Talk:Sexuality in Star Trek/Archive 2

Hmmm
I always thought it a bit peculiar people haven't discussed all the other groups excluded from Trek as much. There is some mention online that there seems to be no Jewish characters in the Star Trek Universe. More than that there aren't even any real references to Anti-Semitism or Judaism despite the fact several of the actors are Jewish. There have also been no Muslims and Hispanics have been basically absent as well, but this is rarely discussed. I know there was some who hoped Star Trek would finally have a Christian character with Enterprise, but it didn't. Considering Trek is an American show with a large juvenile audience I'm not sure why the lack of LGBT characters is even notable. Characters identified as LGBT are also relatively rare or even non-existent in Batman: The Animated Series, Futurama, ALF, etc.--T. Anthony 16:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * That might have seemed rambling. My point was first that this article doesn't seem to address what I think is a likely reason for the lack of LGBT characters, namely that Trek is seen as a show parents watch with their kids and such shows have to play by more "conservative" standards. The second being is there any other article on whether or how often characters of various religions, races, or mindsets are in Trek? For example autistic characters, Jewish people, South Americans, etc?--T. Anthony 16:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Though I think the point about other segments of society not represented in Star Trek may well be valid and could be discussed elsewhere, I don't get your point about Star Trek being for a family audience. No doubt there were people who thought Star Trek should not screen an inter-racial kiss because it was for 'family viewing'. Fortunately times have moved on. I don't see why the fact that a show will be viewed by families should prevent it from portraying gay characters in a sensitive and non-sensational manner. To suggest that seeing gay people is unsuitable family viewing rather helps to suggest that being homosexual is in some way deviant or part of a 'sub-culture' that should be kept hidden. 80.42.9.216 16:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Uh huh. Maybe I should've been clearer. "Family viewing" means things the majority of families in the US could feel comfortable watching with their kids. It does not mean "what I think the majority of Americans should feel comfortable watching with their kids." I'm thinking what TV programmers and writers have to actually consider for their demographic. In the US the people who have kids are often more conservative, go to church, and old people may visit them. These are groups more likely to deem homosexuality wrong or strange. However in 1966 no religion forbade interracial kissing, except maybe Mormons or some fringes among the Southern Baptists, and most states allowed interracial marriage. Homosexuality was deemed a mental disorder until the 1970s and the majority of the world's major religious denominations disapprove of it. I know the "homosexuality=interracial relations" notion is useful for activism, but in real life the parallels are poor at best. Besides which how forward thinking was Trek on that really? Uhura only kissed Kirk because they were forced to by humanoid aliens.--T. Anthony 06:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Are there any references to human religions in Star Trek? I thought the show highlights an exclusively atheistic vision of the future. Certainly, the human characters never seem to show any symbols of worship or any practices associated with religion. And as for the representation of other nationalities, Star Trek has always been at the forefront of cultural acceptance in this regard. The franchise has showcased the divergent origins of all of its human characters. JN

The only religion I can recall in Star Trek is the religion of aliens. Anyway, a show can't have a member of every race because there are more than a handful of those in this world. The reason homosexuality on Star Trek is addressed is because the fans were interested in it. If the Jewish fanbase doesn't care about having Jews on Star Trek, then there's no discussion. It's that simple. But let's discuss why the fanbase has been so interested in homosexuality on the show: there have been many broken promises and false news that a homosexual character would show up; there have been many instances on the show that hinted at homosuality and the like; homosexuality can be found in every human population, and many in the gay fanbase would expect it to surface in the 24th century, especially in Star Trek because much of anti-homosexuality these days comes from the religion and tradition lacking on the show. Also, the other shows mentioned wouldn't be expected to lead the way in shedding prejudice because they don't celebrate diversity in the obvious and serious way Star Trek does. -Ciuma 4.162.78.71 02:40, 11 August 2007 (UTC)


 * You forget- Worf is Jewish. Bread and Circuses also introduced one-episode characters who were Christian.  Not saying there isn't a glaring lack of religious characters on Trek, particularly from real religions, especially as compared to shows like Babylon 5.  Just that there have been some characters.  --Abdul Muhib (talk) 04:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * No, Worf is devoted to the klingon belief. --mms (talk) 12:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Homosexuality Accepted on Ferenginar?
I don’t know if this Rule was ever listed on the show or just in the books but the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition #113 states that “Always have sex with the boss.” Since Ferengi society at the time the Rules were written was highly misogynistic it would be impossible for either the employ or the boss to be a woman, the logic follows that both parties would be men. Therefore, gay sex, and by extension, homosexuality was accepted on Ferenginar.

I have absolutely no idea if this was done intentionally or not, but I thought that it was relevant. Scaper8 18:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It's illegal for women to participate in business. So says Memory Alpha here, with this phrase: '[F]emales are not allowed to earn profit'. -Wyndallin 15:34, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

The only episode that I can think of that may have included this rule was one from DS9 involving a female ferengi dressing as a male to work at Quark's.

