not even look at what this person writes anymore. because it is all Hate and that is Against what the Bibble says.
Hy Harry. Just Ignore this poster. I am. Oh and Harry. I think we would make 2 Excellant Stooges. Who would be a 3rd to Join us. Oh. Also will need a 4th to Sub for when you get Hurt to much. WOO! WOO! WOO! WOO!
755
That’s because Trekforever likes spewing out garbage! It’s all he’s got!
So, the cat’s away and the mice can’t play nice?
681. Hugh Hoyland – January 31, 2011
Daaa! I got it backwards! Meant to say that Forbidden Planet is a preboot of The Cage.
Well, as I was watching it I was thinking that Forbidden Planet is a really good example of how that story might be retold in a way that was much more epic than The Cage could do. The Cage was a much smaller version of that type of story, with the alien civilization that destroyed itself using technology that could materialize their own thoughts, right on down to the subterranean remnants of both Talosian and Krell civilizations.
So I got excited by what we might see on an epic scale. I’d bet money on it that if there was no Forbidden Planet, there would have been no Star Trek, because the parallels are too direct to be accidental. They even had those funky things they had to stand in when the ship decelerated from light speed, which looked like and had a similar visual effect to Star Trek’s transporter.
750. “Homosexuals are capable of feeling both love and lust just like heterosexuals are. Gay men and lesbian women are humans, just like the rest of us are. They deserve dignity and respect.”
yeah they deserve dignity and respect but not their acts of homosexuality and not your use of the words ‘bigot’ or ‘idiot’. I’ve done nothing to provoke your resorting to name-calling other than to question your judgment and challenge your views on a topic that was brought up on this site. If you can’t handle that then maybe you should quietly remove yourself from this debate and go find something less taxing on your brain like playing hopscotch or watching Teletubbies, a show that obviously satisfies your requirements for a socially evolved TV show.
TREKFOREVER! I am very disappointed in you! Where is your love? Where is your tolerance? Why are you judging when I have specifically commanded you not to? You are casting stones when I have told you not to. I am supremely let down by your un-Christian behavior. It is not too late to repent.
757
I’ll join! And Bob Orci can be the fourth! Woooo Woooo Woooo!
757+763.
Only if I get to be Moe! C’mere, you knuckleheads!! SLAP SLAP!!
I had a friend once who hated gays. He refused to watch anything that presented a gay lifestyle. In fact, he’d walk out on movies if a gay theme was involved. I tried to discuss this with him rationally, but he’d have nothing of it. He’d merely pick quotes from the Bible that he thought supported his argument, or cherry pick “scientific” studies that were anti-gay.
We fell out of touch because I just couldn’t handle his ignorant hate. Several years went by and we happened to meet at a party, and it turned out he was gay! He told me he had had so much trouble accepting it that he had turned to hate and self-righteousness as a coping mechanism, but finally had to admit what God had made him. He’s now one of the best Christians I’ve ever seen and we’re in regular contact again. I can’t believe the change in him since he accepted what he is.
Holy shit! Jesus is here! Quick, everybody look busy!!!
#763.All right I,m Larry. Harry is Curly and you are Mo and Bob Orci can be Shemp. That will work. Nyk! Nyk! Nyk!
“#754. That is why I quit going to Church. People like you. The Bibble says not to Judge. But you are Judging and going against the Very Bibble you claim to believe in. So rant and rave all you want. Because I’m just not going to listen to you’re rants and raves. Good day to you”
First off, you call my words hate and yet I’m not the one calling people bigots or idiots. Second, you quit going to church and yet you call yourself a Christian. That’s like saying you dropped out of school while you go around calling yourself a college graduate. you talk about what the Bible says. When was the last time you ever read your Bible Mister?
761
Why can’t homosexual acts be respected? If its between two consenting same sex adults, then who cares? Plus, what they do in private is nobody’s business but their own! And they don’t need you to tell them what is right and what is wrong! So go f**k yourself. Its what you do best, it seems!
765 “I had a friend once who hated gays. He refused to watch anything that presented a gay lifestyle. In fact, he’d walk out on movies if a gay theme was involved. I tried to discuss this with him rationally, but he’d have nothing of it. He’d merely pick quotes from the Bible that he thought supported his argument, or cherry pick “scientific” studies that were anti-gay.
We fell out of touch because I just couldn’t handle his ignorant hate. Several years went by and we happened to meet at a party, and it turned out he was gay! He told me he had had so much trouble accepting it that he had turned to hate and self-righteousness as a coping mechanism, but finally had to admit what God had made him. He’s now one of the best Christians I’ve ever seen and we’re in regular contact again. I can’t believe the change in him since he accepted what he is.”
wow! and they say the Bible is a work of fiction. apparently certain “Christians” are works of fiction too.
#764. Why you! (Hit you over the head with a frying pan) Nyk! Nyk Nyk!
762 “TREKFOREVER! I am very disappointed in you! Where is your love? Where is your tolerance? Why are you judging when I have specifically commanded you not to? You are casting stones when I have told you not to. I am supremely let down by your un-Christian behavior. It is not too late to repent.”
Repent from what Commodore?
769 “Why can’t homosexual acts be respected? If its between two consenting same sex adults, then who cares? Plus, what they do in private is nobody’s business but their own! And they don’t need you to tell them what is right and what is wrong! So go f**k yourself. Its what you do best, it seems!”
you say what they do in private is nobody’s business but their own but yet you want Star Trek to make that kind of relationship public so everyone can see it. you just contradicted yourself chump.
#765. That is a great Article you wrote. Sometimes you havt to Accept your self to accept what otheres are. I have seen this my self a number of times. I had a friend in H.S who was the Typicle Jock. Played Football and was on the Track team. We were best friends and did a lot of things together. But he was always shy around other Girls and never went on any real dates though he even had some offers from other girls and even cheerleaders.After I went to the Navy we fell out of touch. Then on our 10 year reunion this Beautiful Woman comes up to me and turns out it was my best friend from H.S He always knew that he was in the wrong Body. But back in 1987 in Ar. Well You know. He or now she went to UConn and made the Full Transition to being a full Woman. No she is a Lawyerfor a Law Firm and she helps others like her. Oh. She also Goes to Church on a Regular basis with her Husband. Yes. it is a real Christian Church and yes. They know that she was born a male. But Accept her as a female and she was baptised.
773
What they do in private is have sex. And we don’t need to see that in Star Trek. Just like we don’t need to see heterosexuals having sex either. I didn’t contradict myself. I was responding to your posts in regards to homosexual acts. Just because we would like to see Trek portray a gay character DOES NOT mean we want to see him/her going the distance with someone else of the same gender. All people want is an acknowledgement to the gay community and fans.
774 “That is a great Article you wrote. Sometimes you havt to Accept your self to accept what otheres are. I have seen this my self a number of times. I had a friend in H.S who was the Typicle Jock. Played Football and was on the Track team. We were best friends and did a lot of things together. But he was always shy around other Girls and never went on any real dates though he even had some offers from other girls and even cheerleaders.After I went to the Navy we fell out of touch. Then on our 10 year reunion this Beautiful Woman comes up to me and turns out it was my best friend from H.S He always knew that he was in the wrong Body. But back in 1987 in Ar. Well You know. He or now she went to UConn and made the Full Transition to being a full Woman. No she is a Lawyerfor a Law Firm and she helps others like her. Oh. She also Goes to Church on a Regular basis with her Husband. Yes. it is a real Christian Church and yes. They know that she was born a male. But Accept her as a female and she was baptised.”
That article would seem to imply that getting a sex change is done to correct the error of an actual female that was mistakenly born as a male. If you believe that to be true and you being a Christian believe God is the Creator of humans then you would also have to believe that God makes mistakes. Is that what you believe? That God made a mistake by creating that person as a male?
Ryan, Ryan, you should know by now that you can’t reason with human garbage!
775 ” All people want is an acknowledgement to the gay community and fans.”
as if they don’t get enough acknowledgment already.
Harry, you’re right! Garbage like Trekforever should be deleted from this site, sent to the ‘Recycle Bin’ and deleted into cyber-nothingness!
The only mistake here is Trekforever’s silly assumptions.
777 “Ryan, Ryan, you should know by now that you can’t reason with human garbage!”
you call people human garbage and yet I’m the one being accused of spreading hate. How illogical.
Hey guys. This is really getting silly. Why don’t we leave trekforever with his hate and misinterpretations of the Bible, and the rest of us can all go out for a beer or something?
Hey! I know, let’s go to my place and watch Brokeback Mountain!
Hey Jesus! I’m there! I’ll bring the beer!
780 “The only mistake here is Trekforever’s silly assumptions.”
I ain’t making any assumptions of any kind. I’m just putting 2 and 2 together. It’s called deductive reasoning. you should try it sometime. I believe you will find it more effective in getting your message across than your constant use of personal attacks and hostile insults.
Hey. I’m there as well. Then afterword we can watch the 3 Stooges. Nyk! Nyk! Nyk!
629
“I still remember the gorilla at the Bronx Zoo as a kid…how he pulled his shit covered hand from his butt and held it under his nose smelling it.”
I had no idea about Trekforever’s afternoon activities! And how come nobody reported a missing gorilla?
#786. Funny. You make a Perfect Stooge. Just like Harry and I. Right Harry.
Hey Guys! I’m at Jesus’s place right now! But he doesn’t have any popcorn. Can one of you bring a couple of boxes? I like the buttery stuff, but the kettle corn is pretty good too. Wait, hang on…
Jesus says he wants the low-fat stuff. So bring a variety, please.
781.
Oh, you’re not WORTH hating, just someone to be pitied.
Harry! Bring some nacho cheese Doritos!
there’s moderating these comments has probably worn the staff out from writing new articles again :(
784 “Hey guys. This is really getting silly. Why don’t we leave trekforever with his hate and misinterpretations of the Bible, and the rest of us can all go out for a beer or something?
Hey! I know, let’s go to my place and watch Brokeback Mountain!”
This got silly the moment somebody though it would be a good idea to introduce a gay character into Star Trek. That seems to be the typical Hollywood mentality as of late. Have no new ideas for a movie? then do one of two things. 1)Do a movie remake of a popular TV show or 2)Put gay characters or gay stories in attempt to “break the barrier” so some these screen-writing hacks can win some kind of award or something. This why there are so few respectable actors these days and why most of today’s movies and TV programming is butt-ugly trash. It’s no longer about quality writing. It’s all about winning awards and getting ratings. Technology gave us high quality picture and sound. Unfortunately it can’t give us high quality writing. What a pity.
#790. Hey. I will bring some Nachos and Cheese ok. Love the Cheese.
OK,
Yet again, Hollywood, and the small interests groups are trying to push their agenda’s and political correctness on people through the use of motion pictures. (And before you say it, yes, I HAVE all but stopped going to the movies completely, because I’m so sick and tired of there always being SOME kind of “message” meant to convey the “wrongs” in America.)
I USED to not have a problem with gays and lesbians. My feelings were, “so long as they don’t mess with me, I don’t care what they do.” But frankly, when they feel the need (and yes, I said “THEY”) to go completely out of their way to declare their sexuality to the world, pound on their chests for attention, and tell me “You HAVE to accept this, and your opinion doesn’t count! (even if it’s in the majority)”, then that’s when I have a problem.
Why put a gay character in the next movie? Why explain ANY of their sexualities? Again, do you think that the writers, producers, directors, etc. should go out of their way to put in some kind of scene to declare that a certain character be gay? You might as well through in a small dog doing backflips during a scene…..it will do NOTHING for plot development or story! If it DOES, and the story line centers around it, then you basically have “Gay Trek”.
Yep, I voted “no” in the poll, because I feel that introducing a gay character will do nothing for plot (again, unless the entire storyline is centered around a gay relationship), and instead, try and force yet another politically correct agenda on loyal fans that want to see good sci-fi (and that’s ALL they want to see), and not just a future that goes out of it’s way to say “HEY, THERE ARE GAYS HERE! LIVE WITH IT!”
And I’m sure that to some (fortunately, not the majority), I’m ignorant, un-Christian, naive, hateful, etc. etc. etc., because I don’t want to “change my ways” to “understand / respect” an alternative lifestyle. Well, sorry to tell you, it has more to do with “I wonder what the storyline will be about?”, and not “I wonder what homosexual themes will be included?”
Hamburgers! Somebody bring some burgers. Jesus likes extra onions.
786. “Oh, you’re not WORTH hating, just someone to be pitied.”
What a coincidence. I was thinking the same thing about you.
Hey, Canon Schmanon only brought Sam Adams and I’m really more of a Budweiser guy. Can somebody bring some Bud?
792
“It’s no longer about quality writing.”
Especially when it comes to your posts!
Beer and burgers! Sounds great!
Can somebody bring some Green Bud?
Done and Done.
#797. Would it be ok if I brought some Samual Adams. Also. Jack and Jim.
Oh. I will bring some Pizza. Thin crust with Pepperoni.
Trekmovie, I am sick of your ridiculous ranting.
Why don’t you just piss off?
794.”OK,
Yet again, Hollywood, and the small interests groups are trying to push their agenda’s and political correctness on people through the use of motion pictures. (And before you say it, yes, I HAVE all but stopped going to the movies completely, because I’m so sick and tired of there always being SOME kind of “message” meant to convey the “wrongs” in America.)
I USED to not have a problem with gays and lesbians. My feelings were, “so long as they don’t mess with me, I don’t care what they do.” But frankly, when they feel the need (and yes, I said “THEY”) to go completely out of their way to declare their sexuality to the world, pound on their chests for attention, and tell me “You HAVE to accept this, and your opinion doesn’t count! (even if it’s in the majority)”, then that’s when I have a problem.
Why put a gay character in the next movie? Why explain ANY of their sexualities? Again, do you think that the writers, producers, directors, etc. should go out of their way to put in some kind of scene to declare that a certain character be gay? You might as well through in a small dog doing backflips during a scene…..it will do NOTHING for plot development or story! If it DOES, and the story line centers around it, then you basically have “Gay Trek”.
Yep, I voted “no” in the poll, because I feel that introducing a gay character will do nothing for plot (again, unless the entire storyline is centered around a gay relationship), and instead, try and force yet another politically correct agenda on loyal fans that want to see good sci-fi (and that’s ALL they want to see), and not just a future that goes out of it’s way to say “HEY, THERE ARE GAYS HERE! LIVE WITH IT!”
And I’m sure that to some (fortunately, not the majority), I’m ignorant, un-Christian, naive, hateful, etc. etc. etc., because I don’t want to “change my ways” to “understand / respect” an alternative lifestyle. Well, sorry to tell you, it has more to do with “I wonder what the storyline will be about?”, and not “I wonder what homosexual themes will be included?”
Careful Chris, you don’t want Commodore Mike and the rest of his “Christian” crusaders labeling you a hateful bigot who doesn’t accept “social change”. They might wanna take you outside and have you stoned or crucified for being a “heretic”.
…… So, mini hotdogs?
You guys can bring whatever you want! I’m all about tolerance, after all. Hell, Trekforever can come if he wants. Just because he betrays my principles doesn’t mean I don’t love and accept him.
Mini hotdogs sounds awesome! As does the thin crust pizza! Thanks, Chang and Commodore. Jesus and I are watching some Looney Tunes right now. Bugs is dressed in drag, so I should warn Trekforever about that, just in case he decides to come by…
798.”“It’s no longer about quality writing.”
Especially when it comes to your posts!
coming from the hostile kid who wrote this:
“So go f**k yourself. Its what you do best, it seems!”
Hey #804 Battle-scarred Sciatica. We are getting together at jesus Returns place for Brokeback Mtn and Beer and Pizza. Wanna come on over.
There is nothing hostile about masturbation….
Hey I havt to Ask. Do you have a Blu Ray. If not I do.
It’s the first annual Brokeback BBQ.
Hey everyone. I hear a Buzzing sound going on here on Trek Movie. . Whe I hear it and I look it is not there. Kind of like what happened in the Tos Ep Wink of an Eye. Weired.
Even if I didn’t have Blu Ray, I could just lay my hands on the machine and make it so. But no, I have an ass-kickin machine and 55 inches of high definition goodness. Get your butts over here and let’s party!
807 “You guys can bring whatever you want! I’m all about tolerance, after all. Hell, Trekforever can come if he wants. Just because he betrays my principles doesn’t mean I don’t love and accept him.”
They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Well I don’t know about the real Jesus being flattered by your actions. But I can say with sincerity that out of all the Jesus imitators I’ve seen so far you are the worst one, Commodore.
Sounds like the Commodore already got into the Green Bud!
#813. Hey i Like that Idea. Hey. I can bring over The Rocky Horror Picture Show as well. Always had fun at the Midnight Showing.
Nods. I’ll bring the Irish stuff. Think we’ll need Jameson.
#817. I only had a couple of Drinks. So far at least.
811. “There is nothing hostile about masturbation….”
whether it is or it isn’t is it something you would wanna see in a Star trek movie or TV show? or any movie or TV show for that matter? Cuz it seems like Commodore Dunsel and his Gay Crew are of the belief that any kind of sexual behavior should be displayed on Star Trek.
I LOVE Rocky Horror! I used to dress up as Frank but Mary Magdalene would get angry because I’d always put runs in her stockings…
Hmmm. I hear that Buzzing sound again. Oh Well.
I would sometimes go as Frank. Lot’s of fun!!!!!
Come on guys! Leave trekforever alone and get over here!
Yeah, I agree with Jesus. Let’s leave this horrible forum of bigotry and judgment and party already!
trekforever, how old are you?
@810
I’ll be there.
I will have to borrow Harry’s pink leather gimp suit though.
Star Trek seemed so much simpler when it just featured tribbles…
Hey all right. We have a Vorlan coming to the Brokback Party. This will be a Rocking Party.
Wow, I left this discussion 5 days ago after it got boring and repetitive. Can’t believe it’s STILL going on……. and on…..
Nothing new Trek-related or scifi-related??
And what’s with the annoying tax preparer ad that takes up half the screen and can’t be closed??
827. “trekforever, how old are you?”
why do you ask?
testing EMAIL address
Guess I’ve missed all the fun…
Hi from Irene,
In case you might be interested,
William Shatner begins his third Season on TV’s show
called ‘Raw Nerve’ on the Biography channel tonight.
Among hia guests this year will be Scott Bakula,
LeVar Burton and Walter Koenig.
Wow.,Shatner will be 80 years old on March 22nd of this year !!
Happy Year, Irene
@ 609
I am not saying I dislike people who are homosexual, i am only stating facts and that fact that if someone is homosexual, they should not be made fun of, because it is not their fault. And also, I am an atheist.
Schmanon and “Jesus”. I’d love to see you be fair and make Mohammed jokes for a while for balance. And also Y-HW-H jokes. And poke fun at people other than Christians. You can’t exactly claim moral superiority if you’re not spreading the “love” around.
.
@NCC. Not sure where in the Judaic texts it says homosexuals must be killed. The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was for a total lack of humanity, treating visitors to the equivalent of the Procrustean beds, giving no alms to the poor, teasing starving people with food and gold, etc. The residents of Sodom refusing to be betrothed to Lot’s unbetrothed daughters, instead preferring the young male children in his group visiting should be seen more as a comment on pederasty than anything. They didn’t want the promise of his daughters’ hands in marriage later, they wanted his little boys. Now, generally speaking, I think people of all adult sexualities, heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, ambisexual, and celibate… all can all agree that PEDERASTY = any adult having sex with a minor child is vile. That that was tolerated in Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboim and Zoar is why the story states they were nuked.
@ 616
Technically, humans are animals.
837. Daoud – I’d like to see some of the Christians here stop claiming moral superiority and spread some love to homosexuals instead of narrow-minded ignorance. If somebody here was claiming to be Muslim or a “Yawehist” and was passing judgment on gays, I’d be making fun of them, too. All “holy” texts are errant, in that none of them are written or inspired by any God. Nobody is so intolerant as one who thinks they are divinely inspired.
But since it seems only “Christians” are present here doing the judging, they are my focus.
I’d also like to add that I hope Anthony returns one of these days and bans all of us from this site. I would gladly give up my ability to comment here if it meant that the intolerant bigots here also lost that ability.
Yeah!
837: “I think people of all adult sexualities, heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, ambisexual, and celibate… all can all agree that PEDERASTY = any adult having sex with a minor child is vile.”
