I swear we had a topic dedicated to this subject but I'm sad to report that it must have fallen off the forum drop-off.

I'm pretty sure we had a topic on this too...oh, well. Homosexuality has been something that Trek has really skirted around. I always cringe when watching TNG and they continually refer to sexual/romantic relations between men and women. DS9 at least seemed to be better about blurring the lines (Garak/Bashir--hell, Garak and anybody, Dax and some other Trill whose name I forget, and, yes, even that reprehensible "Emperor's New Cloak"). Voyager? Ugh--same ole, same ole, Harry and Tom's great lurve notwithstanding.

Well, we should keep HoYay seperate from homosexuality. As much fun as HoYay is.

Yes, HoYay has a separate thread.

I know it does, it's just that the post before my previous seemed to be more about HoYay and less about homosexuality (one which Star Trek has in bushels, the other seems to be lacking from canon).

I was agreeing with you, cuiusquemodi and reminding people about the HoYay thread.

That's part of the problem with Trek--we've never really seen much in the way of homosexuality. The closest we've ever come to that was perhaps TNG's "The Outcast." What I meant in my above post was that Trek, for all it's inclusive sensibilities, doesn't even recognize the possibility of same-gendered romantic relationships--for example, many of the conversations that people on Trek have had about relationships have been quite gender specific ("when a man and a woman get together," etc). I do seem to remember an anecdote about Whoopi Goldberg refusing to read a line that said "when a man and a woman..." during shooting for 'The Offspring,' arguing that in humans in the 24th century should be beyond such narrow conceptions of romantic relationships.

Fascinating. I never heard that anecdote before. Does Whoopi go to conventions?

What about DS9's "Rejoined"? I've always felt that was the better episode. Because, simultaneously, it's about homosexuality in the metaphor, but also it's about two women coming together romantically and no one batting an eye over their genders.


I think the possibility is left open, in several off-handed lines throughout the series (but especially DS9). Although I suspect if one were tallying, the "man and woman" count would outnumber the "homosexuality is okay" count.

But the thing I finally understood the last time we discussed this is that gay people want to see their way of life still exists in the future. We all want that. People want to see themselves represented on TV. Because if we see people like ourselves on TV suddenly we're more "normal", which makes us feel better about ourselves and our way of life.

So the "homosexuality is okay" stuff isn't enough. Actual gay characters are wanted. I get that now.

And I can't stress it enough: Chimera. Odo and Laas openly do the Changeling-equivalent of intercourse. And both characters are played by male actors, so the primary complaint about "The Outcast" (that Soren was played by a woman) is removed.

Also, with "The Outcast", as much as people complain about that aspect of it, what does it say about Riker's sexuality? He openly went into a relationship with an individual who may have self-identified as female, but biologically was not. That's got to count for something.

I don't.

Well, I take that back. I get that people want it. I respect their position. I have no problem with the request. But I don't join them in thinking it's an imperitive. Mainly because I think it amounts to a really really big request.

1. At the smallest level,have a few episodes, a few situations, where alternatives to the the "traditional" male/female relationship are shown and accepted. It's been done, that's where we are now. And some people are saying it's not enough.

2. So we need a repeat character. What if I were to tell you that Admiral Nechayev is a lesbian. You can't dispute it, right? We haven't seen her with a male partner. Of course, I'm just playing symantics here because we haven't seen her with a woman either. But that illustrates my point - it would have to be someone who repeats frequently enough for their romantic preferences to have been displayed.

At this point, the writers can't ignore that character's sexuality any time he/she is on screen, because they're always at risk of being accused of playing to / playing away from the stereotypes. To quote the about.com article that's been referenced before, lesbian Ezri is apparently not a good thing because
3. Let's suppose Garak was gay. Certainly I can see the character having gone there. I'm not convinced that would silence all critics - not by a long shot. He had a lot of negative qualities. And for crying out loud, he was a tailor. I'm sure someone would have been offended with him as a token gay character. Now they've offended those-who-we-never-seem-to-know-personally-yet-we-always-assume-they-exist, and those homophobes have stopped watching. No big loss says I, but if that doesn't placate the community they're trying to appease anyway, it hardly seems worth it.