Gender Identity Inclusion
Hi I'm the one who wrote back in the 'Skirts' paragraph. I feel this article should be expanded to include a instances of gender indentity polymorphism and sex/gender distinction. The "T" in the "LGBT" seems to be missing from this article. The males-wearing-female-uniforms of ST:TNG S1 is an example of clearly gender flexible characters in Star Trek. The Ferengi developments concerning women's liberation in ST:DS9 can also be viewed in this context. I am sure that there are many other examples of sex/gender polymorphism out there. Given the strength these sterotypes have in our society (and the skill and openness of Star Trek's treatment of the subject) it is something that should be developed in this entry.

-JN April 18, 2007

Fan Submitted Script
I have removed this section from Voyager, it's uncited, doesn't really fit and doesn't seem important.

"''One fan-submitted script circulating in some quarters, called "Points of Contention," contains dialogue explicitly referencing the use of genetic engineering to eliminate the so-called gay gene. Some outlying colonies do not use these procedures, so homosexuality, while accepted, is somewhat rare. The script establishes a gay man on the ship in a relationship with a bisexual man. The Doctor gives Janeway a report about the ship's gene pool in the event the ship would have to end its journey home and establish a society in the Delta Quadrant. Given the limited size of the crew, the Doctor surmises that the gay crew members be given the corrective surgery as a way to ensure the crew's generational survival. Janeway is hesitant, but considers the proposal. This upsets some of the crew members, especially Paris, who believe even considering the action violates Janeway's core values. Meanwhile, the ship faces a crisis with Species 8472, and during a battle one of the gay crewmembers is killed, removing the need for Janeway's decision. He is given a heroes funeral, but Janeway's resolve to get home before making ever-increasingly difficult decisions is strengthened.''"

I'm sure fans submit a lot of scripts why is this one notable? Caffm8 21:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Ignoring Riker's sexuality in "The Outcast"
One thing about "The Outcast" that has always stood out to me, but gets ignored in the article, is what the story means about Riker. He willingly pursues a relationship with someone who is not female. Soren may feel female (and be played by female actress), but Soren is not, physically or biologically. Yet Riker is adamant in his pursuit of Soren, and has the full emotional support of the crew. Doesn't this attitude of Riker's qualify him as a bi-sexual character, or at least some form of pan-sexual? Not to mention, by focusing on how the story isn't directly about gay issues, the article misses the fact that it is totally about transgender issues.

The argument would have worked if the actor playing Soren was a man. Riker had stated that he felt this should have been the case.

The New Frontier
I find it interesting that no one has mentioned the 'hermat' species mentioned in The New Frontier granted this is non canonical having never appeared in any series or movie it is still a good point. 69.118.180.120 16:02, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this page.

Moved, per unanimous consensus. The Evil Spartan 18:38, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

This article isn't about LGBT characters in Star Trek. It's about their absence, or more precisely, the controversy surrounding them. An article that was actually about firmly verifiable LGBT characters would never progress beyond a stub. It should be retitled Sexuality in Star Trek.

As the article makes clear, LGBT characters in Star Trek are largely speculative. The article therefore immediately runs into notability problems, because it attempts to define something which cannot be confirmed to exist. Changing the name to Sexuality in Star Trek offers a better chance for the article to retain most of its current content, but to reframe it in ways that better establish notability and avoid NPOV violations. The truly notable thing about LGBT characters in Star Trek is that there are no significant, canonical LGBT characters in Star Trek. Also, writing about sexuality in general allows for other notable items to be included. For example, references to the Kirk/Uhura kiss as the first interracial kiss on American television—as well as the role of monogamy (contrasting Kirk with Worf)—could easily co-exist alongside the other points already raised by this article.  Czech Out  ☎ |  ✍  09:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Support. What CzechOut writes seems reasonable. -Ulla 21:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. Already a more general article than LGBT, and essentially so, as there are genders involved that have no good human analog. Some excellent content which deserves a matching name. Andrewa 09:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Support: I haven't been much involved in this article, but I must say I find the ideas put forth to be good ones. It seems much better to talk about the LGBT issues within the wider context of how sexuality in Star Trek has been dealt with and changed. Though I'd say we need to hear from more of the regular contributors to the article, before going ahead and moving it. --Hibernian 17:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. Sounds like a well thought out idea. Am curious, though, just to play with semantics a bit; should it be Sexuality in the Star Trek universe or Sexuality on Star Trek? Zue Jay (talk)  00:47, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Support per all above. The Evil Spartan 05:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