Apparently, homosexual pedophilia is a widespread cultural practice among the Pashtun of Afghanistan. So you might have trouble convincing them of that.
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-12-17/opinion/etzioni.pedophilia.afghanistan_1_sexual-abuse-afghan-police-officers-afghan-security-guards?_s=PM:OPINION
You will be hated by everyone because of my name. But the person who endures to the end will be saved.
Matthew 10:22
It’s sort of ironic when a Trekmovie thread begins fulfilling scripture.
In Other News Harry has Just Turned Down Erica Durrance for a Date yet again. More at 11pm.
Nice to see that everyone’s dropped the gay comments. That is to say, comments about gay people. lol
Only took 800 or so comments.
When do people think Anthony will return from being interspacially trapped and reappear? When do you think the next interphase will be?
843 – Nothing self-righteous in that comment. How very Christian to claim to be a victim while doing all the victimizing. You shame Jesus by using his words to support your hate.
See you folks! I’m out of here and many of you are probably glad. I have a life to get back to.
But PLEASE, Anthony, ban me and those who’ve been involved in this “argument.” Ban us for life. It will be an improvement to this site and certainly an improvement to future discussions here.
Hell yeah!
“put a gay character on star trek and you will lose a lot of viewership, including mine – especially if it flaunted in every episode. not everyone who watches trek is a trekkie – there are a lot of casual and family viewers who will be turned off by the constant gay agenda shoved in their face.”
I would say… go! and don’t let the door hit your ass when you leave. Gene Roddenberry, I’m sure, would tell you the same thing. You obviously have learned NOTHING about the IDIC,
Trekforever, I was wondering about your age to see if you were of the older generation as it has been my experience that the older you are, the more likely one has problem with adapting to changes in society especially if they do not know someone directly related to the change. I was wondering if that applied here.
So I guess that Anthony and crew took another vacation!
Canon Schmanon hates Christians.
@847 and alter ego @848. Ah, you can’t even respond in a serious fashion. Considering there isn’t a large proportion of Muslims at Trekmovie, I’ll at least speak for my Arab heritage that the standard current fundamentalist Islamic view (as seen in Iran and other places) is that anyone who is gay or lesbian is executed. Not much to say there about acceptance or shunning, they simply execute anyone. My other point is that mocking Christianity as you’re doing isn’t a very legitimate response to the illegitimate views of Trekforever. Instead of leaving it at calling a spade a spade, you go out and dig up the whole garden of Christianity. There are many Christians who aren’t backwards, bible-thumping, Falwell-Schuyler-Swaggart-PTL Club types who have no ex cathedra other than the crystal ones they build themselves from conning people who have misplaced faith. I should have known you’re of the type who only would mock Christians, and not mock Muslims, Jews, Hindus, or any other faith.
.
@842 Dmduncan: you raise an excellent point. Afghanistan is hell, no doubt at all. They have so excised women from society that in their backwards system, pederasty becomes the norm. I believe this is also the case in parts of Indonesia? An abomination… which I think was what the whole Sodom and Gomorrah tale was truly about. Victimization of children, and passing travellers– and not the love two adults have for each other.
.
Star Trek ‘12 would be well served to simply have relationships of a different nature… one thing I think Caprica actually should get merit points for trying to do with Sam’s husband, and with Clarice’s multiple marriage. Of course, Heinlein and others did it better in their stories…. I can’t fathom that Orci, Kurtzman, Lindelof can’t manage to borrow a bit from those examples.
@ trekforever
I hope you don’t eat shrimp.
http://www.openbible.info/topics/eating_shrimp
#536: Would that be Isaac Asimov to whom you are referring? Not Azimov….
811. Iva “There is nothing hostile about masturbation….”
Are you kidding?? Last night I beat my dick like it owed me money!!
#656: “633 “You are referring to the TOS episode, “The Conscience of the King”. What has this got to do with homosexuality? Who is suggesting that anyone kill anyone in this discussion?”
I’m not suggesting killing anybody. I’m just saying that that way of thinking (believing that humans reproduce too much) can lead to serious consequences when one is in a position to act on that belief.”
Trekforever, I think the point being made was that with 7 billion people on this tiny little blue ball in space, we are stretching this world’s resources to the tipping point… and scientists expect another 2 billion souls in another 45 years.
If this happens we’d better be prepared for savagery, because right now the oceans cannot accommodate that demand; our farmers are going to hard pressed to grow the kind of crops necessary for that demand… and already a good portion of the world lacks access to clean, fresh water (and don’t even get me started on global warming)…. having served in Afghanistan I can attest to the fact that a lack of fresh water and adequate sanitation there is at a premium and one of the leading causes of death of children before the age of 5… and let’s talk about Africa.
Seems to me if there were more gays we’d have a less imminent population explosion.
Your response was so hostile (”who elected you? I believe was your quote) that it leads me to believe you like being right all the time.
Lighten up. This is just a thread about just a TV show, that can do better than what Brannon Braga was apologizing for,
As to others mentioning “they don’t want something forced on them, I can honestly say gays are not asking for anyone to force them to do anything, they’re just asking for some respect and some equality here… as someone pointed out, having a same sex couple in the shot would go a long way towards easing the tensions over this issue… or better yet a way to include them a storyline without beating-you-over-the-head with it. It’s not like anyone is asking for a “Look Who’s Coming to Dinner” ala TREK.
A good writer, a good director and a good cast can do this…
I’ve said it earlier, this thread has been an eye opener watching some of the ugliness rear its head. I used to think TREK fans were beyond reproach about being progressive over social issues, It’s disappointing to see that is not the case… and I hate being wrong (and that is a joke).
I WANT SOME FRESH NEWS…. THIS THREAD IS GETTING TIRESOME!
Wow! Jesus is here! Roberto Orci and Jesus the Nazarene in the same talkback! I’ve got to write this down for posterity’! But who would believe me? Especially the Roberto Orci part.
LOL harry i never put it like that before
#660: “you talk about rights. The right to what? The right to getting an education, having a career, having a family, having a life? Is that what you think gay people are entitled to? Well of course they are. Nobody’s denying them that at least I hope not. Or are you talking about the right to have your minority group be endorsed by a popular TV phenomenon just so they can feel good about themselves. Cuz if you are I gotta tell you, that right does not exist for any minority.”
My, my, you certainly are a defensive one. You are putting words into my mouth that I never said nor implied. But since you mentioned it…
I personally could give a rat’s ass if you endorse a minority group’s desires or rights (or forcing you to do so)…. and you say that right does not exist for any minority, but be aware the same can be said of the opposite…
860.
Yeah, DS9, my new adult film name is gonna be….Thicka Than A Snicka!
Okay, maybe a gay or three wouldn’t get my chones in a bunch, but I have to draw the line at fatties. If I see so much as one fatty on the ship, I will never watch again. They are gluttons, and the bible is very clear on what gluttons must do.
I wish the bible had said something about idiots.
Anthony can you please post a new article on ANYTHING.
Maybe he got tired of all of the people that can’t have a civil discussion on this site. But really, though, a new topic would be good to keep the trolls distracted for a bit.
@865 Seconded. VERY seconded.
Anthony…you magnificent bastard! I READ YOUR BOOK!!!! You Task us! You Task us, and we shall have our REVENGE!
NO gays. There’s a reason. In the future the gays have all been medically fixed of their disorder so naturally there wouldn’t, shouldn’t, couldn’t be gays on star trek
It’s true. the homo-disorder has been fixed or removed from the gene pool from lack of reproducing.
You can tell that this site is under the helm of new folk, most of these comments would have been removed days ago.
HOMOPHOBIC AMERICA !!!
RISE OF THE APES NEWS:
Apes must wait til November to rule the world.
The apes won’t rise this summer after all. Fox said this afternoon that it’s moving “Rise of the Apes” back five months, taking its “Planet of the Apes” prequel out of its planned summer date of June 24 and slotting it for Nov. 23. (Filmgoers will get a different animal in June, with the studio saying concurrently that it has moved up the Jim Carrey family film “Mr. Popper’s Penguins” from its August release date to June 17.) The move slowS momentum on the quickly moving “Rise of the Apes,” in which James Franco stars in a new version of the science-fiction classic. (He plays the scientist who discovers the apes mutating; Andy Serkis plays the chimp who leads the revolt.)
The studio announced in May that a reboot would be set for June 2011, saying that British director Rupert Wyatt would be offering a “completely new take on one of the studio’s most beloved and successful franchises.” The cast was rounded out soon after, with production getting underway in the summer. (Pierre Boulle’s novel, of course, spawned the 1968 Charlton Heston classic, which was followed by four sequels as well as a Tim Burton reimagining in 2001.)
The film is using photorealistic apes from Peter Jackson’s Weta Digital effects company, and a Fox spokesman said that the November date will allow for increased postproduction time, and also steers the film to a place on the calendar with fewer big-budget action movies. This coming June-July period will see a number of effects-driven blockbuster hopefuls such as “X-Men: First Class,” “Transformers: Dark of the Moon” and the final film in the Harry Potter franchise.
Moving a film out of summer can sometimes set off alarm bells in Hollywood, but it doesn’t necessarily bode ill for a movie; current comedy sequel “Little Fockers” was pushed back from July to Christmas and has wound up performing respectably over the holidays.
RISE OF THE APES NEWS:
Weta takes physics approach to digital fur.
A New York academic acknowledged as a world expert on computer-generated hair and fur has attracted the attention of Wellington software developers helping create creatures for Rise Of The Apes – the back-story to the classic 1968 movie Planet Of The Apes. Columbia University’s computer graphics group director Eitan Grinspun has helped scientists from Weta Digital, Walt Disney Studios, Pixar, and Adobe Systems solve tough problems with computer-generated images, including making hair or fur look convincingly real when it is twisted, clumped, matted, coiled, soaked, wind-swept, or singed, the New York Times reported.
“There’s not a huge number of people who can do this,” Weta Digital’s software development team head Alasdair Coull told the newspaper. “We’re essentially looking for the best in the world.”
Coull, who last year spent a month at Columbia University, contacted Grinspun after reading about his inventions in hair simulation and fur grooming.
Weta – which created screen images for both Avatar and The Lord Of The Rings trilogy – is creating the computer-generated apes who take over the world in Rise Of The Apes, as well as working on Steven Spielberg’s forthcoming version of the adventures of Tintin and his dog, Snowy.
A senior research scientist for Disney, Rasmus Tamstorf, told the newspaper that the Columbia group used precise mathematical equations based on physics, rather than jury-rigged computer models that had to be forced to simulate both curly hair and straight hair.
The software uses discrete differential geometry, a field so new that the first textbook on the subject was published only two years ago. But the same tools are also being used for computer simulations to predict how needles move through human flesh, so that doctors can train to surgery on “virtual” bodies instead of the real thing.
#692 Yes, soft drugs are legal in The Netherlands, therefore, we have less crime. And let’s face it, soft drugs are pretty harmless to most people(not everyone). And what sexual deviation?I’m sure you’ve never been here, and if you have, only in Amsterdam, which is another country entirely. But stay dumb, please. Just don’t reprocriate. Watch Fox news, read the bible, go order a pizza with extra cheese, drive your big car and shoot your teacher through the head. See? Now I’m you, judging an entire people by stereotypes. It’s dumb. One thing is fore sure, Gene Roddenberry didn’t write Star Trek for you.
NEW SUPERMAN ACTOR REVEALED:
THE Tudors actor Henry Cavill is to star as Superman in the next movie about the Man of Steel.
Henry, 27, was once dubbed “the unluckiest man in Hollywood” by Empire magazine, after missing out on several roles including Batman and James Bond.
And Brandon Routh beat him to the top role in Superman Returns in 2006.
Henry, from Jersey, is best known as Henry VIII’s advisor Charles Brandon in TV’s The Tudors.
He’s the third British actor to be cast as a Hollywood superhero recently. Andrew Garfield is the new Spider-Man and Christian Bale has played Batman twice.
The new Superman story, which has no title or release date yet, comes from Batman masterminds Christopher Nolan and David S Goyer.
Zack Snyder, who directed 300, will take charge. He said in a statement that Cavill was “the perfect choice to don the cape and ‘S’ shield”.
MORE MOVIE NEWS:
Guillermo del Toro On Frankenstein And At The Mountains Of Madness.
Some intriguing details about two in-progress projects from director Guillermo del Toro have come to light in an extensive feature on The New Yorker website.
Article writer Dale Zalewski has seen a number of designs for films such as the Lovecraft adaptation At The Mountains Of Madness and Frankenstein, neither of which have been given the official greenlight yet, but which del Toro has been beavering away on for the last couple of years.
Of a maquette of del Toro’s vision for Frankenstein’s monster he writes: “In accordance with Mary Shelley’s description the head appeared to have been stolen from a cadaver: there was exposed sinew around the jaw, and the cheekbones looked ready to poke through the scrim of flesh. Most appallingly, the Creature lacked a nose; a single bridge bone protruded over an oval breathing hole. Torres had been etching deep furrows into the Creature’s forehead, and shaved bits of clay were scattered on his desk, like clippings on a barbershop floor.”
Then he describes the look of the main creatures from At The Mountains Of Madness: “The Shoggoths had a racecar sheen. ‘They are pristine,’ [del Toro] said. ‘They are functional. They are not asymmetric. Symmetry is efficiency. And these guys need to be efficient.’ He wasn’t sure yet if the Shoggoth palette should be ‘pearlescent’ or ‘circulatory’ – reds and blues. Since the Shoggoths could mutate into anything, there was no fixed silhouette, but many would feature a ‘protoplasmic bowl’, an abdomen-like area from which new forms could sprout. One maquette was a disorienting twist on classic Lovecraftian form. It looked like a giant octopus head with tentacles jutting from the top and the bottom – a fearful symmetry. ‘That’s my belly in the middle,’ del Toro joked.”
There is also a description of del Toro’s vision for the dragon, Smaug, in The Hobbit (which, of course, at one point he was set to direct), though he admits, “There had been discomfort over his design of Smaug” so the one in Peter Jackson’s films could be very different. But for what it’s worth, here’s the description:
“Smaug’s body, as del Toro had imagined it, was unusually long and thin. The bones of its wings were articulated on the dorsal side, giving the creature a slithery softness across its belly. ‘It’s a little bit more like a snake,’ [del Toro] said… Smaug’s front legs looked disproportionately small, like those of a T-Rex. This would allow the dragon to assume a different aspect in close-up: the camera could capture ‘hand’ gestures and facial expressions in one tight frame, avoiding the quivery distractions of wings and tail. (Smaug is a voluble, manipulative dragon; Tolkien describes him as having ‘an overwhelming personality’.) Smaug’s eyes, del Toro added, were ‘going to be sculpturally very hidden.’ This would create a sense of drama when the thieving Bilbo stirs the beast from slumber.
del Toro wanted to be creative with the wing placement. ‘Dragon design can be broken into essentially two species.’ Most had wings attached to the forelimbs. ‘The only other variation is the anatomically incorrect variation of the six-appendage creature’ – four legs, like a horse, with two additional winged arms. ‘But there’s no large creature on Earth that has six appendages!’”
MORE NEWS:
Stephen King’s The Stand Heading For The Big Screen.
Warners still deciding whether it should be one film, or multiple films.
Warners Bros is set to bring Stephen King’s epic post-apocalyptic novel The Stand to the gig screen. But, reckons Heat Vision, the company is still deciding whether the mammoth book should be adapted as one film or as a series. Stephen King will be involved with the project.
The 1978 novel was King’s fourth book, and a 1990 revision added over 400 pages to make it also his longest (over 1,100 pages), as well as one of his biggest sellers (possibly second only to The Dark Tower). Its story is also vast in scope, set in a world where a virus has wiped out much of the population, a featuring a massive cast, parallel, overlapping storylines and a fundamental underlying message about good and evil. There was a TV mini-series in 1984 and a Marvel Comics adaptation a couple of years back.
So, The Dark Tower and The Stand are now both in development as major movies. Long gone are the days when the phrase “Stephen King movie adaptation” meant “dodgy, cheap horror film with a poster that makes the most of King’s name, while the script makes little of his words”.
TV NEWS:
Torchwood Miracle Day News Update.
Casting news, and who’s writing what
The Doctor Who News Page has unearthed a wealth of new info about Torchwood Miracle Day, including:
Each episode will have its own individual title (unlike “Children Of Earth”)
Russell T Davies will be writing episodes one and ten
Jane Espenson is writing episodes three, five, seven and eight.
Doris Egan is writing episode two
John Shiban is writing episode six
Lena Kaur has been cast as Dr Alicia Patel – the actress is best known as Leila in Hollyoaks
Danny Szam will play a character listed as Surveillance – he’s appeared in Skins, Doctors, The Royal and Casualty
Daniel Adegboyega will play a guard
William Thomas is returning to the show playing Gwen’s father Geraint Cooper
The article also reprints a quote from Russell T Davies talking to The South Wales Evening Post: “One thing I’ve quite enjoyed is the little jokes in the show about Brits feeling lost in America, and Americans not knowing where Wales is.”
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ADD MORE NEWS, THANK YOU. I’M NOW GOING TO STAB ONE OF MY CUSTOMERS TO DEATH IN THE SHOWER….
681. Hugh Hoyland – January 31, 2011
Daaa! I got it backwards! Meant to say that Forbidden Planet is a preboot of The Cage.
Well, as I was watching it I was thinking that Forbidden Planet is a really good example of how that story might be retold in a way that was much more epic than The Cage could do. The Cage was a much smaller version of that type of story, with the alien civilization that destroyed itself using technology that could materialize their own thoughts, right on down to the subterranean remnants of both Talosian and Krell civilizations.
So I got excited by what we might see on an epic scale. I’d bet money on it that if there was no Forbidden Planet, there would have been no Star Trek, because the parallels are too direct to be accidental. They even had those funky things they had to stand in when the ship decelerated from light speed, which looked like and had a similar visual effect to Star Trek’s transporter.
IMO A Cage story remake would not be the worst rout to go with Star Trek 2.0. The First Adveture!
Well, seeing as how we are covering various aspects of Star Trek news, I am starting to get a bit worried about Orci, et al. insofar as the writing seems to be taking a while. There are a few alternatives that occur to me that explain this; one is that they are perfectionists and another is that they have such a great script that they are holding out on it just for the sake of suspense.
I don’t really want to think of many other alternatives, mainly because I am an optimist.
SOMETHING ELSE TO PASS THE TIME, YAAAAAAAAWNNN…
Author Diane Duane Talks Trek, Wizards & Soda Bread
Diane Duane is as prolific as a writer can be, having penned novels, comic books, television shows, films, short stories, audionovels, computer games and more, including an upcoming cookbook. While she’s best known for her long-running Young Wizards series, Duane also spent many years in the Star Trek universe, writing TOS and TNG tales, the Rihannsu adventures, Trek manga and a TNG graphic novel, as well as the TNG episode “Where No One Has Gone Before.” StarTrek.com recently caught up with Duane in Ireland, where she lives with her husband, author Peter Morwood, for an in-depth interview in which she discussed her career, Trek output and upcoming projects.
How, when and why did you choose to become a writer?
Duane: I’m not aware of choosing, as such. I’ve just always written. It was to amuse myself, at first: I did my first novel when I was about seven, in crayon. Illustrations and all. Like a lot of little kids at that point, I thought that if you wrote a book you had to do everything yourself: the illustrations, the cover, the whole thing. Later on when I’d go to schools to speak, in the days before home computers and printers, very small children would ask me, “How do you write so small?” I started bringing manuscripts and page proofs with me so I could show them what was going on. Anyway, I wrote all through grade school and junior and senior high, mostly Tolkien-influenced fantasy, stuff which would eventually be the groundwork for my first fantasy novels.
Early on, you worked as David Gerrold’s assistant. What did you learn from that experience?
Duane: Mostly not to be scared of writing as a business and a daily avocation. If I had any illusions about airy-fairy notions like “wooing the muse” and moping around waiting for creativity to strike, having a chance to watch David work dispensed with those in short order. He just made coffee or got himself a Coke, and then sat down and wrote, and that was the size of it. His straightforward professionalism and no-nonsense attitude were, as we’d say now, very grounding. I watched him and thought, “I can do that. I will do that.”