4. So I guess we need a high-level, frequently-occurring, unquestionably good character. Like a captain. I would have no problem with a gay captain. Are they never going to have any romantic entanglements though? I suppose you could have a mostly-offscreen partner like Keiko was to Miles. But there were other potential/theoretical partners for O'Brien at times, so there should be for our theoretical person as well. Obviously dropping in a gay character on Planet X is going to seem like a contrievance. Plus, aren't you at risk of implying the stereotype that any two gay men are necessarily compatible? Maybe then we need gay characters that they're not interested in, to make it more special when two do meet.

In short, what I'm getting at is that you can't simply add a gay character without taking a lot of things into consideration and potentially changing any other plot line you want to have. I wouldn't have a problem with that, but I also don't have a problem with them wanting to ignore it.

I will say however that they dropped the ball on DS9 by creating a female founder when no natural sex organs exist for changelings anyway. Had they all been "male" like Odo, it would have made perfect sense plus been a friendly nod toward the idea that gender roles don't matter. Make the whole species like the people on Outcast, without the reverse-social-pressure of the J'naii. Then every time Odo linked with any changeling it would be like the meeting he had on Chimera.

ETA: I just have to add that as far as the "I want people like me" argument goes, ugly people are seriously underrepresented all over television but you don't hear me complaining.

I'm glad they didn't have just male changelings. There's enough underrepresentation of women in Trek anyway, which brings me to my point. I am a woman. I am repeatedly offended by the way they use or portray female characters on the various Treks (except for DS9). However, female characters are still there. I still get to see characters like me in that respect on the Trek screen. I'm frequently not happy with how I see them, but my straight femaleness is represented.

I think that it is imperative to have a homosexual, recurring human character on Trek, as long as that character is not a villain. I don't think the character needs to be a captain. I don't think the character necessarily needs to be a main cast member (though that would be nice), but she or he needs to be there and she or he really needs to be human. In all the other instances of same-sex relationships or sexual encounters, the characters have not been human: Trill, Changeling, whatever Soren was, but no humans.

So long as this character is not intentionally portrayed as evil or deviant or perverse, I see no reason to shy away. Yes, some people will be offended, but it will be a starting place from which to move forward and improve that character or future homosexual Trek characters. At this point in the game, the "we can't please everyone, so we want to maintain the non-representative status quo" just doesn't wash anymore. It's 2004 for the producers. It's 2150 for the characters. Get a move on already.

I don't know. I mean don't get me wrong I would love to see a gay cast member on any of the various Trek incarnations. Incidentally,the hottie helmsman from First Contact? Was made into a gay character in a Novel after the movie came out and we got to see his relationship with his partner be accepted and no big deal to the main crew.

But that's not on screen.

So yeah...I would like to see a gay recurring character sure. But for me what would be better, more meaningful, would be to see it in the background and just blend in. Have Bev and Troi sitting in ten forward chatting and in the background at the various tables there are all these couples, and one of them happens to be two men or two women holding hands across the table.

Or Kira is strolling through the Prominade saying hello to various couples and one of them happens to be a gay couple, or one half of a gay couple and she asks after the other.

This to me would go much much father then having "a very special episode" or one gay character. Because it would show that, truly, gay couples are an accepted, integrated part of the culture. And that for me is what was missing in Trek. Yeah I got the symbolism, and thanks for trying. In these days I know it is hard. So their attempts were appreciated. But this is how I would have liked to see them handle it.

Re: Changelings. I'm not sure Laas is a good example. He came across as somewhat pushy sexually to me. Like he'd never linked with anyone, never having known another Changeling, and was desperate for anyone, gender notwithstanding.

As to the Female Changeling, it's possible they were trying to drag in Odo, and knew he had been conditioned (by being raised by [straight] solids) to be attracted to females.

