the delphic expanse

Because of a discussion, I went out looking for stuff and things. Thought I'd share them here. Anything not appropriate by Delphic Expanse rules I'm happy to pull.

Sexuality in Star Trek -- Wikipedia
Who knew there was an entire wiki article on this subject? Extremely interesting.

Sexuality -- Memory Alpha
Trek-based wiki entry

Gay, Lesbian & Bisexual Star Trek
I'll include this one because it's from a LGBT perspective, not just an article or collection of information. Last entry was from 2003, quoting Scott.

Gay Trek
Wonderful Whoopi Goldberg story included, which is what I went looking for. The rest of the article reduced me to tears. From 2001.

I'm typing this here because I haven't read very much of the other thread and I think this is more appropriate for the topic.

I have to disagree with the basic idea behind most of the articles. Although LGBTQ are woefully underrepresented, it is the same pace as the analogy most often used in these articles. This means that ST hasn't achieved its goal of the all-encompassing, perfect future by any means, not just out to exclude one issue.

The example used, the interracial kiss, aired in 1968. But this was not the kiss of two characters in love or even established in the show to care for each other that way. It was forced upon them for "alien" reasons. Now, cut to the Next Generation. Interracial kissing was rare (I can't even give you an example of it without alien make-up involved). Sure, there were comments like "I'm attracted to him" or love-struck moony eyes, but an actual interracial relationship? I'm hard-pressed to remember one from any of the shows until ENT Travis and Gannet Brooks.

So the initial "progress" of interracial kissing took 20 years to the day (I'm being kind because I can't remember anything more specific). And from then to the ENT ep took another 18 or so years.

Now, ST touched on the LGBTQ issue in TNG, actually had two women kissing (which is more accepted for some reason) with their "alien" reason in DS9 in 1995. So if people expect the same treatment of LGBTQ issues as interracial issues, ENT probably would have had the relationship of a male human with an male alien that appeared female (Think Farscape Zenetan), sometime in the 5th season of '05. From there, it would only be 28 years. But w/o Trek on TV, the timelines continues... calling for the same treatment, just sit back. It'll be coming in another 22 years.

I do agree that LGTB issues have been woefully underrepresented, but I do think they were moving forward and, as I said in the 2D2N thread, that if we had a show today, it would be taking up the issue in a more progressive way.

Back on TNG, there were several metaphorical episodes, including Riker's romance with the woman from the supposedly androgynous alien and Beverly falling in love with a Trill that turned from male to female.

Shows which did feature gay romances weren't perfect, either. I remember when Babylon 5 had its lesbian love affair, which was pre-Willow and Tara on Buffy, it was between two very attractive women. Girl/Girl action is hetero normative, in the sense that straight men like it, straight men have the the power and run the FCC, therefore it is acceptable. Yet, at the same time there were several throw away lines on Babylon 5 that indicates homosexuality was not taboo in human society. On the other hand, the lesbian love story turned and one of the women turned out to be evil and broke the heart of the other, in the classic "evil gay" scenario.

I, for one, always saw a definite gay subtext in the way Garak showed interest in Bashir, but it was in the Alfred Hitchcock subtext way. Hitchcock wasn't gay nor was he particularly homophobic, but he was not above having a same sex character show a sexual interest in the protagonist in order to make that character register as creepy or/villainous. He did this in Strangers on a Train and Rebecca. Garak always seemed to be willing to seduce Bashir, body and soul, it didn't matter. But that scenario is hardly positive. DS9 had the lesbian kiss between the two hot women, and it wasn't portrayed as wrong, except for the taboo of the Trill society. The same sex element wasn't commented upon.

Trek in general certainly could have done more, and I for one was happy when Martin and Mangels gave Trip a gay brother, which was a minor part of the story but basically said there are accepted gays in the future. I would hope that the show, had it aired today, would have done something similar.

I'm back on my work schedule so can't be detailed in reply today.

That Trek could have done more is an understatement. We have Trek today; the latest movie wasn't done in some Victorian age, and Chris Pine almost humping someone in his underwear (appealing to both sides as that is) is still apparently more acceptable in a "family movie" than seeing background characters who are simply with each other -- not that there was much room in the movie for that. I'm hoping in the next movie we see something, not related to story, that shows people just are. Once that barrier is crossed, it's no longer a BFD, and things can be integrated later on without it having to be front and center because it's Teh Gay OMG.

The most poignant statement in all of those articles is, where are all the happy, well-adjusted gay people in the 24th century? It's as if they've been erased, along with sickness and war, like it was something that just didn't make it into the future. Yes, I understand the times we lived in during production. I don't understand it now.

Trek, of all things, should be better. What we've been given just isn't good enough. Not anymore.

For anyone looking for a crash course in LGBT images in films, I highly, highly, highly recommend the 1995 documentary "The Celluloid Closet", which as a straight person I found mesmerizing and instructive when I first saw it. My gay friends are more "meh" because they naturally see the coded images that I was oblivious, too. The film is by the same people who did "The Times of Harvey Milk."

It's available entirely on Youtube. Here's part one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe3WGtaWA84


This is where I got my reading of Garak/Bashir as a kind of Hitchcockian villain/hero seduction scenario. And I will absolutely say, I think Silik was played gay in the very same way, and I'll be watching the rewatch of Shockwave with that eye this week.

I will say the film puts the whole issue in larger context and illustrates just how starved the gay community has been for images of themselves, how often those images have been negative and how often the issue has been treated metaphorically. It doesn't cover television, so Trek isn't addressed, but there is a later segment on the 1980s vampire film "The Hunger".

I watched parts 1-5 and it's absolutely fascinating. Anyone know where part 6 is? Please...

There are two different facets of this subject that have come to the forefront.

The first is the under-representation of LGBT characters in Star Trek. Which I agree with whole-heartedly. Is it long past time? Sure enough. Is it ironic considering how many gay people are involved in show business? Maybe a little, yes. Should the next incarnation of Trek, be it on a movie screen or a TV screen, try to do better with this? Absolutely.

The second thing, however, is what happens when we look at an episode as a text unto itself--no articles, no outraged fans, no background of who said what in which interview--just looking at what we see on the screen. Is there textual support for what we're seeing? Or are we projecting our own desires/issues/whatever into it? These questions (among others) are what critical thinkers ask when they read or watch something.

In reference to the second facet, I just don't think it's fair to look at two characters engaged in a heterosexual behavior, or two characters engaged in a homosexual behavior but saying it doesn't count because one of them started out in an opposite sex body (as was done in one of the above articles), and present that as some kind of anti-gay agenda. If you can textually support a case for a character's behavior being this or that or the other, go for it. Whether I agree with them or not, other ways of reading something are cool or interesting. But if it's not textually supported, then we're in the realm of wishful thinking and personal agendas instead of critical textual analysis.

And to be clear--this isn't anything that I haven't said to my own fellow TnTers who've painted Trip as a misogynist and T'Pol as a human with pointed ears and a crappy haircut. My position on this aspect of the issue is not politically or sexually motivated, but rather analytically.

Isn't it addictive, CW?

The version I posted appears to be missing a couple of parts (6 and 8) but this other version appears complete!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbJrD5cc ... 6B17C54CF3

You can try that one!

Absolutely. I don't know what I love more, seeing the clips or the interviews in between.

Thanks so much, HB!