Plus, David also did me huge a favor: he got me mad. When I told him I wanted to be a writer, he did what turned out – for me — to be exactly the right thing. He rolled his eyes and said, “Oy, another one.” I got absolutely furious and went off thinking, “You just wait, you SOB: I’m going to show you I’m not just some wannabe.” Which, in time, apparently I did because after he read my first novel he sent it off to his publisher, and they bought it about two weeks later. That was the book that got me nominated two years running for the Campbell Award. And about two months later an agent came looking for me – Donald Maass, still my agent after 30 years: both a very gifted writer and a great powerhouse on the agenting and teaching side of our field. So I have a lot to thank David for.
How did you first hook up with the world of Star Trek books?
Duane: I’d been reading them for a while before my first novel was published. I was lucky to be coming into the professional side of writing during what some have described as the golden age of Trek novels – new voices, writing the Trek they really wanted to without feeling crippled by too much oversight, though all the writers I knew personally were very committed to staying inside continuity. Anyway, one day I read a Trek novel that really annoyed me. I thought it was so… substandard. I went off thinking, “I could eat a ream of typing paper and barf a better novel than that.” Whether that’s turned out to be true, I leave to the fandom to discuss. But I loved Star Trek – have loved it since I was a teenager – and wanted to see it treated properly, with respect.
What were the unique challenges of writing for Trek, in the sense that for the most part you were dealing with an established franchise and established characters?
Duane: Well, the challenges aren’t completely unique; it’s something you run into whenever you’re dealing with a universe that’s owned by someone else. Don’t forget, I was also writing for Hanna-Barbera at that point, (which was) my first TV work. The money I made writing for Scooby-Doo and Scrappy and Captain Caveman was directly responsible for keeping me eating while I was writing So You Want to Be a Wizard. And even at that level of TV you learn not to mess with the continuity, and how to stay inside it while also pushing against the walls to see how much “give” they have. So it wasn’t news to me that I was going to have to “color inside the lines” in this slightly different region of novel-writing. If anything, I was happy that I had so much continuity to support me. I was one of those old-school Trekkies who could quote (and still can quote) large amounts of the dialogue in given episodes. I knew the Trek characters better than I then knew some of my own. I knew – I thought – how the Enterprise crew should sound, and how they should act, and I did my best to being that sense into the fiction with me.
You’ve written TOS, Rihannsu and TNG books. You wrote Trek games and comics. Within which Trek “universe” are you most comfortable?
Duane: Tough, tough call. Let me come at it backwards. There are some of the Trek scenarios that I haven’t cared for all that much. They didn’t hook me emotionally, for whatever reason. Voyager and Enterprise never caught my interest the way TOS and TNG did. As regards DS9, I’m sort of on the fence. So it’s fair to say that TOS and TNG were my favorites, with TOS having a slight edge. As regards the Rihannsu books, they were always a special case. I was very aware that Paramount had “ring-fenced” this particular part of Trek for me to play in, and that knowledge always charmed and frankly awed me a little. It was a relief to complete that storyline, which had been hanging fire for a very long while. But I was also sad to say goodbye to the characters.
Which of your Star Trek works would you say were the most popular/best reviewed and which were you personally happiest with?
Duane: Spock’s World is probably my favorite, for all kinds of reasons. Yes, it spent eight weeks on the New York Times Bestseller List, which admittedly was a trip. But there are other reasons more private. That book scratched a creative itch I’d wanted to deal with for a long time, for I was always a big Spock fan. But also, sometimes it’s the work that gives you the most trouble that you love the best. I lost what should have been the final draft of that book to a disk crash – my backups turned out to be corrupt – and I had to reconstruct the entire book in about two weeks to hit my deadline. This may have been one of those blessing-in-disguise things, in that I think the rewrite/reconstruction was better than the original. In any case, Spock’s World is sort of the gift that keeps on giving, to its author anyway. I could hardly believe it when I heard that Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci were passing out pages from Spock’s World to the cast on Star Trek (2009) in lieu of script pages, to show them how they wanted certain characters to interact. That blew me away. Beyond that, I have kind of a soft spot for Doctor’s Orders and Dark Mirror.
How did you wind up with a “written by” credit on the TNG episode “Where No One Has Gone Before”? And what did you make of the episode?
Duane: Michael Reaves and I co-wrote the screenplay. My husband Peter Morwood and I were guests at Michael’s while Michael’s then-wife Brynne Stephens and I were story-editing separate animated series at DIC. At that point, the Trek offices were only accepting pitches from writers who were Writers’ Guild members and had live-action drama under their belts. I wasn’t in the Guild and had no live action at that point. Michael did. After some days’ work on a pitch he came to me and said, “No matter what I do with this, it keeps coming out like Wounded Sky. Do you want to come with me and we’ll pitch this as a team?” I was completely astounded. That was a tremendous offer, incredibly gracious and generous, (and) absolutely in character for Michael. So that’s what we did. We went in and pitched it to Gene Roddenberry together – a high water mark for me as regards sheer nervousness. Even the first time I scrubbed in on brain surgery back in my nursing-school days didn’t freak me out as much as that pitch did.
But Roddenberry loved the story we told him, and Bob Justman later described the pitch as “the Star Trekkiest Star Trek story he’d ever heard.” High praise. So Michael and I went through the usual stages of premise and outline, taking notes from Gene and our line producer each time, and then went off and wrote the script. It took us a couple of weeks. We turned it in, and got paid, and that was that. As of a couple of weeks later we were “cut off at first draft,” as the saying goes. The script was handed off to another writer for rewrite. Much later we discovered that some obscure power struggle was going on inside the TNG offices, and like various other writers working TNG at that point, we got caught in the crossfire and were chucked out when the production associate who’d brought us in was let go. The rewrite was very complete: of our original script, only one shot (by Duane) and one scene (by Reaves) remain. It’s the kind of thing that makes TV writers shrug at each other and say, “Oh well. The check cleared.”
If someone reads this and decides to check out your non-Trek works, what novels, shows and/or movies would you recommend they look at to get a real feel for you and your writer’s voice?
Duane: Well, I have a number of voices up and down the range, so to speak. Some of them are a little less serious than others, like the TV movie Lost Future, which aired a couple of months ago on SyFy. (That was) straightforward post-apocalyptic action-adventure, with the added enjoyment of getting to watch Sean Bean run around in leather pants. At the fantasy end – or science fantasy, maybe – the Young Wizards books are a great favorite of mine. The world and its characters have been getting increasingly complex over recent years. They’ve always been as much intended for an adult audience as a young-adult one, and I’m preparing to revise the four oldest books so that their tone will better match the later ones. Book nine, A Wizard of Mars, came out last spring, and the paperback will be coming out in April. I got to indulge a truly indecent amount of Mars geekery in that one. And then there’s Omnitopia Dawn, which is — as they used to say on Monty Python — something entirely different: a projected MMORPG platform for a new decade. I can’t wait for the technology I extrapolated in there to actually come along. Or rather, maybe it’s a good thing that it’s not here just yet, because if it was, I’d never get any work done again.
You’ve got Omnitopia: East Wind coming up. How’s that coming together, and what else are you working on?
Duane: Omnitopia: East Wind is in its final stages, which it had better be, considering it’s coming out in August. Meanwhile I have several book projects in progress, some that have been in process for a long time, some quite new. And there’s some film work in various stages of completion at the moment, a couple of movies with differing amounts of science fiction or fantasy in the mix. And Peter and I have a pitch for a historical drama series that’s making the rounds out in LA at the moment. We’re waiting to see who goes for it.
Oh, and a cookbook; just a small thing. As a hobby, Peter and I have been managing a website called EuropeanCuisines.com for some years. As St. Patrick’s Day approaches each year, the site gets thousands and thousands of hits from people looking for his late mother’s soda bread recipe. So we’ve put together an Irish cookbook around it from recipes that we’ve posted there over the years. Just more writing, but this time we get to indulge our foodie side instead of the strictly literary urge. It’s always fun to do some creative work that the Times book editor isn’t going to get to critique!
To learn more about Diane Duane and keep track of her upcoming projects, visit http://www.DianeDuane.com
#692 “Yes, soft drugs are legal in The Netherlands, therefore, we have less crime. And let’s face it, soft drugs are pretty harmless to most people(not everyone).”
This tells me all I need to know about YOU sir!
880 – The Cage was a 60’s pilot, pure and simple. Roddenberry threw together some elements (some of them excellent!) to create a demonstration of what Trek could offer. In the case of the pilot, he built up the tough-as-nails captain character and the “weirdness” of space aliens element. Thankfully, it was good enough to get NBC to order a second pilot in which we get Shat showing us that there could also be some fun and ripped shirts. The Cage would NOT stand up to Hollywood’s formula of “blow up everything.” It would rip apart at the seams. Doomsday Machine could actually work well. But, I doubt Orci et al are going that route. I’m willing to bet 34523452623546 quatloos there are multiple villains and action set pieces. There’s no reason to believe it will be a revelation. It will be current Hollywood formula. Our only hope is they’ll remember to make it fun.
MORE RISE OF THE APES NEWS:
Tom Felton excited about ‘brilliant script’.
It’s a big summer for Tom Felton, who says goodbye to Hogwarts with the July 15 release of ”Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2.” But a few weeks prior to that big event, Felton is getting into some serious monkey business with “Rise of the Apes,” the Fox film that is enjoying renewed interest in Hollywood with the strong advance word on its Weta Digital visual effects and the career heat around leading man James Franco. Felton, for one, is pulsing with excitement about director Rupert Wyatt’s “Apes” revival, which takes place in contemporary San Francisco and sets the stage for the events that took place in “Planet of the Apes,” the 1968 sci-fi classic that yielded four sequels as well as Tim Burton’s 2001 remake and several television shows.
“It’s one of my favorite scripts of any I’ve read,” Felton said. “It’s a brilliant script. It’s a prequel to the classic, ‘Planet of the Apes,’ so it explains how the apes came to power and it’s a fantastic story, really.”
Felton said he is leaving “Potter” and his sneering role of Draco Malfoy with plenty of good memories, but his supporting role in ”Apes” might be the first step in moving his public persona beyond black suits, blond hair and magic wands. He says he’s not concerned about playing another vindictive fellow in the “Apes” film. “I love playing a villainous role, and I would happily be known for that. A lot of great English actors have been known for that, perhaps Ralph Fiennes and Alan Rickman and Anthony Hopkins being some of the finest.”
And what can Felton say about this new ”Apes” film? He expressed excitement about the plan for Weta to create the apes through digital wizardry — as opposed to the makeup-and-costume approach that was at the core of monkey portrayals in the previous “Apes” installments — but he chose his words carefully in matters of plot and his own character, a research facility employee named Dodge.
“I have to be careful here because they haven’t given me a clearance to divulge the entire plot — as much as I’d like to. I can tell you it’s a great story. I’m amazed, really, that they didn’t do [the original films] in this order and start with this modern-day story. It seems logical to start with this story and then go forward from there. But here we are; they’ve come back and done this interesting story. It essentially follows one particular ape. The story follows this one ape as he ends up in a primate facility, a facility where my character works. Needless to say, I’m not that keen on the monkeys at my facility. I’m not the most pleasant person they’ve ever come across in their life. I show this one particular ape that there is a dark side to humans, and I’m not very nice. And that leads to a backlash …”
That ape is Caesar, and Franco plays the empathetic scientist who takes the ape home to spare him from the cruelties of Felton’s character. Caesar is one of the test subjects in a research program aimed at finding treatments for ’Alzheimers disease, but the work has an unexpected effect on him. Caesar is played by Andy Serkis, the actor who so memorably collaborated with the Weta team to create the Gollum character in “The Lord of the Rings” films. The “Rise of the Apes” cast also includes John Lithgow, Freida Pinto, Brian Cox and David Hewlett. The film hits theaters on June 24.
Whatever happened to that James Cawley and his hilarious Star Trek vids?
What did happen to James Cawley. I thought there were supposed to relaeae a couple of new Voyages Eps this past Fall.
Star Wars is better than Star Trek. Always has and always will be.
888. Desstruxion – February 1, 2011
” Star Wars is better than Star Trek. Always has and always will be.”
I’ll take “Spock’s Brain” over Lucas’ red-headed stepchild prequel trilogy any day!
“Star Wars is better than Star Trek.”
On second thought, maybe the whole “gays in Star Trek” isn’t the worst thread topic ever…
Star Wars had its day in the 70s and 80s. The Special Editions and Prequel Trilogy were utter SHITE !!!
Star Trek is way better, Star Wars is for kids and retards – FACT !!!
Will this thread make a thousand before a new article is published?
Star Wars is SHITE, here is the proof:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI
(a review of The Phantom Menace in 7 parts)
No tolerance for young and mentally challenged fans of Star Trek? How sad.
Star Trek is the new Star Wars you know?
No one cares, close the topic already.
Amazed at the level of emotion being expressed in this thread. Here are a few basic realities in an attempt to be unbiased:
(1) Violence, (and bullying which leads to violence), is always wrong.
(2) Personal opinions are not illegal (in the United States).
(3) Consumer decisions regarding entertainment content affect the health of a franchise.
(4) Knowledge is progressive.
(5) Forward thinking on any particular subject can only survive on facts.
895. Desstruxion – February 1, 2011
Star Trek is the new Star Wars you know?
————————————————————————————
YOU SAID IT MATE !!!
Now go and play with your bargain bin Star Wars toys !!!
Doctor Who and Torchwood are way ahead than any scifi franchise, they have been dealing with gay characters and storylines for the past 6 years now.
900 !!! YIPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEH !!!
@ Desstruxion
I just spoke to my dead mother who is sat in her chair watching The Clone Wars, she thinks Star Wars is crap too !!!
(1) Violence, (and bullying which leads to violence), is always wrong.
Well then you must not be a Star Trek fan cuz Capt. Kirk is violent in every episode or movie.
(2) Personal opinions are not illegal (in the United States).
Yep. But is every moral decision a matter of mere opinion or a matter of truth? Your subjectivism here is rather dangerous for morality in general.
(3) Consumer decisions regarding entertainment content affect the health of a franchise.
Don’t forget it also affects the health of the consumer.
(4) Knowledge is progressive.
That sounds a little political to me. But what do you care, anything to do with morality is just my “personal opinion” anyway, Knowledge doesn’t have anything to do with it.
(5) Forward thinking on any particular subject can only survive on facts.
True. But only if you accept the facts and I think some important facts mising in this discussion include an adequate anthropology and some sort ok acknowledgment of God.
[And my apologies for my early post on this thread for being too snarky.]
I’m beginning to think trekmovie.com is now some kind of bizarre social experiment.
Norman – Now go and play with your bargain bin Star Wars toys !!!
————————–
I kitbashed an Enterprise saucer into a Millenium Falcon. It crashed. Seems the Trek tech was too inferior to represent a Star Wars ship.
Oh and Keenser wouldn’t last a minute on Endor. The Ewoks would serve him up in a stew.
Spock wishes he was Jar Jar Binks.
@856 Harry Ballz
was it like in Family Guy when Stewie beat up Brian for money owed?
@ 898 Now go and play with your bargain bin Star Wars toys !!!
That is exactly what that crap was that Playmates produced for Star Trek 11. I really hope they do not get the license for the next movie.
I think it’s a shame to see that (some) people cannot have a conversation about a sensitive issue without resorting to anger, condescension, mean-spirited sarcasm, and so forth.
A point of view is just that — a POINT of view. There are approx. 6 billion points of view on this planet. Is anyone out there seeing the world from all 6 billion points of view simultaneously? Yet, some people seem to think their personal, singular point of view is the RIGHT one. So, out of billions of drops of water that make up an ocean, there’s one drop of water saying it is the only right drop of water, hmm? The difference is that many drops of water naturally make up an ocean. Many human beings with many points of view makes quite a mess.
I’d like to hear from the people who voted not sure about a gay character in Trek. Anyone?
I once built a starship model using a SW Star Destryoyer for the saucer and the Enterprise for the rest. The SW piece was so embarrassed that it broke free and destroyed the rest of itself.
902. Federali Aundy – February 1, 2011
A depiction of violence in fiction is different from literal violence.
Morality can be shaped by knowledge, truth, and opinion.
An individuals personal health is the congruency of their physical, emotional and mental well being and different from the financial health of a product.
Everyone is entitled to decide what to base their morality on.
Genuine progression must accept all facts.
How about gay marriage in Star Trek? It seems to be okay for different species to marry…how about 2 men or women who aren’t Trill?
It’s time to give Bob Orci a daily blog on this website. Get some daily updates from the man himself.
The English alphabet would be so much better if it had only 25 letters. For one thing, it would be more readily divisible by 5.
Discuss amongst yourselves.
February is the month in which we shall all enjoy Valentine’s Day. As regards to Trek, the word “Valentine” reminds me of the allegation that the final episode of Star Trek: Enterprise was supposed to be a “Valentine” to the fans. ST:E is well-known to be the endeavor of one Brannon Braga.
Strangely, we are stuck, Groundhog Day-style, discussing Brannon Braga’s comments for some reason.
As I said, the final episode of Star Trek: Enterprise was supposed to be a “Valentine” to the fans. ST:E is well-known to be the endeavor of one Brannon Braga.
Strangely, we are stuck….
909. you probably assembled it wrong….we all know that the Enterprise could run circles around a Star Destroyer.
904. you probably assembled that wrong too since we all know the Falcon was put together from a pile of spare parts from a dump…it didn’t even work right in the movie…poor Chewie was always trying to fix it. I think that’s why in Episode VII he is supposed to throw himself out the airlock cuz he can’t stand being on that POS anymore. Adding a couple of other parts that don’t belong there won’t improve crap…it will just look like better crap. For example, putting a paper umbrella into a urine sample doesn’t mean anyone is going to want to drink it. Just saying….
Well put Mr. VorlonKosh.
587. Didn’t say it was my opinion. Just seems to be a typical attitude of many. I could care less what/who people make out with in the star trek universe! There certainly is a double standard.
@913 GREAT IDEA!
915: That’s the one where a overly porky Riker watches a really bad episode of “Enterprise” which happens to show the founding of the Federation, which none here cares about at all, really.
I think there should be a muppet character on Star Trek.
There was a gay character on Star Trek. It was the Next Generation I believe and his name was Wesley Crusher.
Hey BobOrci-
When were you planning on telling us about “Ender’s Game”?
http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2011/01/31/enders-game-adaptation-nabs-star-trek-duo-alex-kurtzman-roberto-orci/
@Factchecker
Gonzo would be a great choice or even that dreadful muppet they used in The Phantom Menace that was supposed to be Yoda?
And the best Captain of any spaceship anywhere in the universe is Han Solo. If he ever crossed over to Trek they’d fire that Kirk kid on the spot. It’s not like he ever earned the command anyway.
Ok. The Terran Empire is much Stronger then the weakling Federation. The Terran Empire would make Mence meat of the Puny Federation. Also. The Terran Empire would use the So called Galactic Empire of Darth Vader for target Practice and the so called force could not even compare to the might of the Terran Empire. Long Live the Terran Empire.
#924. Solo could not even hold a candle to the Federation Capt Kirk. let along the Terran Empires Capt Kirk.
Oh. The Terran Empire would wipe out the Fleets of Babylon 5. Check out. http://www.spacebattles.com proof is there.
Thanks for the New Updates Norman!
(Way to be proactive.)
I’d be worried if they shifted Rise of the Apes from summer to Oct 1st. It would be clear that the studio wasn’t behind it. But moving to the holiday season shows that they were looking for a prime spot. Looking forward to revisiting Planet of the Apes.
Wow! Looks like “Trekforever” missed a few episodes of his handles namesake that dealt with diversity and bigotry. Seek out “Let that be their last battlefield.” Pay attention.
Or change your handle.
Man! This site is sounding more like ain’t it cool news all the time. Not good…IMHO.
@”Check the Circuit!”
Youre quite welcome, thank you!
Maybe it’s just a hiatus. Or maybe it’s Maybelline.
Or maybe it’s just Mabel.
Or maybe it’s a Malentine to the fans….
(See what I did just there? “Mabel” + “Valentine.” Clever, no?)
Also, you if reduce the number if letters, primer books for young readers would need one fewer page, resulting in a 1/26th saving for publishers, and we all know how much publishers need all the savings they need these days.