First stab at "new" article
Following the vote to change the name of the article to the more general "Sexuality in Star Trek", I've made a first, hurried attempt to re-orient it to the new name. It's horribly under-referenced, but perhaps it will serve as a starting point for further growth.  Czech Out  ☎ |  ✍  01:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

fans suggests
seems to be one of the main "sources" for this article. Needs significant clean-up. --Fredrick day 18:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Assimilation as Rape?
Many of the TNG writers, notably Michael Piller, have referred to the Borg assimilation of Picard in 'Best of Both Worlds' as 'rape'. The justification Piller gives for the following episode 'Family' on the DVD special features for Season 4 is that 'Picard has been raped' and they needed to focus on the recovery - it was an event that needed to be focused on. I think there is something to be worth exploring here, if only in a single paragraph. Any thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.12.117.152 (talk) 15:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Remembering things that didn't happen?
A later episode titled "Liaisons" (1993) explored a similar theme when a male alien has a love affair with Captain Picard, while disguised as a woman, but as was the case in "The Host", there is no sign of love when the alien changes gender Uh... Was Picard actually all that interested in 'her' even before he found out she was a he? 139.57.100.104 (talk) 21:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Just a note: Still no feedback yet on that "Liaisons" episode. I've added the 'cn' tag, but will simply remove the entire entry if someone doesn't come up with a valid reference within a reasonable timespan. (Of course, since it never happened in that episode, I'm not holding my breath on a 'valid reference') 139.57.100.104 (talk) 03:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Just Some Observations
I find it highly amusing that those voicing dissent for GLBT culture and evolution on discussion pages for these kind of articles most often go unsigned. If you don't want to own up to your opinion, don't voice it; the internet's potential for anonymity is constantly abused in this fashion.

I, a(n assumed) male heterosexual, found this article fairly enlightening. I never realized that the GLBT community had such a vested interest in the Star Trek universe, nor that the absence of GLBT was such a void; None of my gay or lesbian friends are Trekkies like I am, so the issue never came up. However, I feel that much of this article is overly-wordy and sometimes imposes homo- and bisexuality in situations where the context has been grossly misinterpreted, namely regarding Garak. However, I understand the impulse to search for subtext given that most of the people involved with the Star Trek Universe canon feel GLBT issues have should been addressed within the series, and that subtext likely exists. I also find a mere sentence about George Takei's homosexuality is pretty lacking, though perhaps there is little to say about it.

My scope is mostly limited to TNG and Voyager, but I for one always though that Riker was most likely bisexual, though I have no particular references or context for such interpretation, just a feeling. I also have noticed the slight lesbian overtones in the relationship between Seven of Nine and Capt. Janeway. I always thought an arc addressing a possible 7 of 9 romantic infatuation for Janeway, given their already uniquely intimate relationship, which would not be reciprocated by Janeway given her history of heterosexuality (male finance, male bartender in Fair Haven, etc.). However, I also imagined Janeway would encourage her to pursue other romances without ever trying to reassign her sexuality. This of course never materialized.

Anyway, that's my two cents. All-in-all, great article that expanded my understanding of this subject. DKqwerty (talk) 02:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Just a reminder: Article discussion pages are for discussing improvements to the articles; not your personal 'observations', nor general discussion. If this particular discussion page were more active, you could actually expect your entire entry here to simply be deleted. 139.57.100.104 (talk) 20:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, then where should I post these 'observations' of mine? I'm saying the article is too wordy and makes it's own observations based on elaborate -- and I feel invented -- implications based, again, on observation. It needs to be cleaned up, but I'm not the person to do it. DKqwerty (talk) 02:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Suggestions From me
1) The article has failed in the nuetrallity in my opinion.

2) It should be made more, pardon the pun, explicit, that Worf willingly entered into a relationship with an entity that used to be male. Lots42 (talk) 06:26, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I find it peculiar that your second suggestion would only serve to reinforce the lack of neutrality. They were pretty careful to establish that, in DS9, each joined entity is a separate and new entity from what either half had been in the past. (Remember the episode when Jadzia was going to be charged with a crime that Curzon was suspected of having comitted?) 139.57.100.104 (talk) 18:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * ? I fail to see how it messes with nuetrallity. If we're going to have an article discussing sexuallity with Star Trek, then why not mention Worf and Dax, considering Dax has been both genders? Lots42 (talk) 19:13, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It messes with neutrality because it's skewing the facts, and thus using a false interpretation to make invalid points. Look, Worf wasn't involved with 'Dax'. He wasn't even involved with 'Jadzia'. (I can't believe I'm arguing about a sci-fi show) Worf was involved with 'Jadzia Dax'. Trills in DS9 aren't the same as they were in TNG. In TNG, there's a shakey argument that could be made, but in DS9? Nope. 209.90.134.31 (talk) 05:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It looks like we have skidded into irreconcible opinion territory so I am bowing out of this discussion. Lots42 (talk) 12:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Comics
I seem to recall an interesting sub-plot in one of the Star Trek: Academy comics. Character A realizes that Character B does not like gay people. A attempts to get B kicked out of the system until Commanding Officer gives a lecture to him, saying that as long as B does his damn job, he can have all the stupid opinions he wants. If I remember the issue numbers and whatnot, I'll try and put it in. Lots42 (talk) 09:05, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Lots of Edits
I did a lot of work on the Deep Space Nine section, including deleting the highly offensive suggestion that being in denial about what seems to be a same sex kiss is homophobia. Lots42 (talk) 03:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)