Not to mention we would save the planet (fewer dead trees).
So, it’s agreed then: The way to save the planet is to knock off a letter off the English alphabet.
The only questions is, which one?
I nominate “e,” the most ubiquitous, and hence obnoxious, letter of all. I mean, “lttr,” that is.
From the Terran Empire News Service.
it was reported today that Capt Morgan Tracy of the I.S.S Exeter landed on a Planet that has some simularitys to Earth. Most of his crew was killed though when the Landing Party returned to his Ship with some kind of Plague.. But Capt Tracy who stayed on the Planets Surfice was imuned. But in a War Capt Tracy used several Phasers and Phaser Rifles to hold off and attacking force. When the I.S.S Enterprise came to the Planet Capt Kirk and his Party beamed to the Exeter and foung the Log Entries and beamed to the Planet just in time. Together with Capt Tracy and a group called the Coms they were able to find a cure and with more Weapons from the Enterprise were able to Defeat once and for all the Yangs. A faction on the Planet. Capt Tracy and Capt Kirk were both given citations from the CNC of the Empire for there Bravery and Inganunity.
A demonstration, s’il vous plais, mesdames et monsieurs:
933. Commodor Mik of th Trran mpir – Fbruary 1, 2011
From th Trran mpir Nws Srvic.
it was rportd today that Capt Morgan Tracy of th I.S.S xtr landd on a Plant that has som simularits to arth. Most of his crw was killd though whn th Landing Party rturnd to his Ship with som kind of Plagu.. But Capt Tracy who stayd on th Plants Surfac was immun. But in a War Capt. Tracy usd svral Phasrs and Phasr Rifls to hold off and attacking forc. Whn th I.S.S ntrpris cam to th Plant Capt Kirk and his Party bamd to th xtr and found th Log ntris and bamd to th Plant just in tim. Togthr with Capt Tracy and a group calld th Coms thy wr abl to find a cur and with mor Wapons from th ntrpris wr abl to Dfat onc and for all th Yangs, a faction on th Plant. Capt Tracy and Capt Kirk wr both givn citations from th CNC of th mpir for thr Bravry and Ingnunity.
Voila, ici! You can still mak out th maning, asily, and also pronounc th words. Much mor fficint. Plus, it would driv spllchckrs crazy.
Abolish th lttr !
I think this thread has self-destructed quite a ways back. I suspect a number of people would have been warned for spamming if Anthony were more closely monitoring it.
I’ would have closed the thread if it were my site.
but… that is, of course, Anthony’s purview, not mine.
Perhaps a cure will have been found by the 23rd century?
Just kidding! : D
910 @Allenburch
“A depiction of violence in fiction is different from literal violence.”
But you say that “violence… is always wrong” – to take such a position is to be opposed to fictitious violence since the violence in fiction could be imitated in reality. Obviously no one will be using phasers, but there can and do exist situations in which the violence justified in fiction can thereby justify the violence in reality. Besides, you’re opposed to the “bullying which leads to violence” – but doesn’t the bullied have a right to self-defense?
“Morality can be shaped by knowledge, truth, and opinion.”
So if morality can be shaped by opinion, we can just vote for what is moral? What happens when the mob holds an immoral opinion? If opinion counts as truth, what good is it?
“An individuals personal health is the congruency of their physical, emotional and mental well being and different from the financial health of a product.”
I think this is lacking what I called an “adequate anthropology” because “the ongruency of [one's] physical, emotional and mental well being” reduce a person to his physical state and does not meet the needs of their spiritual and religious nature. These two aspects of man cannot be overlooked and need to be taken into great consideration when dealing with public policy, gay marriage, and the products we place on the market.
“Everyone is entitled to decide what to base their morality on.
Genuine progression must accept all facts.”
But do you not see the contradiction here? If I am entitled to decide what to base my morality on, then I am therefore also entitled to reject facts as incorehent with my morality. If we are to embrace a real morality, we must place opinion aside and accept all the facts (including those regarding man’s spiritual and religious nature).
Chillie Con Carne
Ingredients
2 tbsp olive oil
2 onions, chopped
2 garlic cloves, crushed
1kg/2¼lb lean beef mince
250ml/9fl oz red wine
2 x 400g cans chopped tomatoes
3 tbsp tomato purée
2 red chillies, thinly sliced, or 3-4 tsp dried chilli flakes
1 tsp ground cumin
1 tsp ground coriander
1 stick cinnamon
good shake of Worcestershire sauce
1 beef stock cube
salt and freshly ground black pepper
2 x 400g can red kidney beans, rinsed and drained
1 large bunch coriander leaves, roughly chopped
wedges of lime, to serve
Preparation method
1.Heat the oil in a large, heavy-based saucepan with a lid and fry the onion and garlic until softened. Increase the heat and add the mince, cooking quickly until browned and breaking down any chunks of meat with a wooden spoon.
2.Pour in the red wine and boil for 2-3 minutes.
3.Stir in the tinned tomatoes, tomato purée, fresh chilli or chilli flakes, cumin, coriander, cinnamon, and Worcestershire sauce and crumble in the stock cube. Season well with salt and freshly ground black pepper. Bring to a simmer, cover with a lid and cook over a gentle heat for about 50 minutes to 1 hour, stirring occasionally until the mixture is rich and thickened.
4.Add the kidney beans and fresh coriander. Cook for a further ten minutes, uncovered, before removing from the heat, adding any extra seasoning if necessary. Serve with rice, guacamole, sour cream and a big green salad.
937. Anthony Thompson
Somebody has already made that comment.
It is not funny, don’t ever stay at The Bates Motel…
922. John from Cincinnati – February 1, 2011
I tweeted it!
935 – I think this thread has self-destructed quite a ways back. I suspect a number of people would have been warned for spamming if Anthony were more closely monitoring it.
———————————————————
I like Spam. It’s a versatile food item.
I think we’re just bored at this point.
Hey Bob what about seeing the Abramsverse Excelsior in the next flick?
Does Anthony still care about running this site? It used to have a couple of daily posts even on little Trek stuff and now nothing.
If there’s one thing this discussion shows… it’s that the topic highly relevant and the Trek sequel needs to deliver a comment on that. One that could change the world or at least make people question their hate.
Good you’re still following us, boborci ;)
Let’s get back on topic and try to make 1000. So . . .
It isn’t that heterosexuality is normal, it’s just common.
I am also wondering if I should keep Trekmovie bookmarked anymore?
@945
Agree. What’s going on here?
Trektoday.com has now become my new home for fresh Star Trek movie news.
I can’t take the stagnation of this place any longer.
Gee whiz…….we were having such fun and then the “H” word showed up again. To each his/her own……whatever. Now what about that Abramsverse Excelsior?
Almost 1000, I’m so proud. lol
CNN.COM COMPARES CURRENT TRANSLATION DEVICES/PROGRAMS to those of STAR TREK
http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/innovation/01/30/universal.translators.google/index.html
947. Cyberziggy
Trektoday.com has now become my new home for fresh Star Trek movie news.
Don’t hold your breath.
People, Anthony could simply be sick…
i agree with comments 3 and 11. personal mate preferences should be common and uncommented on. i always took this issue to be universal in the Star Trek universe, – personal choice on lifestyle should be private and not determine how you are viewed by the rest of society.
if your married, single, with kids , without. inter-species – whatever! who cares? you are exploring the galaxy on the Enterprise! that’s what matters. wish i could live then…..
You could go over to io9.com and give them your 2 cents about the
“10 Greatest Starships Of All Time”. TNG Enterprise is #2 according to them.
http://io9.com/#!5748340/10-greatest-starships-of-all-time
What a load of shite. I’m with you 951, trektoday, not two weeks ago
How about a ‘gypsy’ crew member?
Oi caarnt reed or roite captin’ but oi can coint me proiton toypeedoes, wud ye loike ye lawn tarmaccic when we git back te Oirthe?
@Hat Rick. I dunno. We already eliminated some very useful letters such as:
ash: Æ æ, which would really help clear up “father” from “fæt her”
edh: Ð ð, which would improve it more: “faðer” vs. “fæt her”
ænd thorn: Þ þ, which would be ðe best of ðese þree still-needed letters.
I miȝht even pitch in for briŋiŋ back
yogh: Ȝ ȝ, oethel: Œ œ, wynn: Ƿ ƿ, ænd æddiŋ a few others, perhæps eng: Ŋ, ŋ.
@boborci
.
Your tweets are great… Could you tell us any more about this one from a few days ago:
“is it a coincidence that the very day i am writing Sulu’s biggest scene, I run into John Cho at a friend’s party?”
.
Is it a Sulu solo, or is he leading a “landing party” as in TOS Enemy Within?!??
.
Will we see a little doggie colored pink with antennae? :) Just drop a really long rope with a pot of coffee to us, it’s cold down here on Trekmovieworld and we’re getting frostbite!
Now I got it: show us some strong, brave and honorable imperial Klingon warriors who happen to be gay and then have to work with the Enterprise crew against a common threat O_O
Totally passed out at Jesus’ party there, did I miss anything?
937. Federali Aundy
“He ain’t wrong, he’s just different but his pride won’t let him do the things that make you think he’s right. If you don’t understand him and he don’t die young, he’ll probably just ride away.”
-Performed by Willie Nelson and Waylon Jennings
-Written by Ed Bruce and Patsy Bruce
I thought that Klingons were gay anyway?
940. boborci – February 1, 2011
Congratulations on trying to get some literary SF to the screen. That’s good news. There’s lots more where that came from too, Bob.
962 – I thought that Klingons were gay anyway?
——————————-
No you’re confusing them with the Romulans.
OH
MY
GOD
I check back into this site after a week in the vain hope of a news story and find nothing new except nearly 1000 posts, a large proportion of which make me feel sick to be a human being.
I give up on this site.
@965. Desstruxion
Did I say Klingons? I meant Star Wars fans ;)
@966. Winkie
Me and my mother were thinking that too!
961 @Allenburch
“He ain’t wrong, he’s just different but his pride won’t let him do the things that make you think he’s right. If you don’t understand him and he don’t die young, he’ll probably just ride away.”
I think this hits the nail on the head because the purpose of gay rights laws and gays in movies is to secure the acceptance (not the mere toleration) of the gay lifestyle. In such a way, the question is no longer about what is right or wrong but about what is honored and what is shamed. I think some gays feel hated – and there are some who sadly do hate gays – but I think a deeper feeling that gays feel from “traditional” marriage supporters is a feeling of being shamed.
Nevertheless, my questions to you about what is right and what is wrong remain.
@boborci
I have become a recent fan of the movie reviews of Red Letter Media – and I was very happy to see that your Star Trek is pretty much the only positive movie review this guy has made.
But as it relates to our topic at hand, the review took some time to discuss how the characters all had moments where the audiance knew they were “not gay” (i.e. Kirk and the green cadet, McCoy is divorced, Spock and Uhura are making out).
Was Red Letter Media correct in their review?
905.
Yes, except I didn’t see blood at the end.
Hi guys,
Me and mother have some newly refurbished rooms available at The Bates Motel which also includes newly tiled showers.
Book now to avoid disappointment.
Hope to see you all soon,
Norman.
909 – “I’d like to hear from the people who voted not sure about a gay character in Trek. Anyone?”
I voted “Not sure”.
Wow. So many posts since!
Am I the only female posting here? It feels like it. Just wondering.
@907
Blood at the end of your ol’ Fella or blood at the end of the event?
Just askin’………a bit bored you see……
@972
I suspect Keachick, that you are possibly the only female judging by the timbre of the majority of posts….but you never can tell!!!
I also suspect that we are the only people posting from NZ.
Every time I enter the chat room it is empty!
I am really looking forward to some articles.
This is getting tedious and when you get people like Trekforever and his insipid diatribe it kind of makes you a bit sad for the Rodenberry vision of the future. At least he hasn’t posted for a while….what a twat….
I myself am a girl, all female parts included.
On topic, there really shouldn’t be a maybe/don’t know poll option, what is it supposed to mean anyway?
I always thought that Tasha Yar was going to be a gay character way back during the first season. I think they tried to address the gay issue a few times with the Trill storylines – but lost their bottle and tipped toed round it.
That’s what mother thinks anyway…
Apologies Iva!
Like you I am unsure what the maybe/don’t know option is really getting at.
Perhaps it is for those who are not sure what gay really is?????
It means happy of course….
To quote Shat – Let’s keep it gay :D
Wow … this issue is yielding, is not it? …. LOL … it’s time for a new post, guys! … I think!
# 972- Keachick – “maybe/ unsure” I voted … but not necessarily because of the controversial issue … but because the writers seem so busy with so many projects, I think better they haven’t another subject for “thought” … Did they have already decided by the villain? …LOL … okay I’m being a bit ironic! … LOL!
Did you see my last post on imdb? … a bit of levity about the AWESOME CP! :-)
968. Federali Aundy
“You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.” -NIV
“By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.” -KJV
“What dire offence from am’rous causes springs,
What mighty contests rise from trivial things.”
-Alexander Pope
Me and mother have just watched the amazing Star Trek V: The Final Frontier on VHS (Pan and Scan version).
Apart from being totally blown away by the jaw dropping special effects and the Police Academy style gags and humor, we noticed at the end of the movie that Spocks says to Kirk; “Please Captain, not infront of the Klingons” when Jimmy Kirk tried to hug him.
Are me and mother missing something here? What really happened around that campfire? Is this Treks first attempt at a ‘gay’ thing?
Please respond for me and mother.
” Is this Treks first attempt at a ‘gay’ thing?”
Hardly, Kirk and Spock have been all homoerotic for years before that movie.
@923 –
Gonzo. Good choice for a TREK muppet. I’m thinking of something a little more trippy like those monk dudes with the four arms in The Dark Crystal.
They looked a thousand times more real than Phantom Yoda….but then again, so does Gonzo.
# 972 – keachick – I’m female … I hope you know that … but I have no resistance or “patience” to be commenting on the same matter as long as you do! … definitely not! :-) … But I read your comments, very relevant. … almost always. :-) :-)
Thank you, Bob Orci, for posting that informative link about the prevalence of homosexual men (in particular) and population dynamics.
Just one or two gripes:
For people who mock, I said that having a percentage of the population born gay/lesbian is but ONE method of bringing about a natural control of a population. Nature generally does not “put all her eggs in one basket”. To me, this has always seemed to be a no-brainer.
Someone accused another poster of okaying abortion, but being concerned about the killing of animals. I have read all 973 posts (the last number showing on my computer screen) and the only person who mentioned abortion was me, and I was not in favour.
I presented a couple of fictional characters early on, one was a human bisexual male and the other an alien hermaphrodite, or to use the more modern term, an intersex person, however this alien intersex individual had two sexes, both fully functional, within the one body. In order to reproduce, the sexes required another intersex mate. S/he was not self-reproducing nor asexual. Somehow this got confused with fish and alligators and I was told by a poster that Asimov… had done it all before and that I should write vampire novels? DUH
Then we get people confusing consenting homosexual adults with those who practise bestiality and pedophilia. An oldie but a goodie, that one. Jeesh, almighty.
Anyway, Bob, how’s that red convertible…:)? And where’s our Trek story? I don’t care whether you write in a gay character or not, just as long as you bring that poor lovable beagle out of the transporter holding pattern. Promise?!
Norman @966 – Did I say Klingons? I meant Star Wars fans ;)
———————————————————————–
That’s pretty good. Did mother tell you to say that too?
Yes, Dee, I have seen. So CP has taken Laura Vandervoort out on a date. We don’t know any more than that. She’s pretty – probably met her on the set of This Mean War. She is from Toronto, Canada and has degrees in English and Psychology. Chris has a degree in English but he has an interest in psychology as well. His mother (once actress) is now a psychotherpist and his sister is a clinical psychologist. It appears that this Laura and he may share some interests, but whether they become a major item, well – who knows? I doubt they know themselves at this point.
More Canadians! Ballzy Harry should be pleased. BTW, please stop turning down Erica Durance, Harry. It is not good for your soul. Just give it a chance. It’s meant to be. It’s destiny.
985. keachick – February 1, 2011
Beagle survived in Novelization!
987.
So! Captain Kirk is banging Supergirl! Well, a guy could do worse! :>)
985: “For people who mock, I said that having a percentage of the population born gay/lesbian is but ONE method of bringing about a natural control of a population. Nature generally does not ‘put all her eggs in one basket’. To me, this has always seemed to be a no-brainer.”
There’s a problem with that theory, however. That sounds exactly like a teleological process, and there’s no teleology in Darwinian mechanisms.
“Then we get people confusing consenting homosexual adults with those who practise bestiality and pedophilia. An oldie but a goodie, that one. Jeesh, almighty.”
Hehehe. You have no idea what your leaders have in store for you. This, from one of the so-called “leading ethicists” of our time, over at Princeton U.
http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/2001—-.htm
You are like fish in a bucket.
And perhaps it is better not to divide the world between the categories that you are taught, between left and right, between gay and straight, between liberal and conservative. Perhaps a better line of demarcation would be between human beings and those who are just-doing-their-jobs:
http://www.news1130.com/news/national/article/176868–sled-dog-massacre-leaves-man-with-post-traumatic-stress-disorder-police-probe
Sometimes human beings are enough to make you want to upgrade your membership to something much better.
# 987- HAHAHAHAHA! … Keachick you always said! … I love it! … And boborci answers your questions … this is great! … I am solemnly ignored! … LOL … okay but thank God I have great self esteem! … but I just keep complaining that they do not unleash “soon” node Star Trek 2012! … I deserve it! hahahahah!
# 989- Harry Ballz
Yes, “Captain Kirk and Supergirl” … this could cause problems for the Trek Universe? … this would be a great topic … or not? :-) :-)
Because I always bring very serious issues here …. LOL and + LOL!!!!
Cricketts, I say! I hear cricketts!!
zzzzzzzzzzzzz………….
I’ll check back in another week or two…….
Not even on topic I know….. but there hasn’t been a new thread in some time…..I’d just like to share with someone that it’s damn cold here in Texas. 9 degrees tonight. That’s unusual for us. Quite a reception for the Super-Bowl attendees I know.
Sad tht this topic is almost at 1000 posts. I mean, come on, something about Brannon Braga???? Anthony, come quick, we need fresh news about our new crew!!!!! I’d at least love to know why the new stories have become so sporadic. I love this site. I hate to see it lose “readers”.
330. Scruffy the Janitor
Problem is, Hitler wasn’t an athiest. And the Catholic church helped to prop him up.
Or an atheist! : )
MJ, we are almost at 1000 posts!!! Put us over the top, my man!
Arghhhhhhhh basta!!!
Is this 1000?
How about news on the new William Shatner & Amanda Tapping cartoon or the Star Trek Online Anniversary……..
1001: A POST ODYSSEY
#991 – “There’s a problem with that theory, however. That sounds exactly like a teleological process, and there’s no teleology in Darwinian mechanisms.”
Who says that everything necessarily works according to “Darwinian mechanisms”? So Charles Darwin had all the answers?
996: “Problem is, Hitler wasn’t an athiest. And the Catholic church helped to prop him up.”
Here’s something else that supported the Third Reich:
http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/
Now that you know, I trust you will all spend a few weeks finding out exactly how you unknowingly use and/or support the IBM products and services scattered and hidden throughout your daily lives so that you can sever all ties with that company and condemn IBM without seeming hypocritical by being one of its customers.
I think you’ll find it’s much harder to separate yourselves from IBM than the Catholic Church.
YAY! The beagle lives.
Any chance of seeing this animal? I need proof, you see…:)
So we have made it past the 1,000 post mark. As I said before, Anthony only needs to post a thread with “sex” in there and he can take off and leave us…
Bob Orci is here (Hi, and thanks). He must know stuff, tidbits about some rumoured Star Trek sequel, any Welcome to People set gossip, red convertibles, Cowboys & Aliens and heaps of other cool stuff as well. So whatya say, Bob?
1002: “Who says that everything necessarily works according to ‘Darwinian mechanisms’? So Charles Darwin had all the answers?”
Not all mechanisms in current evolutionary theory are by Darwinian natural selection, thus, Darwin did not have “all the answers,” but the other evolutionary mechanisms aren’t teleological either.
There is no teleology in evolutionary theory.
Mutation? NON teleological. Heredity? NON teleological. Symbiogenesis? NON teleological.
…And I’m back. Whoa! And it’s nearly all been said. Oh well, as you were.
Actually Laura Vandervoort could play my fictional alien character, Jasmia, a beautiful Menosian woman who becomes Jim Kirk’s love of his life…There you go! She has the right look and height (almost). Just have to make sure this time that the body paint is not some sticky ooey stuff, as Jasmia, like the rest of her race, has subtle variations in colour and pigment of skin and hair. She is a single sex being and is a female who is all about her man (or two?). She has her reasons…
Well… at least we got Bob’s company this time. I am thinking we are going to get used to these sorts of Hiatuses. I say whenever no new news arrives after 5 days, we all go to the chatroom and have live chats.
So… some 1000something posts away…
Are we going to get abrams Kirk and Spock back in line, or does the new homophobic trend continue in the sequel too?
…. though I have to admit it is quite flattering,
in a twisted sort of way,
that the jj person would go such an extreme *cough* Nuhura*cough* just because of a misguided attempt to get away from their legacy.
So… this is quite the article. 1,011 comments and counting. Man. Oh man. Oh man
“Homosapien” by Pete Shelley and the Buzzcocks
I’m the shy boy
You’re the coy boy
And you know we’re
Homosapien too
I’m the cruiser
You’re the loser
Me and you sir
Homosapien too
Homosuperior
In my interior
But from the skin out
I’m Homosapien too
And you’re Homosapien too
And I’m Homosapien like you
And we’re Homosapien too
And I think of your eyes in the dark and I see the star
And I look to the light and I might wonder right where you are
All the gods in the sky way up high see the world spinning ’round
But the sun and the moon and the stars are so far from the ground
I’m the shy boy
You’re the coy boy
And you know we’re
Homosapien too
I’m the cruiser
You’re the loser
Me and you sir
Homosapien too
Homosuperior
In my interior
But from the skin out
I’m Homosapien too
And you’re Homosapien too
And I’m Homosapien like you
And we’re Homosapien too
And the worlds built of age are a stage where we act out our lives
And the words in the script seem to fit ‘cept we have some surprise
I just want this to last or my future is past and all gone
And if this is the case then I’ll lose in life’s race from now on
Homosuperior
In my interior
But from the skin out
I’m Homosapien too
And you’re Homosapien too
And I’m Homosapien like you
And we’re Homosapien too
And I just hope and pray that the day of our love is at hand
You and I, me and you, we will be one from two, understand?
And the world is so wrong that I hope that we’ll be strong enough
For we are on our own and the only thing known is our love
I don’t wanna classify you like an animal in the zoo
But it seems good to me to know that you’re Homosapien too
I’m the shy boy
You’re the coy boy
I don’t wanna classify you like an animal in the zoo
But it seems good to me to know that you’re Homosapien too
I don’t wanna classify you like an animal in the zoo
But it seems good to me to know that you’re Homosapien too
I don’t wanna classify you like an animal in the zoo
But it seems good to me to know that you’re Homosapien too
From the Terran Empire News Service.
Disaster has happened. The I.S.S Hood,Potemkin have been heavily damaged and the i.S.S Lexington and Excalibur have been damaged in a war games exercise with the I.S.S Enterprise. Dr. Richard Daystrom with his unit M5 Computer was installed aboard the Enterprise to see how it would fare in a war games exercise. The M5 took complete control over the Enterprise and and fired full phaser and torpedoes at the Terran Fleet. Capt Kirk was able to regain control of the Enterprise when he convinced the m5 to turn control. After Capt Kirk reported to Star Fleet the Emperor of the Empire ordered the Execution of Dr. Daystrom and a full scale Investigation is now underway for any of his Conspirators. We here at the Empire news service offer our Condolences to the Family of the fallen and hope that any and all Conspirators be brought to a swift and complete Terran Justice.
Anthony what gives, man?
this site is dead.
as for this topic; who cares if someone is gay or straight?
it’s 2011, grow up everybody!
#1014. Khan was Framed!
Khan was not Framed!!!. He is Guilty of all Charges.
In the end, all the issues aside– from a purely marketing standpoint, it would be a mistake to introduce gay characters. Star Trek fans tend to be more progressive in general, and even then we have 40% of the fans against having a gay character and 14 % unsure. That tells me from a purely capitalistic standpoint, it would be smart to leave it out. Gays will watch it whether there are gay characters or not and many straight people will be turned off by it.
Capitalism usually wins out in the end of the day over social issues so we will probably not see a gay character.
Sigh. I wish Anthony felt consistency was important. I really miss this site.
1016. The Pragmatist – February 1, 2011
given that star trek is all about the future of our race and being progressive,
those 40% can’t be considered trekkies in no shape or form.
Morning eveybody! Only got 3 hours sleep, nice to see that we have reached over a thousand. No new articles I see, never mind….
This just in…………………………………………………………………………………….nothing new!
Anthony has a lot going on right now. He’ll post new articles later in the week. He’s been under a lot of stress from working hours and hours on end. He has a job in real life, apparently.
Well, it’s only appropriate that a thread running off a Brannon Braga interview runs for far too long, goes off in strange directions, and ends up with THREAD FATIGUE.
.
We’re just all being rowdy and sending a VALENTINE to AP? Ouch.
.
I’m still wondering what Sulu has ahead of him in the next film. Bob’s tweet about harmonic convergence of Sulu-writing and seeing John Cho make me really curious.
Trek seems to be losing momentum in general…sequel news is more ‘whole ot of nothin’ goin’ on’ and a week without a single update. Thats all well and good that Anthony has a real job (like the rest of us) but that doesnt mean folks are going to keep checking back if, between Anthony and Paramount, theres nothing going on. It is what it is.
Hey. At Least Bob Orci checks in with us at times. Maybe Bob can give us a tid bit.
@1023. I disagree. Go over to Trekweb.com — they have published 12 articles with some connection to trek or scifi at least over the past 9 days when Anthony has been AWOL again. This is frankly getting irritating — I am sure that there would be a line of volunteers waiting to take this site over if Anthony is burnt out. Better he be honest with us and turn it over to others then continue with this piss-poor catch-is-catch approach to providing us Trek info.
THIS IS JUST NOT WORKING FOLKS !!!!!
@1021. Then he realy should recuse himself from the website and turn it over to others who do have the time. Sometimes you have to know when it is time to go. He started it and will always be the creater, but it needs daily juice to be credible. If it wasn’t for the boards I’b be long gone by now. This is just unnacceptable.
3
I happen to find Brannon Braga an excellent writer, he did some great episodes of Star Trek, co wrote one of the best Star Trek movies, First Contact.
Yes he might have been there too long, but he was one of my favourite writers.
And I know I will be penalised for saying this but I think he’s better than the current regime. That not to say the new regime is bad but Brannon Braga has wrote better and good strong plots where I believe the weak point on Star Trek XI was that it had a wafer thin plot which the character moments made up for.
Loving the Terran Empire News feed.
@951. Nufan
Don’t hold your breath.
I was already doing that here. It’s time to move on.
Hey have Bob take over the board, he aint got nothing to do right now! ;]
This site has officially flatlined———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–like my mother—————————————!!!
1018: You say that 40% of those who are against having a gay character in the next film are not true fans. That has nothing to do with my point. My point was simply to say that marketing and capitalistic forces will determine whether there is an openly gay character or not. If 40 % of Trekkies are not in favor, probably a higher % of the general public are not in favor.
We have seen how Star Trek can not survive if it only relies on Trek fans in general— that’s why the newest movie was such a success– it brought in a bigger audience.
Alienate the 40% of fans who are against homosexuality and 40+ % of the general population also against it, I don’t think you’ll have a very successful movie.
And on this point, gay or straight, we should pragmatically all agree — even if we hate it’s implication and see it as a sad state of things.
Isn’t this thread getting to a bit like the end of world now?
You have to marvel at how we’re all still here!
Yep, sure is like the end of the world.
Still hoping that this site will turn around?
Mother says that she seriously doubts it though…
R.I.P trekmovie.com…
1032. The Pragmatist – February 2, 2011
If Gene agreed with you about the general audience, ST would not exist in the first place and we would have none of its legacy now.
Didn’t we have his letter posted on this site, not so long ago, about this very matter? How very in agreement were we back ten.
But it seems like it was all bark no bite, as usual.
And no, a casual couch potato viewer and a trekkie are not the same thing.
Just give the site to Bob whenever Anthony is on hiatus. I’m sure he and Alex can fill those weekly updates with news of their new projects. Haha.
1032. But is this site an accurate reflection of the general audience? Are we even a reflection of the multitude of fans?
From the Terran Empire News Service.
A Comment on History. It was in 1945 that the U.S Droped 4 Atom Bombs on Germany to bring an End to Hitler. 3 more were droped on Japan that brought an end to World War 2 and as some Historians say. A Real Start to the Great Terran Empire. It was Rosevelt that said that all Humans no matter the race or color would form the Greatest Empire. Also. It was John F Kennedy that said shortly after that the U.S Would be on the Moon by the last 1960s that the Humans would one day forge a vast Empire in Space. History has shown that we Humans can overcome anything and we have. The greatest Empire that not only Earth but the Universe it self is alive and well. Long Live the Terran Empire.
From the Terran Empire News Service.
The Empire has sent a fleet of Ships into Tholian Space after they destroyed the I.S.S Defiant. 15 Ships Lead by Capt Kirk of the Enterprise went in and Destroyed 4 outpost and destroyed 15 Tholian Ships including 4 of there bases. The Empire has sent word to the Tholians that any further action would be an all out war with the Empire. In the fighting only minor damage was done to the fleet of Terran Ships.
From the Terran Empire News Service.
Update.
The I.S.S Enterprise has Destroyed a main Colony World of the Tholians. It was reported that over 5 Million Tholians were killed. In a message sent to the Tholians the Empire stated that there home world would be destroyed if any more aggression is taken against the Empire. The Tholians have replied that they will comply.
From the Terran Empire News Service.
In a Final Report on Dr. Richard Daystorm on the M5 Incident the Empire has Concluded that Dr. Daystorm and his aides acted alone. Vulcan Interagator Sarak stated in his report. We here at the Empire news service want to thank Sarek for his hard work and dedacation for getting to the bottom of this Act of Terror against the Empire Fleet.
Breaking news from the Dpt of Information at the Terran Empire News Service.
The I.S.S Enterprise and the I.S.S Constalation have captured a device known as the Doomsday Machine. Both Ships were Damaged in the fight but they were able to uses a couple of Freighters and one Passenger ship from as yet an unknown Species and deactivate the Machine by raming them with there Engines set on overload. The Empire is dispatching more ships to the sector to Investage further and see if the Machine can be controlled by the Empire. More as it becomes available.
From the Office of Information at the Terran Empire news Service
This is Breaking news. The Dooms day machine has been Destroyed. The I.S.S Enterprise and the Constalation and Defiant were trasnporting the Machine to the Reigal Worlds when the Machine started to reactavate. The Enterprise took another Passenger Ship and used it to once again ram the machine and the Machine self destructed.
From the Terran Empire news room.
We have an update. It appears that Commodore Decker who against orders tried to make the machine reactivate so he could control it. The Emperor Ordered his Immediate Exucution which was carried out by Capt James Kirk.
More on this as we get Information.
@ commodore mike,
Is this supposed to be funny? I dig dorky humor but god damn.
Ahhh the Terran Empire newsfeed. The only place I get my news. Keep it coming Commodore. You’ll be able to copy and past eventually and have yourself a novel.
uhhhh….I mean paste.
Well since it seems no topic is off topic, Im reading the script Alien Harvest. Pretty interesting stuff for anyone whos a fan of the Alien series. I know that Scott isnt exactly making an Alien Prequel anymore. But this might have made an interesting movie.
#1045 THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE EMPIRE UNIVERSE. If you don’t like it then don’t read it.
Star Trek Updates: Why not?
The ever-busy Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci have added another project to their schedule; they will be producers of a big screen adaptation of Orson Scott Card‘s novel Ender’s Game.
Orci tweeted about the project this weekend. “Ender’s Game!” said the Twitter entry. “Us (K/O), Oddlot and Gavin Hood taking his amazing script to the town! Who wants some?”
Ender’s Game is the story of Andrew “Ender” Wiggins, a boy chosen to attend Battle School, will he is to be trained to be a soldier to help defend the Earth against another invasion by the alien insectioid Formics (also known as the “Buggers”).
#1050 Cool! But the only Card book Ive read is the non-fiction “How to write Science Fiction & Fantasy.” Will have to pick this one up sometime.
Trekmovie and Trekweb should merge and form one mega Trek site and let Gustavo at Trekweb run it.
Here’s something new – a Star Trek music video from meekakitty:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ryo-GtOgi7s
and to stay on topic, perhaps the guy in blue with the glasses is gay ;)
Any news Anthony posts will be old news because the other Trek sites would have posted it. Readership for this site will dwindle because they will think its been abandoned.
Keep the Terran News Feed coming, Commodore Mike!
It’s the best thing we’ve had to read on this site in a week!
Those are some good stories you’ve got there. I’d love to see a new series set in the Terran Empire during the TOS time frame. Your posts shows that there’s a goldmine of stories to tell!
It’s time to play the music
It’s time to light the lights
It’s time to meet the Muppets
on the Muppet show tonight….
Update: Geordi is a little too taken with meekakitty’s new video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdHmoOx9aIw
caution: some may perceive a degree of tokenism at the very end :O
OMG!
I come back here after a week and no new updates!?
I can’t believe you guys are still hanging around and leaving comments on a dead thread, quite sad really…
I’ve took this site from my faves as it’s pointless to keep and too slow with any new news.
RIP trekmovie.com…
Can anyone recommend a decent Trek news site, besides Trekweb? I get so many “Java Script Error”s when I log on to it, it’s not even worth going there.
Thanks.
I just found this site and bookmarked it, it’s pretty good:
http://www.superherohype.com/
Why do we always come here?
I’ll guess we’ll never know
It’s like a kind of torture
To have to watch the show
“Alienate the 40% of fans who are against homosexuality and 40+ % of the general population also against it, I don’t think you’ll have a very successful movie.”
If 40% of the trekkies spread the word that they don’t like the movie – then all the world will come rushing into the theaters ;)
I just have one thing to say…
boborci hear this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZnEBT1pAtM
So what is the latest news from the Star Trek world?
It is Paramount, JJ Abrams and others who are responsible for there being no news of real import. For me, the most important thing right now is what is happening about the next Star Trek film sequel.
From theTerran Empire News Service.
It has been reported that the Tribble Infestation on Space Station K7 has been Cleaned up. One Sirano Jones a Space cargo pilot was forced to clean up the Station after I.S.S Enterprise Capt found some of these Tribbles on his ship. Capt Jones was Spared after Chief Engeneer Scott of the I.S.S Enterprise realised that the Klingons hated and vice versa each other. It was Mr. Scott and Jones who came up with the Idea to realise these Tribbles on the Klingons Ship and on any Planet that the Klingons were trying to Colonise. Also it was reported that some Tribbles found there way to the Klingon Homeworld.
From the Dpt of Information at the Terran Empire News Service.
An Astroid which the Inhabitans call Yolanda was Destroyed last week after it was learned that it was on a collision course with a Terran Controlled Planet. Capt James T Kirk of the I.S.S Enterprise was forced to Destroy the Astroid when while leading a landing party that was attacted by something called the Oricle. It is said that all of the Inhabitants were killed but millions of Terrans were saved. We here at the News Service want to thank Capt Kirk for his service to the Empire.
Correction from the Empire News Service. We have learned that the Astroid was called Yonada. The Writer of the Story was Asked for his Agoniser and now offers his Apologiese. In other news.
On this date. In 1965 then presdent John F Kennedy sent in the U.S Marines into what was left of Cuba after he had ordered 3 Nuclear Weapons to strike Havanna. The Marines were sent to to Capture any of Cubas forces and help any of there Citizens. The Total Death toll from Nuclear Blast was set at just 150,000.
In January 10th of 2011 Auburen Won the National Championship by by beating Oregon 50 to 10.
August 25th of 2035 South Korea launched 5 Nuclear Warheads at the North. The North which had been trying to forge a new peace Treaty with the South did not respond to the attack with any Nuclear Weapons as what they had been saying was only for show and in fact they had none. The South Took over the North and a 50 year Dictatorship Reigned till the new Empire was formed.
December 23 2053. The First Emperor of the Terran Empire was Born.
On this date in 1920. The League of Empire Nations held it’s first meeting.
On this date. The first United Empire Nations held it’s first meeting.
On this date. Marshall Frank James. Brother to U.S Marshall Jesse James was Born. As everyone knows The James Brothers and there Gang were U.S Marshalls. They were Vilolent. But they got the job done.
In 2035 a Riot eroptued in England after King William was Shot. He did survive the Shooting. Though it is believed that his wife was the one who shot him there was never any proof. 43 People died durring the Riot.
In honor of the Norman Conquest, I am posting # 1066.
NEWMAN! Didn’t hit it. Damn you Commodore Mike and your frequent posts!
#1070. You’re Agoniser. You’re agoniser Please!
#1071 (The year, of course, when the last Byzantine-controlled city in southern Italy, Bari, was captured by Robert Guiscard.)
He’s not the Messiah. He’s a very naughty boy!
@ Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire
Learn to spell you thicko !!!
Jesus H Christ, we’re nearly at 1100 !!!
Oh my. Hey, follow me on twitter if you’re bored. @chrisdoohan
Where is Norman Bates when we need him? This thread is getting boring without him and his mother!
Chris Doohan, OUR SAVIOUR !!!
Hey Chris. I am not yet a twit. Tweeter? One who tweets? You should post your tweets online ala Steve Martin. Or I should get a twitter account, I guess.
MLH Time for you to pay a visit to the Agoniser Booth.
@Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO !!!
PLEEEEEASE NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO !!!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHH !!!
1063.
Well, there’s 43 seconds of my life I’ll never get back!
@ #1021, Red Dead Ryan
No problem. We appreciate that Anthony has a real life, with real commitments. Actually, I was hoping that he was on a nice tropical vacation, relaxing. He’s earned it, big time.
What’s perplexing is the total lack of any updates or news items. We used to get Sci-Fi Thursday and Sci-Fi Sunday updates from the likes of Rosario T. Calabria or some other unnamed “trekmovie.com staff”. Now nothing.
We could be discussing the new Alien movie going in a new direction, or the naming of the next Superman. Instead we get this circle j**k. No wonder people are looking for other options. I know enough about the web business to know that less or declining “hits” is a bad thing.
1035: IVA:
Trust me Iva, I am a true Star Trek fan. I sat glued to my tv every time it came on, had a pretty impressive collection of memorabilia for an 18 year old, been to several conventions, show up early to every movie, have read the books for years, I even used to write my own fan fiction.
If you are saying I am not a true fan simply because I don’t agree with absolutely every philosophical point of Gene Roddenberry, I think you have a skewed understanding of what a fan is.
To Bob Orci:
Sorry to see that your brother-in-law, Brandon Routh, will not be getting another chance to play Superman. I thought he was superb in the role. And, don’t forget, I AM the pickiest SOB on the planet!
This site is crazy… Anthony deserves a break but maybe put an OUT OF OFFICE notice up..
@1085. Adam Shepherdson
Well put, I’ll bet the sites advertisers will move on soon?
Harry. You Picky. Who would have Guessed.
Right, I’m off, I’ll check back in a week or two instead of my three times a day – hopefully there will be some new updates by then?
I’m hoping this thread will not reach 2000?
Commodore Mike, you’re right! I’m a regular pussycat!
Somebody rub my belly! I SAID SOMEBODY RUB MY BELLY! NOW!!!
Are we to assume that all Klingons love opera?
Isn’t that stereotyping? Isn’t stereotyping when you type on two different keyboards at the same time?
@ Harry Ballz
I’ll make you lose 3 seconds now
1
2
3
Pffft
Attaboy, Gary! :>)
So what’s the deal with this website lately? Did someone finally get a real job?
Has this reached 1100 yet? Yaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwnnnn…
Ahhhhhh…..
The old, old adage:
“No news is……………….no news”
Deep.
Anyone fancy a shag?
With my mother?
I won’t watch…
Almost there…
1100 !!!
1101…
1102…
1103…
So does post # 1701 win some kind of prize? :-P
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…………………….
Anthony should let the fans of this site know what he is going to do with the site if he did get a job with longer hours and he can’t multitask witth the site anymore. I think that is rude. Will he sell it? Let someone else run it? Or get rid of it? I don’t think this site will get many readers when the new news he posts will be old because he takes off for weeks at a time.
@1104. Wes
Lets go for it !!!
Maybe the prize will be a new post by this site?
HUGH JACKMAN BULKS UP FOR WOLVERINE
Director Darren Aronofsky reckons he looked too lanky in the last film
Hugh Jackman seems very excited about the next Wolverine movie. Speaking to Hero Complex, he enthuses, “I’m really, really pumped about it. I feel like all the planets are finally aligned to make a great movie,” before revealing that he’s been working out for the new film. He currently reckons he‘s around 210 pounds as opposed to the 190 pounds he was filming the last movie.
“I don’t know how much I want to give away about it, but [director] Darren [Aronofsky] said with the last one, ‘Hey you looked great, but you’re so tall that in those long shots you looked kind of like Clint Eastwood, and that’s not Wolverine.’ He said that Wolverine, in the comics, is powerful, stocky, you know, he’s short and thick. So he said, ‘I want you to go there, get bigger.’”
Of the scripts, he says, “We finally have the character and with this mythology. Ever since X-Men, when I was kind of hanging around and reading all these comics, because I was cast before I ever read any X-Men comics, so I was trying to get my hands on everything. I remember saying to [producer] Lauren Shuler Donner, ‘Lauren, I don’t know about you, but I’ve seen this Japanese story, and I think it’s so good. It’s just genius, it’s brilliant.’ And we kind of always talked about it from there on. I sort of even wanted to do that in the third X-Men movie at first, but we thought, no, we really need to establish who he is at first, and we did that with X-Men Origins: Wolverine. And now this is sort of the cherry on top, to finally do it and have Darren Aronofsky direct it. I love his gung-ho attitude toward it and great vision. Straight off, it’s not a sequel, it’s a stand-alone, and I think we’re going to make one that people will describe as the best of the bunch.
“Chris McQuarrie has done a script that is just phenomenal. I read a story once that said that he wrote The Usual Suspects in 15 days, and with this one he said to me, ‘I just knew what I wanted, and it came out real easy.’ And he’s done an unbelievable job with it. I’m as excited as anybody to see what we come up with. I know we’re going to be met with huge expectations. The expectations will be high, but he’s one of the great filmmakers out there. I’m beyond thrilled.”
This thread has been re–f%#$ing–diculous.
well it has been up on the main page for a good solid 3 weeks it seems, so where the hell is everyone I mean did they just go on vacation?
SOMETHING TO PASS THE TIME…
85 Galactic Facts About . . .
Star Trek
1.Lieutenant Uhura’s name means “freedom” in Swahili.g
2.Martin Luther King Jr. talked Nichelle Nichols (Lt. Uhura) out of leaving Star Trek: The Original Series (TOS).l
3.The popular line “Beam me up, Scotty,” was never said exactly in this way in the Star Trek series or film.d
4.An alternate juror for the 1996 Whitewater trial wore a Star Trek: The Next Generation (TNG) uniform with a phaser and tricorder during the trial. She was later dismissed for talking to a journalist.f
5.Star Trek: TNG character Geordi La Forge was named after George La Forge, a devoted fan of the original Star Trek series. George La Forge had muscular dystrophy and died in 1975.j
Despite Lucille Ball’s attempt to save the series, Star Trek was cancelled after three seasons
6.Lucille Ball, from I Love Lucy and head of Star Trek’s parent company Desilu Productions, single handedly kept Star Trek: TOS from cancellation during the first season. The series was finally canceled in its third season, after 79 episodes. It then gained immense popularity in syndication.l
7.The original Star Trek series was originally marketed as “Wagon Train to the Stars,” after the popular 1957 western, Wagon Train.l
8.Star Trek: TOS aired from September 8, 1966, to September 2, 1969. The show was a way for its creator Eugene Wesley “Gene” Roddenbery (1921-1991) to comment on contemporary issues through the guise of science fiction.d
9.Scientists from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory wore “Spock ears” while monitoring the Mariner V on its October 1967 fly-by of Venus.d
10.Star Trek: TNG had the highest ratings of any Star Trek series.d
11.The popular 2009 Star Trek (“Reboot”) movie is the eleventh film in the Star Trek franchise. The film has earned high critical praise and has grossed more revenue than all previous Star Trek films.i
12.The Star Trek franchise includes six series: The Original Series, The Animated Series, The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and Enterprise, totaling 726 episodes.d
13.Gene Roddenberry initially cast girlfriend (and later wife) Majel Barrett as Captain Pike’s “Number One” (first officer) in the series first pilot. NBC executives, however, demanded the character be cut because they said audience members could not relate to such a powerful woman character.k
NBC executives initially wanted to remove Spock from Star Trek due to his “satanic” appearance
14.Initially, NBC asked Gene Roddenberry to get rid of the “guy with the pointy ears” partly because they were worried about his “satanic” appearance. Luckily, Roddenberry refused to cut Spock.o
15.Most male Vulcan names begin with “S” and most females’ names with a “T” followed by an apostrophe.d
16.Several famous actors and actresses have made guest appearances in Star Trek films and episodes, including Kim Cattrall, Kirstie Alley, Tom Bergeron, Jason Alexander, King Abdullah II of Jordan, Kelsey Grammer, Christopher Plummer, The Rock, Iman, Lee Meriwether, Joan Collins, Mick Fleetwood, Stephen Hawking, Ashley Judd, Famke Janssen, Mae Jemison, and Tom Morello.b
17.The BBC banned a TNG first-season episode titled “Conspiracy” because of the graphic phaser death of Star Fleet Inspector Dexter Remmick, who was a host to a disgusting “mother creature.” The BBC also did not air a 1990 TNG episode titled “High Ground” due to Data’s passing remark that Ireland would be reunified as a result of successful terrorist activities in 2024. BBC Two finally aired the episode in 2007.c
18.During the first season of TNG, Patrick Stewart had a sign over his door that read: “Beware of Unknown Shakespearean Actor.”j
19.DeForest Kelly (1920-1999) was the first of the three original members to appear on TNG. He was also the first original cast member of TOS to pass away.j
20.The Borg were initially conceptualized as being insects but took on their ultimate form due to budget restraints. The hive motif, however, remained.h
21.In the Star Trek universe, Zefram Cochrane developed faster-than-light warp drive around 2061 and conducted his test flight to Steppenwolf’s Magic Carpet Ride.d
22.On impulse drive, it would take 400,000 years for the Enterprise to cross the galaxy.d
23.Warp engines work by allowing particles of matter and antimatter to commingle in a reaction chamber regulated by a dilithium crystal. When the particles interact, they destroy each other, giving off enough energy to allow the ship to warp into space.g
24.The Enterprise usually can operate safety from warp drive 1 to 9.2. Traveling at warp 10, as seen in Star Trek: Voyager, mutates humans into big salamander creatures. However, in the final episode of the preceding series TNG, “All Good Things,” Federation starships traveled at warp 13.g
Uniform colors indicate different departments or divisions
25.In TOS, uniform colors indicated the wearer’s role on the Enterprise. Gold uniforms indicated the wearer was on a command track. Blue meant the sciences, including medicine. Red indicated support services, such as communications, engineering, or security.g
26.“Red-shirting” became a Star Trek slang word for an extra who was killed to demonstrate the danger the main characters were in. The extra almost always wore a red uniform.b In tribute to the original series’ “red-shirting,” red-shirted Chief Engineer Olsen in Star Trek (2009) meets his death during an orbital sky dive onto a drilling platform while Kirk and Sulu survive.m
27.The star dates Kirk mentions in his captain’s log each week in TOS are not based on our current Gregorian calendar dates. TOS star dates were largely arbitrary and were created just to let the audiences know the show took place in the future. Later Star Treks attempted to be more consistent with star dates.g
28.The episode titled “Spock’s Brain” ranks as one of the worst TOS episodes due to clichés and an implausible plot. The phrase “Spock’s Brain” has become a cultural term that refers to an unintentionally humorous television episode.d
29.The Enterprise in TOS is 953.7 feet long, which is more than the length of three football fields. The Enterprise-D in TNG is more than twice the length of Kirk’s ship at 2,103 feet. That’s as big as the Paramount Studio lot in Hollywood.d
30.The only official intoxicant served in TNG’s Ten-Forward is Synthenol, an artificial booze that loses its inebriating effects the moment a crew member leaves the bar.j
31.Data’s cat Spot was initially a long-haired male but became a short-haired female later in the series. Data didn’t seem to notice.j
32.Although Roddenberry was actively involved in the Star Trek animated series’ conception and production, he did not consider them to be “canon” or part of the established history for the characters he created.l
33.Vulcans were once an extremely violent and emotional people until Surak developed a new philosophy of logic, which spawned the Vulcan Time of Awakening. Those opposed to Vulcan logic left the planet and founded colonies elsewhere, most notably the Romulan Star Empire.h
34.Vulcans were one of the first to develop warp drive, and they helped humans navigate the perils of warp travel. The official contact between Vulcans and humans occurred on April 5, 2063, when a Vulcan survey ship detected the warp flight of Captain Zefram Cochrane’s Phoenix.h
35.Vulcan’s have teeth that humans don’t have, such as anterior tricuspids. Their heart is where a human’s liver would normally be and beats several hundred times a minute. They have no appendix.o
36.Vulcans have inner eyelids that protect their eyes from the intensity of the Vulcan sun. They can also survive several days without water, perhaps because they evolved on a hot, dry planet.o
37.The Vulcan brain has been described as “a puzzle wrapped in an enigma, housed inside a cranium.”d
38.Even though they’d prefer not to mate, Vulcans are compelled to reproduce by a ritual called Pon Farr. Once every seven years, they are consumed by Plak-tow, or blood fever, in which they become savage and may even fight to the death.d
39.Besides the Trill, Vulcans are the only other known humanoid in the Star Trek universe who are able to transfer one individual’s consciousness into another’s (known as the “mind meld”).d
Most Vulcans are strict vegetarians and cannot digest meat
40.Most Vulcans are vegetarians and do not touch food with their hands unless they are wearing special gloves.d
41.In an alternate reality established in the 2009 Star Trek film, Vulcan was destroyed by the Romulan Nero in 2258.m
42.When Spock sacrificed his own life to save the Enterprise from destruction at Kahn’s hand in the film The Wrath of Khan, Kirk could only say, “Of all the souls I have encountered in my travels, his was the most . . . human.”k
43.Dr. McCoy’s nickname “Bones” seems to come from two sources. First, it may have derived from the old-fashion colloquialism “sawbones” for a doctor.b In Star Trek (2009), Kirk calls McCoy “Bones” after McCoy reveals his divorce left him just his “bones.”m
44.The Enterprise was initially a French sailing ship in 1671. A later ship was captured by the British royal navy in 1705 and renamed HMS Enterprise. The first Earth Starfleet vessel, commissioned Enterprise NX-01, launched in 2151 under the command of Captain Jonathan Archer (of the Star Trek: Enterprise series).h
45.Jeri Ryan, the actress who played Seven of Nine in Voyager turned down the role four times.n
46.James Doohan (Scotty) did not have a right middle finger. He lost it during WWII.k
47.Actress Majel Barrett Roddenberry is the only actor to be in all Star Trek incarnations, including the animated series and films.b Before her death in December 2008, she completed the voice of the computer in Star Trek (2009).m
48.Star Trek (2009) is the first time Uhura has been given a name on screen, “Nyota,” though she is referred to as Nyota in the DC comics’ “Who’s Who in Star Trek.”m
49.Leonard Nimoy created the famous Spock neck pinch during the episode “The Enemy Within” when Spock was supposed to hit the evil Kirk over the head with the butt of a phaser. Nimoy wanted something more interesting and came up with an answer from within Spock’s hand-orientated background.k
50.At the same time the Star Trek series was beginning to create a loyal following, the Monkees were exploding onto TV sets. Consequently, Roddenberry created the character of Pavel Andreievich Chekhov as a close approximation of the Monkees’ lead singer, Davy Jones—with a Russian accent.d
51.Spock was originally conceived as a red-skinned alien with a plate in the middle of his stomach. He didn’t eat or drink but fed upon any form of energy that struck his stomach plate.o
In response to the advent of color TV, Star Trek producers designed a set bursting with colors
52.An October 1967 TV Guide ad by RCA cited Star Trek: TOS as the reason to buy a color TV.d
53.Geordie La Forge’s VISOR (Visual Instrument and Sensory Organ Replacement) was actually based on a hair clip. LaVar Burton describes wearing the VISOR as a “living hell” as it gave him headaches and reduced his vision.a
54.The sign Spock makes for “Live long and prosper” is actually half of what is commonly done by the Cohanim Jewish priests when they bless the congregation. Both Nimoy and Shatner are from Jewish descent, and both are mentioned in Adam Sandler’s Hanukkah song.e
55.Nimoy and Shatner are the only two actors to appear in every episode of the original Star Trek series.d
56.DeForest Kelley (Dr. McCoy) was originally offered the role of Spock.d
57.The U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701 from the original series has a crew complement of 430 men and women. The Enterprise NCC 1701-D from TNG has a crew complement of 1,012 men, women, and children, reflecting a more family-friendly and less warlike atmosphere than TOS.d
58.Divorce Klingon style means slapping your spouse, reciting the words “N’Gos tlhogh cha!” (our marriage is done) and spitting in your spouse’s face.d
59.In the Klingon creation myth, Adam and Eve destroyed their gods and “turned the heaven into ashes.”d
60.Although Voyager was initially allotted only two shuttlecrafts, over the course of seven years, they went through dozens.n
61.Despite Picard’s British accent, he was born in France where his family owned a vineyard.j
62.Riker was born in Valdez, Alaska, and his mother died when he was two years old. His father was a civilian strategist who worked for Starfleet and essentially left Will on his own when he was 15 years old.h
63.Klingons prefer to eat food that’s still alive. A favorite Klingon meal is gagh, a slimy serpent-worm dish, followed by warm blood wine.d
64.A Romulan Warbird is nearly twice the length of the Enterprise in TNG and is powered by “an artificial quantum singularity” or a black hole.d
65.Captain Archer from Enterprise owns a dog named Porthos, a character in the novel The Three Musketeers by Alexandre Dumas. His litter mates were named after the two other Musketeers.d
William Shatner strove to create Captain Kirk as the paragon athlete and intellectual of his time
66.Captain Kirk was born on Earth in Iowa. He is paradox in many ways—for example, he depends on technology but likes resolving conflict with a hands-on approach, and he deplores humankind’s violence but has a distrust of apparent peace. Additionally, although he has a reputation as a lady’s man, no woman has come between him and his career—or his ship.h
67.Spock was the first Vulcan to enlist in Starfleet. His father did not speak to him for 18 years because he opted to join Starfleet rather than attend the Vulcan Science Academy.g
68.Spock’s fiancée, T’Pring, spurned him at the altar in favor of a more traditional Vulcan.g
69.The Enterprise’s “Jeffries Tubes” (small corridors or tunnels that provide access to critical starship systems) were named after Matt Jeffries, the TOS art director, who designed the original starship Enterprise.d
70.Art Director Matt Jeffries (1921-2003) was a bomber pilot during WWII and based the Enterprise’s identifying letters “NCC” on twentieth-century aircraft registration codes. For example, the “N” represents an aircraft registered in the United States, and the first “C” represents a civil aircraft. Jeffries added a second “C” because he thought it “looked neat.” In the Star Trek universe, NCC stands for Naval Construct Contract and USS stands for United Space Ship (not United States Ship).g
71.Randy Pausch—Carnegie Mellon computer science professor, author of the “Last Lecture,” and devoted Star Trek fan—appeared in the 2009 movie Star Trek. He died on July 25, 2008, of pancreatic cancer.m
72.Star Trek (2009) director J.J. Abrams glued Zachary Quinto’s (Spock’s) fingers together so he could perfect the Vulcan salute.m
73.Star Trek 2009 is dedicated to Gene Roddenberry and his wife Majel Barrett.m
74.According to Spock’s mother, Amanda, humans cannot pronounce Spock’s full name. It is written as “S’chn-T Gai Spock, son of S’chn-T gai Sarek (of Skon and Solkar) of Vulcan.d
75.Shatner’s first wife left him after Star Trek: The Original Series was canceled.k
76.Shatner’s favorite episode is “The Devil in the Dark” because he says it contains all the elements that made Star Trek successful: intelligence and excitement.k
77.Captain Kirk’s dramatic pauses in speech have been called “The Shatnerian.”d
78.Roddenberry said Star Trek was influenced by A.E. van Vogt’s novel The Voyage of the Space Beagle, Eric Frank Russell’s Marathon series, Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels, C. S. Forester’s Horatio Hornblower, and the film The Forbidden Planet.l
79.The original Star Trek concept included Captain April of the S.S. Yorktown, who later was reconceptualized as Captain Christopher Pike during the first pilot. After the first pilot was canceled, Captain Kirk replaced Pike.l
80.Hikaru Sulu was initially cast as the ship’s physicist before being cast as helmsman for the rest of the series.d
81.The number 47 seems to make recurrent appearances in Star Trek starting with the TNG. Apparently writer Joe Menosky, who attended Pomona College, heard that all numbers are equal to 47.d
82.Ferengi, the name of an alien race, is the Persian word for “foreigner.”o
83.In the Voyager episode “Deadlock,” the doctor has to deliver a baby of a human mother and Ktarian father. The baby has spiky ridges on its forehead arranged in such a way that it would have lacerated the mother’s uterus and vagina if the doctor had not been able to manage the delivery by transporter beam.n
84.Writers considered several other titles before deciding on Star Trek: The Next Generation, including Star Trek: Future Trek, Star Trek: Enterprise VII, and Star Trek: A New Generation.j
85.Fans of Star Trek have been called “Trekologists,” “Treksters,” “Trekkies,” and “Trekkers.” Some Star Trek fans prefer to be called “Trekkers” rather than “Trekkies,” though there is considerable debate about what the differences are between the terms.d
References
a “Auditioning for Geordi.” BBC.co. Accessed: July 27, 2009.
b Ball, Sarah. “Famous Life Forms on Star Trek.” Newsweek.com. Accessed: July 27, 2009.
c Caldwell, Johnny. “Star Trek Predicts a United Ireland.” BBC.com. April 14, 2007. Accessed: November 22, 2009.
d Erdmann, Terry J. and Paula M. Block. 2008. Star Trek 101: A Practical Guide to Who, What, Where, and Why. New York, NY: Pocket Books.
e Goldstein, David B. 2008. Jacob’s Legacy: A Genetic View of Jewish History. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
f “Judge Beams ‘Trekkie’ Juror from Whitewater Case.” CNN.com. March 14, 1996. Accessed: July 27, 2009.
g Okuda, Michael and Denise Okuda. 1993. Star Trek Chronology: The History of the Future. New York, NY: Pocket Books.
h —-. 1999. The Star Trek Encyclopedia.New York, NY: Pocket Books.
i Pascale, Anthony. “Star Trek Passes TMP to Become Most Attended Film in Franchise (Domestically).” TrekMovie.com. June 20, 2009. Accessed: July 28, 2009.
j Reeves-Stevens, Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens. 1997. The Continuing Mission: A Tenth Anniversary Tribute. New York, NY: Pocket Books.
k Shatner, William with Chris Kreski. 1993. Star Trek Memories. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers, Inc.
l Solow, Herbert F. and Robert H. Justman. 1996. Inside Star Trek: The Real Story. New York, NY: Pocket Books.
m “Star Trek (2009).” IMDB.com Accessed: July 28, 2009.
n “Star Trek: Voyager.” IMDB.com Accessed: July 28, 2009.
o Westmore, Michael, and et. al. 2000. Star Trek: Aliens and Artifacts. New York, NY: Pocket Books.
Cassini Sends Back Postcards of Saturn’s Moons
ScienceDaily (Feb. 2, 2011) — On Jan. 31, 2011, NASA’s Cassini spacecraft passed by several of Saturn’s intriguing moons, snapping images along the way. Cassini passed within about 60,000 kilometers (37,282 miles) of Enceladus and 28,000 kilometers (17,398 miles) of Helene. It also caught a glimpse of Mimas in front of Saturn’s rings. In one of the images, Cassini is looking at the famous jets erupting from the south polar terrain of Enceladus.
To see raw images, go to http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/ and click on “Search Images.”
The Cassini-Huygens mission is a cooperative project of NASA, the European Space Agency and the Italian Space Agency. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a division of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, manages the Cassini-Huygens mission for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate, Washington. The Cassini orbiter and its two onboard cameras were designed, developed and assembled at JPL. The imaging team is based at the Space Science Institute in Boulder, Colo.
For more information about the Cassini-Huygens mission, visit http://www.nasa.gov/cassini and http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov.
NASA Finds Earth-Size Planet Candidates in Habitable Zone, Six Planet System
ScienceDaily (Feb. 2, 2011) — NASA’s Kepler mission has discovered its first Earth-size planet candidates and its first candidates in the habitable zone, a region where liquid water could exist on a planet’s surface. Five of the potential planets are near Earth-size and orbit in the habitable zone of smaller, cooler stars than our sun.
Candidates require follow-up observations to verify they are actual planets. Kepler also found six confirmed planets orbiting a sun-like star, Kepler-11. This is the largest group of transiting planets orbiting a single star yet discovered outside our solar system.
“In one generation we have gone from extraterrestrial planets being a mainstay of science fiction, to the present, where Kepler has helped turn science fiction into today’s reality,” said NASA Administrator Charles Bolden. “These discoveries underscore the importance of NASA’s science missions, which consistently increase understanding of our place in the cosmos.”
The discoveries are part of several hundred new planet candidates identified in new Kepler mission science data, released on Feb. 1. The findings increase the number of planet candidates identified by Kepler to-date to 1,235. Of these, 68 are approximately Earth-size; 288 are super-Earth-size; 662 are Neptune-size; 165 are the size of Jupiter and 19 are larger than Jupiter.
Of the 54 new planet candidates found in the habitable zone, five are near Earth-sized. The remaining 49 habitable zone candidates range from super-Earth size — up to twice the size of Earth — to larger than Jupiter.
The findings are based on the results of observations conducted May 12 to Sept. 17, 2009, of more than 156,000 stars in Kepler’s field of view, which covers approximately 1/400 of the sky.
“The fact that we’ve found so many planet candidates in such a tiny fraction of the sky suggests there are countless planets orbiting sun-like stars in our galaxy,” said William Borucki of NASA’s Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, Calif., the mission’s science principal investigator. “We went from zero to 68 Earth-sized planet candidates and zero to 54 candidates in the habitable zone, some of which could have moons with liquid water.”
Among the stars with planetary candidates, 170 show evidence of multiple planetary candidates. Kepler-11, located approximately 2,000 light years from Earth, is the most tightly packed planetary system yet discovered. All six of its confirmed planets have orbits smaller than Venus, and five of the six have orbits smaller than Mercury’s. The only other star with more than one confirmed transiting planet is Kepler-9, which has three. The Kepler-11 findings will be published in the Feb. 3 issue of the journal Nature.
“Kepler-11 is a remarkable system whose architecture and dynamics provide clues about its formation,” said Jack Lissauer, a planetary scientist and Kepler science team member at Ames. “These six planets are mixtures of rock and gases, possibly including water. The rocky material accounts for most of the planets’ mass, while the gas takes up most of their volume. By measuring the sizes and masses of the five inner planets, we determined they are among the lowest mass confirmed planets beyond our solar system.”
All of the planets orbiting Kepler-11 are larger than Earth, with the largest ones being comparable in size to Uranus and Neptune. The innermost planet, Kepler-11b, is ten times closer to its star than Earth is to the sun. Moving outward, the other planets are Kepler-11c, Kepler-11d, Kepler-11e, Kepler-11f, and the outermost planet, Kepler-11g, which is half as far from its star as Earth is from the sun.
The planets Kepler-11d, Kepler-11e and Kepler-11f have a significant amount of light gas, which indicates that they formed within a few million years of the system’s formation.
“The historic milestones Kepler makes with each new discovery will determine the course of every exoplanet mission to follow,” said Douglas Hudgins, Kepler program scientist at NASA Headquarters in Washington.
Kepler, a space telescope, looks for planet signatures by measuring tiny decreases in the brightness of stars caused by planets crossing in front of them. This is known as a transit.
Since transits of planets in the habitable zone of sun-like stars occur about once a year and require three transits for verification, it is expected to take three years to locate and verify Earth-size planets orbiting sun-like stars.
The Kepler science team uses ground-based telescopes and the Spitzer Space Telescope to review observations on planetary candidates and other objects of interest the spacecraft finds.
The star field that Kepler observes in the constellations Cygnus and Lyra can only be seen from ground-based observatories in spring through early fall. The data from these other observations help determine which candidates can be validated as planets.
For more information about the Kepler mission, visit: http://www.nasa.gov/kepler
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/753443/2012_hollywoods_most_insane_year_for_blockbuster_movies.html
Thought this was an interesting article on movies due for 2012. I really liked the tie in with 1997 and the busy year that was.
Well its quite obvious that the site has reached Limbo again. The administrators are gone! :] So I say it should be all of us that take it over! You know, like the book animal farm. We’ll create a trekker utopia, everyone will get their say. News bits for everyone! No more secrets either, all details made known about the sequel to! In fact we ALL will co-write it with the boys, yeah, that sounds really good…(sorry, bored)
And Desstruxion can review all the lates Star Wars toys (which all end up in bargain bins!)?
thats cool to!
#1026. “This is just unnacceptable”
…don’t let the door hit you on the way out. I wish all the folks blubbering about no news would leave…hearing it each and every time there is a lapse in daily updates posts is tiresome. Why not complain about the weather for a change, you can’t do anything about that either.
@ commodore mike
You yelled at yourself in post 1050. Dumbass.
@ Harry Ballz
THANKS HARRY
Steven Zaillian Re-Writing Jack Ryan
He’ll tackle the CHRIS PINE prequel
Paramount’s still trying to crack the script on the studio’s planned reboot of the Jack Ryan series. Screenwriters have come and gone, but now the call is out to Schindler’s List/American Gangster writer Steven Zaillian to take a pass on it.
While the slowly developing film has a star (Star Trek’s Chris Pine) attached to play Ryan and a director in place (Lost veteran Jack Bender), the story has been eluding everyone brought aboard to write it.
Hossein Amini wrote the first draft a couple of years ago, then the studio nabbed Adam Cozad’s original spec Dubai to refashion as a likely plot for the new adventure. Since then, Anthony Peckham has given it a polish and Cozad was brought back on shortly after to do some more tweaking.
Now the executives are hoping that Zaillian, who has just been hired by DreamWorks to script a remake of Spanish thriller Timecrimes and most recently wrote the US version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (while also getting set to adapt The Girl Who Played with Fire) for David Fincher is the man to make it work.
It wouldn’t be his first time working on a Ryan story – Zaillian wrote 1994’s Clear and Present Danger and Deadline’s report mentions that he did some uncredited script doctoring on Patriot Games. There are no real solid details on what the as-yet-untitled new film will be about beyond the fact that it’ll follow a younger Ryan on an early assignment and might just be linked to a nasty helicopter crash talked about in The Hunt for Red October…
James White
Gordon-Levitt Up For DARK KNIGHT RISES?
A likely reunion with Chris Nolan
Rumours about Joseph Gordon-Levitt working again with his Inception director Christopher Nolan have been circulating ever since… well… he took the job on Inception. So it comes as little surprise to find Deadline reporting that he’s in talks to join the cast of The Dark Knight Rises.
Naturally, nothing is official yet: Warners and Nolan always tend to keep Batman news close to their chests until the last possible moment (or until things are confirmed, such as the recent announcement of Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle aka Catwoman), but you’ve got to figure that the director would end up cherry-picking from the cast he enjoyed working with so much on Inception to fill out his Bat-world.
Tom Hardy’s already aboard as Bane and Gordon-Levitt’s schedule on Rian Johnson’s Looper should be finished by the time Nolan’s planned May shoot start for Rises rolls around.
Of course, now we’re starting to wonder what role he’ll play. Ssome are naturally quick to think of him as a natural successor to Heath Ledger as the Joker, but Nolan has said time and again that the villain won’t be showing up again, partly out of loyalty to the deceased actor.
So give us your best guesses. We’ll get the ball rolling with the least likely option: could Nolan be using what he keeps describing as his final Batman film to finally address Robin?
James White
Tyler Perry (Star Trek 2009) As Alex Cross?
He’s nabbed the lead role…
If, like us, you’re a big fan of Idris Elba, then we’re afraid we have some bad news to report: it appears he’s dropped out of the running to replace Morgan Freeman as the face of James Patterson’s detective Alex Cross. And the man who is taking over the role is one that could raise a few eyebrows – Tyler Perry.
Yes, the man better known for appearing as loudmouth lady Madea and directing/writing/ producing films and building a movie empire is making a real switch to action drama to play the ‘tec/psychologist.
To keep those eyebrows going up, Rob Cohen has jumped aboard to direct the movie, which means that David Twohy, who had been attached to re-write and direct the film, is also out.
Kerry Williamson and Patterson himself wrote the original draft of the script, which Along Came a Spider’s Marc Moss is now busily re-writing. The new outing is currently called I, Alex Cross, and there’s no word on whether it’ll still follow the story of the conflicted lawman trying to return to private psychology practice but getting drawn back into criminal cases.
QED International is currently seeking a distributor to partner up with, but Cohen is pushing ahead, with shooting set for June.
Tyler Perry as Alex Cross. Can you see it? Would you have preferred Elba?
James White
Harry: On the bright side, Brandon Routh is now very available for a major role in Star Trek 2012.
.
I think he’s make a great Captain Garth…. Handsome, charismatic… with an edge of about-to-lose-it. Perfect for when the fleet leaves the Laurentian System for Axanar to oppose the Klingon Incursion led by Commander Kor (Garber).
Come on guys, am I the only PSYCHO on here that’s going to keep floggin’ this dead horse of a thread?
Please upload more news and reviews, I have a motel to run!
Goodnight!
1125. Daoud – February 2, 2011
My pick for Garth would be Christian Bale, or maybe giving Mr. Hardy another shot at the franchise……which means Seth Rogan gets the job..
OMG!!!
Brandon Routh is screwed. He is such a PERFECT Superman he won’t be seen as anything else.
And this Cavill…what the…?…a frakkin BRIT? to play Super…I don’t…that is like seven different kinds of Un-Ameri…NOLAN, you fargin sneaky bastage…
1120. BLIRISH. That was a little tonge and cheek Stupid. I did that on purpose. I may be a bit dumd at times. But you are just plain STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Who Is HENRY CAVILL?
Everything you need to know about the new SUPERMAN…
Just last night it was announced that Henry Cavill will play the lead in Zack Snyder’s Superman: The Man Of Steel. For those of you who haven’t been paying attention, who is this Cavill guy and how did he get the chance to don the big blue tights of justice? Well, here’s your handy cut-out-and-keep guide to the man that everyone’s suddenly talking about…
WORDS HELEN O’HARA
Who Is Henry Cavill?
How He Got His Start
Like his Gotham city counterpart Batman and New York’s friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man, Metropolis’ new Man of Steel is a Brit. He was born in Jersey in 1983 and educated at English schools, so that awfully proper accent is not a fake. He got into acting early, starring in his first film Laguna, alongside Joe Mantegna and Emmanuelle Seigner, at 18. His introduction to Hollywood proper, however, was The Count Of Monte Cristo in 2002, opposite Jim Caviezel and Guy Pearce.
He played the 15 year-old son of the former, who thought he was the son of the latter, and who got mixed up in the whole nasty revenge scenario between the two. Look, it’s kind of a complicated thing, and it’s enough to put a young man in therapy – so it probably wasn’t a particularly brilliant idea to follow that up a couple of years later with Hellraiser: Hellworld. Still, at least in between he appeared in the much cheerier I Capture The Castle, so it all balances out.
LOL, all the new A list superheroes are played by British actors!
And all the B ones by Americans and an Ozzy…
Well done Britian, looks like the’ll be clearing all the Oscars too!
G*D*M*T!
Content please!
You may put this article at the top, but please put additional content.
It’s getting tiring.
The weather is just fine over here in NZ.
Poor ol’ Queensland have just been hit by a massive typhoon. I guess after their horrendous floods too they really could complain about the weather….
I’m beginning to think that Anthony P. was a recent guest at Norman’s motel. That would explain a lot of things! C’mon, fess up Norman!
I predict that Bob’s participation in this thread above indicates that he has completed the script for ST2 and has submitted it to Paramount.
NEED …… TREKMOVIE
Thank GOD for off-topic…
Wants some Trek news? I posted this on another story but here it is. Last week on the 27th, Stephen Colbert interviewed Brian Greene, a physicist on his book about parrallel universes. In the interview, Colbert makes a reference to an evil version of himself ala Spock in “Mirror, Mirror.” Also in the same show, he does a story about an ESP experiement that exposes time traveling po_n. I ‘m not kidding. Can’t post that one not because it has naughty pictures, it doesn’t, but because the link has the word “po_n.” Enjoy the interview.
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/372476/january-27-2011/brian-greene
@Basment
Cool story.
Henry Cavill is not my first choice, but he’s better than many others. Tyler Perry isn’t a bad actor, I just hate his movies.
…Also Idris is nicer to look at. I’m betting Alex Cross will continue to be asexual onscreen, like most black male leads before him.
1140 +
O_O!!!!!
http://www.nextmovie.com/blog/darth-vader-volkswagen-commercial/
Cute commercial
I swear, if I come back onto this site tomorrow and see the headline “Brannon Braga Explains Why No Gay Characters On Star Trek: Not Forward Thinking” again, I think I might lose it. Actually, no I probably will…
why no new mews?
#902: “Well then you must not be a Star Trek fan cuz Capt. Kirk is violent in every episode or movie.”
And just how was Adm/Capt. Kirk violent in “Star Trek The Motion Picture?”
Just want to let you guys know that Anthony is hoping to get some time off to put up some new articles on the weekend. But from the looks of it, we may have to wait til next week.
He’s also had some personal family matters to attend to.
Wow, this has really become hilarious. I’ve never seen a talkback disintegrate like this. I have to shoulder some of the blame for that.
I hope Anthony’s doing OK. Must have been some kind of emergency, or trying to moderate this discussion drove him away forever. It’s not like him to let the wolves run loose like this.
Some “Sci-Fi Movies” news:
The Wachowski brothers are working on two sequels to the “Matrix” trilogy.
So far, Keanu Reeves has signed on to reprise his role of Neo, who died in “Matrix Revolutions”. No word on whether either Carrie Ann Moss (Trinity) or Lawrence Fishborne (Morpheous) will return, though if rumors are to be believed, they both will. But Lawrence Fishborne’s commitment to “CSI” might prevent him from returning.
I don’t mind the gays… I just hate how SOME of them get all in your face about it and try to make everything gay related.
“What’s this? No guy on guy portrayal in star trek? STOP TRAMPLING MY RIGHTS!!”
Get over yourselves.
hmmm Well for two years Anthony never let the website go….I didnt mind at all during xmas.new years…But NOw I am starting to worry. Hope Anthony is ok….personal matters can certainly affect a website….Hope all is well with Anthony and family…
My 92 year old father died Jan 22 from stomach cancer…he died surrounded by family and caring friends who all loved him….U cant say he didnt have a full long life because he did…His last week at home with hospice was not a good week….if something similar happens with me I would want to call dr kevorkian….his diseas was discovered last august they said one year but he barely lasted six months….RIP MY FATHER–one of the very few people in my life to give me unconditional love….He also loved the star trek experience when I took him and my mom back in 04….I am trying to find the photo he had made inserting his face into a tos crew photo hahah….
1149
Sorry for your loss, Jim.
1149.
Jim, my sincere condolences.
“Star Trek Updates: Why not?
The ever-busy Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci have added another project to their schedule; they will be producers of a big screen adaptation of Orson Scott Card‘s novel Ender’s Game.”
Bob, I beg you to reconsider this, as Enders Game is one of the most overrated sf novels of all time.
@1149. My condolences Jim to you and your family.
” 1148. BLIRISH – February 2, 2011 — I don’t mind the gays… I just hate how SOME of them get all in your face about it and try to make everything gay related.”
Other than that, some of your best friends are gays, right? :-))
Seriously, every special interest group of any type will have the “get in your face” types that are irritating/obnoxious, but that does not mean we should be prejudiced against the larger groups that just want their pursuit of rights and the American Dream. Yes, I too cringe on the Gavin Newsome “whether they like it or not” types of in your face gay political statements, but that does not prevent me from supporting gay rights at the ballot box and in my personal interactions with people on a daily basis.
Being irritated is OK. Being bigoted is not.
@1149: Jim: Sincerest condolences. The death of one’s father is a challenge I’ve dealt with for almost three years now, so I have total empathy for you and your family. Hope he’d smile knowing you shared his enjoyment of the Experience with us all! My dad always did a great Shatner impression. I think he perfected Shat My Dad said long before Bill… so now when I see Bill or things about him… makes me think of Dad.
Hope Trek can do that for you too.
David
So , no new updates and this story is getting up in to the crazy high number comment area, special prize for the person who lands comment 1701? lol
@1140 “Henry Cavill is not my first choice, but he’s better than many others. Tyler Perry isn’t a bad actor, I just hate his movies. ”
Do we really need to use the work “hate” concerning Tyler Perry movies. His critically acclaimed portrayal of Medea in the award-winning “Madea” series has caused him to be one of the most respected black actors in Hollywood.
If you don’t like these sort of movies that try to bring in a new take on minorities by minority directors, OK, fine, but let’s please not use the term “hate” here as people might misunderstand your intentions with this post.
Perhaps this is an experiment, one that began late last year, and it’s being repeated now. What will happen if a popular STAR TREK website has no new content, except for an open thread? How will the readers/writers react?
Holy… what happened?
Will I achieve Nirvana if I read all of these comments?
Think I’ll just come back after another week. :)
Hmmm…this used to be a daily thing for me, coming to this site. Now, every few days if I even remember.
What’s going on?
BRAIIIIINNNNNNNNSSSS!!!!
This is a Star Trek site. Stay on topic!
SPOOCCCCCCKKKKK’s BRAIIIIINNNNNNNNN!
@1146. Jesus CHRIST, this is a long thread!
whats up with the lack of new news? there’s been new Mr Potato Heads and STO’s 1st birthday and Trekmovie, the what used to be number 1 place to go for news hasn’t posted anything new for days now!
1149. Jim
Condolences to you.
All joking aside I wonder what the deal really is. Im not sitting here demanding an answer or anything. Im a guest on this site and a regular one at that. Just curious is all. Its obvious something has changed, I just hope its all good. And Jim same here, my condolences.
And I just finished reading the screenplay “Alien Harvest” a proposed prequel to the alien franchise. Going to read “Shadow 19″ next, which is rumored to be the templet for Riddly Scotts new Alien prequel. AH is an interesting script, and it sorta on topic here, two main characters get involved in a homosexual relationship.
Anyway The basic premise of the script is an incident that happen a few years before the first Alien movie.
Jim, sincere condolonsces.
I lost my dad back in August, also to cancer. It becomes normal to talk about him in the past tense, but there’s still a numbness in my being.
The most utterly shocking thing for anyone in our position is the dispassionate way in which the world fails to grind to a halt. Driving licences still need to be renewed, trash taken out. It all takes on an air of pointlessness and absurdity, but you get over that, too.
Best wishes for you and your family, you are lucky to have so many warm feelings to cherish.
On the topic of the Alien franchise, what is the status of the Alien Versus Predator films in either canon?
#1169 Bren
Nothing that I’ve read so far. Must of the news has been about the prequel, which is now rumored not to be a prequel at all…or maybe just “kind of a” prequel. lol But there may be something AVP in the works, everything else is.
Antonie on the run again!
Hugh, I’m curious, how do you manage to get your hands on all these screenplays?
1147. Red Dead Ryan – February 2, 2011
Heard that Keanu Reeves was asked about this, and had no knowledge of the project. I think more Matrix movies are nothing more then an internet rumor at this point. Sorry…
#1162 This is a Star Trek site. Stay on topic!
SPOOCCCCCCKKKKK’s BRAIIIIINNNNNNNNN!
Brain!. What Brain.? What is Brain!.
Ok. The Tos Ep Spock’s Brain. The Actress who Played Kara who was the one who Stole Spocks Brain is Actress Marj Dusay. She latter went on and did some Eps of Hawaii Five O and Trapper John. But she is most Noted as a Daytime Soap Actress. Her most Promanate Role was as Alexandrea Spalding on Guiding Light and a feature role on All my Children. Tn that show she was the Crazy Mom of Leo played by Transformers Josh Dumel. She is Rumard to be heading back to All my Children.
I’m finding TrekToday.com to be pretty informative, fyi….
So long as this site is back to form by the time news on the next movie starts rolling around I’ll be happy.
@ 1157
Yes, we really do. It’s all awful, and enough is enough.
Is the highest number of messages there have been for one topic?
I want to apologise for my rants over the past few years.
#1179. No. The Highest is about 2,100 from Back in Dec on a Scifi Friday Page.
1180
both times when it was taking ages for the next news item right?
Ok… while we are waiting, who wants to sit around the campfire, eating some bourbon beans, singing Row Row Row your Boat, roasting marshmellons and bantering about life and death…. anybody?
@1182 LMAO! I’ll start! Row row row your boat…..
Gently down the stream… merrily merrily merrily merrily life is but a… guys, why haven’t you joined in?
Boobies.
That is all.
1184
I do not understand the concept…
1173
Actually, its apparently in the works. Though I DO NOT think any more “Matrix” movies should be made.
As for Tyler Perry, he sucks as an actor. He should stay out of the sequel.
Row Row Row your Boat.
Sorry. I was trying to Understand the meaning of Row Row Row your boat.
1189
“The words aren’t impostant, what’s important is that you have a good time singing it.”
coming next:
Ronald D. Moore Explains Why No Happy Characters On Battlestar Galactica
Just checked in again to catch up, but I see we’re all still stuck with the ‘gay’ article…
And judging by the comments and poll results, it seems to prove that while most of us seem to like Star Trek, we don’t necessarily like other Star Trek fans, lol!
Personally, I hope you’ll concentrate more on an exciting ‘Boldly going…’ adventure Bob, rather than worry about trying to squeeze in a ‘gay’ moment or two, just for the sake of it…but that’s just me.
Anyway, for those that can’t wait for Rosario’s ‘movie news’ round-up to supercede this topic, here’s a great interview to tide you over. It features some interesting tidbits on director Del toro’s unrealised intentions for the ‘Hobbit’ movie….And has some neat descriptions about what he’s come up with for his forthcoming ‘At The mountains Of Madness’.
But if you want a totally ’spoiler-free’ viewing of ‘ATMOM’, then DON’T read this! – http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/07/110207fa_fact_zalewsk?currentPage=all
#1190. I see. Was I having a good time.
Also coming up. Chris Nolan talks about why the Dark Night is so Dark.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the Star Trek franchise. For other uses, see Star Trek
The 2006 Star Trek 40th Anniversary franchise logo, featuring Captain Kirk (William Shatner) (left) and Mr. Spock (Leonard Nimoy)
Creator Gene Roddenberry
Original work Star Trek: The Original Series (1966)
Films and television
Films Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982)
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984)
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989)
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991)
Star Trek Generations (1994)
Star Trek: First Contact (1996)
Star Trek: Insurrection (1999)
Star Trek Nemesis (2002)
Star Trek (2009)
Television series Star Trek: The Original Series (1966–1969)
Star Trek: The Animated Series (1973–1974)
Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987–1994)
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1993–1999)
Star Trek: Voyager (1995–2001)
Star Trek: Enterprise (2001–2005)
Star Trek is an American science fiction entertainment franchise. The original Star Trek is an American television series, created by Gene Roddenberry, and followed the interstellar adventures of Captain James T. Kirk and the crew of an exploration vessel of a 22nd century galactic “United Federation of Planets” – the Starship Enterprise. This series debuted in 1966 and ran for three seasons, after an initial pilot film “The Cage” with a mostly different cast was rejected by Paramount, though this pilot is now routinely packaged with the original series. Following the release of other series in the franchise, the Kirk-lead series was retroactively referred to as “Star Trek: The Original Series”. These adventures were continued by the short-lived Star Trek: The Animated Series and six feature films. Four more television series were eventually produced, based in the same universe but following other characters: Star Trek: The Next Generation, following the crew of a new Starship Enterprise set a century after the original series; Star Trek: Deep Space Nine and Star Trek: Voyager, set contemporaneously with The Next Generation; and Star Trek: Enterprise, set before the original series, in the early days of human interstellar travel. Four additional feature films were produced, following the crew of The Next Generation, and most recently a 2009 movie reboot of the franchise featuring a young crew of the original Enterprise set in an alternate timeline.
The franchise also includes dozens of computer and video games, hundreds of novels, as well as a themed attraction in Las Vegas (opened in 1998 and closed in September 2008), and at least two traveling museum exhibits of props. Beginning with the original television series and continuing with the subsequent films and series, the franchise has created a cult phenomenon and has spawned many pop culture references.[1]
Ok. Just thought I would post this. Always a good read.
Has this site died? Has it been abandoned? This article has been the last one posted here for a while now.
Apologies, that link in post #1192 doesn’t seem to work, so if you want to read that latest Guillermo del Toro interview, go here, and then click on the ‘new yorker’ link – http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/19300/del-toro-on-mountains-frankenstein-design
Kinda lame. This is the second or third time this site has gone dark after publishing a few articles. Hmmmm…..
How long until the 2000th post?
Nice. Hollywood has run out of ideas, and so has Trekmovie.com haha!
Hey Orci, wanna write an article here? Anything will do…what you had for breakfast, your bet for the Superbowl, your favorite brand of toilet paper… Anything, really.
To the live chat room!!!
Does someone seriously have a way to check on Anthony?
This non-posting is not necessarily disturbing, but just downright odd and out of the ordinary.
=A=
I have deleted Trekmovie from my bookmarks.
The silliest part is that when Anthony and crew finally do surface, we’ll get blasted with five new threads all on the same day! The threads here are like bananas…….they come in bunches! :>)
Me and Da Commodore are in the chat room chatting up, anyone else want to join?
#1200
From your last post, roughly 800 more, give or take. With apologies for my public school education. Math was not my strong suit.
#1204
Thanks for the update. Good to see you are still posting.
#1205
69 Forward members are like this site’s articles: We don’t come often enough.
And all posts from #1186 on: I believe I said that would be all.
This was kind of funny over the holidays when Anthony and staff took nearly a month off…but now I’m getting downright irritated by this. At least have the balls someone to post and article explaining why this site it not being maintained…
“Hey all, just wanted to give you a heads-up that between mid-January and March this year this web site will only be sporadically maintained due to some issues beyond my control. Please bear with us and we’ll be back at full throttle by March. Best Regards, Anthony”
IS THIS TOO FRACKING MUCH TO ASK ???????????????
This just in from Trekweb.com, a site which seems to give a rats ass about keeping Trek fans up to date on the new movie news:
“According to Heat Vision, writer Steve Zaillian (The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo adaptation) is in negotiations to rewrite the upcoming Jack Ryan movie for Paramount, which is positive indication that the film is going to happen. “If they’re spending the money for this guy, they’re making the movie,” a source told THR. Jack Bender is set to direct Jack Ryan, starring Star Trek star Chris Pine as the new Ryan, which was due to shoot in Budapest this March. The start date has been pushed back, however, possibly up to a month or so as Zaillian completes his rewrites.
Zaillian boarding the project will push the start date further, possibly up to four or five weeks, although Paramount can’t risk any more time since the studio needs Pine for the Star Trek XII sequel, which will also likely be nudged slightly, but not enough to impact its release date.”
1208. I completely agree.
Just lost my post. Forgot to create a new tab.
Anyway, we know that Alex Kurtzman has been busy (directing) and now I know what that cool red convertible is, that “my captain” has been driving. Fortunately, even with a *Kirk* in the driving seat, it still has not been totalled as a result of plunging into a quarry or whatever….Phew. That’s a relief!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1353075/Chris-Pine-drives-round-set-Welcome-To-People-classic-convertible.html?ito=feeds-newsx
Bob – It is so very important that this Pine/Kirk gets to time travel back to the future soon, very soon. He has already prevented a potentially disastrous derailment in Unstoppable and no doubt he will help get drunk big half-sister back on track with her life or not – (have not seen the Welcome to People script…:( ) Why won’t you guys share…:)?
Pine/Kirk is young; he needs to get some experience in running a big starship and the sooner the better. Besides, he needs to meet Jasmia and again, the sooner the better. It’s destiny, you see. I appeal to the Supreme Court in the name of all that is Good and Noble!
1135. Anthony Thompson – February 2, 2011
I’m beginning to think that Anthony P. was a recent guest at Norman’s motel. That would explain a lot of things! C’mon, fess up Norman!
————————————————————————————————–
I have nothing to do with the disappearance of any of the Trekmovie team, my mother got really upset when she read that comment!
This was identical to what happened a few months ago when the last article written was the article about the Heroclix boardgame coming out. Was like 2 weeks before a new update. Kinda odd.
Losing “viewership” really fast….
I’m surprised no one’s mentioned the Deep Space Nine episode “Chimera”. (The episode where Odo finds another changeling).
Yes, it falls into the list of “Star Trek wussing out and only talking about gays allegorically” episodes, but it’s also some of the best handling of the issues around Coming Out I’ve seen. The way that even the supposedly tolerant Federation characters are automatically suspicious of the new changeling, Odo’s shame and embarrassment at being seen “linking” with a changeling in public (By holding hands!)
Odo’s position in the episode, of being supposedly comfortable with who he is and accepted for it by his friends, but being scared to do anything that would draw attention to it or “confront” people with it, is one that lots of gay people can identify with it, and it was a very nuanced approach to the issue that you just didn’t see on telly at the time.
Hey, maybe we’ll get to 2112 posts before the next update!
Wouldn’t that be awesomesauce.
(Just kidding. Hoping for an update in the near future!)
http://io9.com/#!5747318/10-reasons-the-star-trek-2-screenplay-still-isnt-done
So, why not get back on topic!
I’ve been thinking. I had always thought that in order to have a gay character, they would have to introduce someone new. Then I realized, what with the drastic change of re-booting Spock and Uhura as a couple, that there’s really no good reason why they couldn’t re-boot Chekov to be gay. He would be the perfect choice!
They sound like perfectly rational reasons to me…:)
Okay, so I leave for a week and come back and no updates??? Anthony, what’s going on. Is Trekmovie.com dead?!!
If this thread does prove to be the swan song of Trekmovie.com, it will be as sad as TOS bowing out with “Turnabout Intruder.”
“If only … if only …”
Here’s what Gene [Roddenberry] said in an interview just before he died in August 1991; somebody had asked him, ‘What’s going to become of Star Trek in the future?’ And he said that he hoped that some day some bright young thing would come along and do it again, bigger and better than he had ever done it. And he wished them well.
— Richard Arnold, Roddenberry’s assistant
Not going to argue with the creator. Star Trek lets hope 2012 get the better part right. 2009 was bigger indeed..but…
Trekmovie bowing out?? Time for some outrage!!
“What do you mean Trek has no gay characters!! This is an outrage!! I always thought Q was gay, or at least Bi!!”
Well said, 1221…
Well, since this post’s original debut, I’ve completed Mass Effect 2 twice on the PS3 and all I’ve got to say is this.
My female Shepard and Liara are going to get married, have a bunch of blue daughters and grow old together.
Oh well, they are still discussing, arguing, blahblah about whether Zachary Quinto is gay or not on his IMDb board. Some are quite angry that he won’t “come out of the closet” and admit to the world that he is indeed gay. Rumours abound that he has had a boyfriend for the last six months at least. Some fans have tweeted on Zach’s Twitter about how disgusted they are about his (supposed) homosexuality, while others complain that he is letting down the Gay Rights cause.
Of course, he is playing a gay guy in the stage play “Angels in America”, which no doubt adds to the controversy over his sexual orientation. However, I expect to see Zachary as Spock pon-farring all over the place with Zoe’s Lt Uhura, while Kirk makes out with my Jasmia…Oh dear, this hope of mine seems like it may be all too good to be true.
Good that it is noted in the article about the Jack Ryan movie that Chris Pine is needed back for the Star Trek sequel. So there will be a sequel then?
Anthony? Bob? Why such abandonment? Is it perhaps because they are having trouble casting the right beagle for the sequel? Bob, I do need proof, you realise…:)
I wonder if this web site realizes that if weeks go by with nothing new we dont come by as often, we dont look at ads as often the site will definately lose viewers and perhaps already is….we love ya and this Site Anthony! COMMME BACK!!!!!!
Are there gay Vulcans? One would assume their flamboyance and drama would be quite…. logical.
Legalize Vulcan Gay Marriage NOW!
#1221 should have been last post. Forever.
If only…
Also my sincere thanks to all who responded to my notice about my fathers death with condolenses….I am touched that so many here were so kind and I also felt better hearing that some of you have also had to cope with the death of a parent recently and are getting through it….yes Bren, sometimes you feel like why is the world still turning? Its still hard for me to think he is gone as he has been with me my whole life….
Daoud that is a great rememberence about your father….my dad never did impressions but he did yell egghead a lot hehehe….
Again thanx for the warm wishes for us and our family….U guys really helped me to feel better….
Jim – I understand
http://turbulence.org/Works/saddest/index.php?id=194
1228
As long as you remember him, Jim, your father will never be truly gone. :-)
If Zachary Quinto is indeed gay, coming out could ruin his career. As evidenced by this discussion, there are still many small-minded judgmental people out there.
1231
Unless J.J Abrams is a homophobe, I don’t think Zach Quinto has anything to worry about. That’s assuming he is gay of course. Only he knows for sure.
Doesn’t matter to me either way, though.
Red Dead – I’m sure he has nothing to worry concerning Star Trek, but he would risk other roles, as well as some of his fandom. It may not matter to you, but unfortunately it still does to many people.
Hey Jim. To quote MCcoy from Trek 2. He is realy not Dead. As long as we remember him. That is a true Statement. I lost my Dad to Cancer back in 2000. So I know where you are coming form. All my Best.
Hey everyone.
I’ve left a message with Anthony to make sure everything is ok. I’ll be sure to let you all know when he gets back to me.
Rosario
1235
Thanks Rosario!
P.S
Any Sci Fi tidbits to tide us over?
I have a movies column ready to post. I’ll do that in the mean time and, as I stated, I will keep you all informed when he contacts me.
Very appreciated!
“Are there gay Vulcans? One would assume their flamboyance and drama would be quite…. logical. Legalize Vulcan Gay Marriage NOW!”
I can just see it now, a Vulcan father trying to have a talk with his Vulcan son:
Father: So son, that is how most Vulcan’s make love. There is another option though, as I minority prefer to make love with others of their own gender?
Son: Please explain further how would that work?
Father: Well son, you would put you private thing into…ahem… the rear of another male Vulcan.
Son: Dad, it bad enough that I got to wait 7 years, but now you are telling me after 7 long years that I might have to put my thinamajo into a guy’s poopdeck?
Father: Well, some consider it the logical thing to do.
bout time there is a new story stop commenting on this gay thread no pun intended lol
I know this thread must be dead by now, but in case anyone is still reading – look what our new ‘Scotty’ Simon Pegg has to say about this…
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/news/a301741/simon-pegg-men-should-kiss-men.html
here is some trek-worthy news:
William Shatner Is Recording Star-Studded Metal Album in L.A.: We Got the Details
“William Shatner is back in the studio working on yet another great big pile of Shat-mazing, Incredibly Strange music. It’s been over a week since Shatner first formally proclaimed Zakk Wylde’s mad skills via Twitter (”Best, Bill”), but our sources on the scene confirm that some big metal heavy-hitters have been engaged to play backup to Captain Kirk.”
http://blogs.laweekly.com/westcoastsound/2011/02/william_shatner_is_recording_s.php
1241. And that is one of the many reasons Simon Pegg is cool.
The fact is, Star Trek has always been about inclusion, tolerance, and embracing that which is different. That is the philosophy of episodes and movies in the series, that is the philosophy of the people who created the series.
The people who are getting icky about the idea of a gay character in Star Trek now are no different from the people who got freaked out by the idea of Kirk and Uhura kissing in the original series.
Quite frankly, if you don’t like it, you’re probably better off with another franchise.
Jim Nightshade, my dad died thirty-three years ago. You never quite get over it, but it does get easier in time. You can now live your life as a testimony of your father’s love for you and the pride he had in his fine son. Many condolences and blessings to you and your family.
“Is Brannon Braga still talking? Last I heard every single sci fi show he touches gets cancelled. Enterprise? Threshold? Flash Forward? And he blames sci fi rot or whatever? Perhaps it’s time he looks at himself and perhaps admit to himself he’s probably better doing something else? I’m just saying.”
Your argument is flawed.
Every TV show gets canceled at some point. That doesn’t mean it or its writers aren’t/weren’t successful.
He worked on TNG. That lasted 7 years. Voyager, 7 years. Enterprise, 4 years. Flash Forward, 2 years, Threshold, 1 year. 24, 9 years. That’s a 5 year average lifespan on the shows he’s been on.
@1245. Not a big Bragga fan either, but isn’t an average show lifespan of 5 years a pretty damn good stat?
The next Star Trek movie will feature Spirk.
Mark my words.
@1152
Not only is Ender’s Game overrated, but Card is a homophobic religious nutbag.
@1245: Flashforward didn’t lat two years. It didn’t even last one year. It barely gasped through six months.
i dont know what they’re all yapping about. there’s plenty of gayness blatantly shown in star trek! they do not need to mention it for 3 reasons. (1) since this is the future….hopefully there is no need for the “issues” of lifestyle choices. there wil lbe no need to “come out”
(2) besides the ones mentioned (like dax or the mirror bi/lesbian of kira & ezri) you have “t’hy’la” in ST:TOS….kirk/spock is 99% canon thanks to gene roddenberry making that word…just need to get it on screen. besides kirk & spock with their women…they are pretty much bi.
(3) george takie for sure is gay…..there are rumors of zach quinto being bi or on the other extreme….ace (he was once seen wearing a black ring on his right middle finger…that is an ace symbol. granted…not many people know that so it could be just a random ring…or is it more? hmmm…)
nuff said.
Gay-themed Star Trek plot: on-board medical team discovers cures for antibiotic-resistant gonorreah and gay bowel disease…
It doesn’t matter, any more than having characters of a specific species or eye color on the show/movie.
Many people approve of the idea that sexual orientation is a non-issue and that the stories haven’t addressed that clearly. I’m willing to bet many of those people are also afraid that the script writers would handle this poorly, and so would say NO to the poll.
For the sake of interesting diversity, it’d be great to have characters of many different orientations!
Please, though, leave the ambiguity in our favorite main characters. There is no need to confirm or deny.
(And SHAME ON YOU for the Spock/Uhura rubbish.)
And since many people who have posted here have been explicit about their own orientations, I am straight and married and late 20s. Right in your target movie-goer range. (Well maybe.)
Key point: Do it right, or don’t do it at all. No flamer comments, no mentioning shoes or fashion for the men, no trying to ‘butch up’ the women. Just have an interesting, believable character… And oh yeah, btw they are gay. IDIC, and all that.
The type of gay I like is the kind where it’s “oh, hey, after all this shit we just went through/after slowly getting to know you I realise I’m kinda sorta in love with you” — haven’t seen it done this way on TV or in a movie with gay characters, yet you see it ALL THE TIME with straight couples at the end of a movie.
TV shows/movies ALWAYS do one of two things:
1) The characters are announced as gay right away so they’re aren’t any surprises for the viewers later on, writes want to get that “obstacle” out of the way asap. Usually the characters are hooking up right away and likely the premise is all about them and their “gay love”.
OR
2) They maybe have the chemistry but there’s never any confirmation and likely some chick thrown in just to disrupt the vibes. Bromance to the extreme.
Both of these are getting old. If you’re going to make a gay character, do it right, do it in an original way, .