I think alexias makes a good point. Furthermore, they're in a bit of a bind- to make an entire story out of something would imply that homosexuality is not considered "normal" in the future. So background- even as an aspect of a major character- is one thing, but portraying it as a source of conflict, etc. raises more issues.

But then... I was always iffy about Changeling gender anyway. I mean, the reason Odo looks like he just woke up from the Matrix is because he wasn't raised amongst other changelings, better at assuming humanoid forms than he. The reason the female Changeling decided to make herself appear like Odo (as opposed to, say, a Bajoran female or Bolian male) is because Odo would appriciate the familiar face. What would have kept her from assuming a male form? Yes, Odo's humanoid form is male, but probably because his first exposure to humanoids was scientists, who, poltical correctness aside, are mostly a male group.

But then there was his attraction to Kira. I suppose being "raised" amongst Bajorans in a male form might imprint on him an attraction to females. I don't know enough of his backstory to comment on that.

But then, there is Changeling reproduction altogether, which is either asexual or sexual. If it's asexual, fine, they can be purely genderless. Asexual reproduction would also explain why no Changelings posessed a natural immunity to Section 31's virus, which one might expect some Changelings to have.

But I drift from the topic. I don't think Changelings are a good example for homosexuality because I think they are, in their liquid form (and thus, while linked) sexless.

Disclaimer: I am not a scientist, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Odo technically has no sex. So that sort of makes him bisexual. Maybe he just liked Kira more than anyone else, and gender didn't really have anything to do with his attraction to her.


Not really. You just need one that's human, sympathetic, and flawed in the way most good characters are. Er, metaphorically human. Garak might not be the best choice because he is so morally grey and he doesn't want anyone to understand him.


Exactly. For me, it always comes back to comparisons with Uhura on TOS. You show people a black woman on the bridge, or an openly gay character, or an interracial kiss, or a gay couple kissing, and it becomes more normal for them. If they accept it on TV, they'll come to accept it in life. You "break" them of thinking it's strange and something to hate by making these characters people they "know".

Or fear.

Odo being sexless notwithstanding, if he was raised in an environment that wasn't particularly open to homosexuality, I can see him being "conditioned," at least somewhat, into thinking he's only attracted to women.

He doesn't react that way to Laas, though. So maybe you're right, Cleo.

Well, I can't really say I've seen much evidence supporting or refuting Bajoran homophobia. As in all cultures, I'm sure there are elements along all elements of the spectrum, but unfornitually, we have no way of knowing where the majority of Bajorans stand. Any culture made of sentients dependent on sexual reproduction would logically insist on heterosexuality, at least to some degree, for sheer perpetuation of the species.

It's been a while since I saw DS9's "Let He Who Is Without Sin..." (since it's awful), but isn't there the implication that Curzon Dax had had Vanessa Williams as a lover, and that as Jadzia Dax, neither of them would mind repeating that relationship. And Worf got all uppity accusing Jadzia of that as well.

And I would bet Risians are most likely all omnisexual.

I think most joined Trill would probably be fairly comfortable with gender-bending and experimenting with their sexual orientation. I mean, if I could remember being a man having sex with a woman and being a woman having sex with a man, I don't think it would actually be that big of a deal to *me* whether I was dating men or women. Being overly uptight about sex would probably be something the Symbiosis Commission wouldn't be looking for in its prospective hosts, even.

Ferengi are pragmatically bisexual as well. They've got a Rule of Acquisition about it.

Rule 11, in a society where women are not permitted to do just about anything, is "Always have sex with the boss."

(I think it's Rule 11, anyway. My copy of Legends of the Ferengi is sadly upstairs somewhere.)

You know... I'd never thought of it that way. Maybe by "sex," they mean oo-mox. That's... less squicky.

It's still giving someone of your own gender an orgasm. That's something most heterosexual humans are very uneasy about, to say the least.

LOL! You think the writers intended that interpretation of the Rule, or is it just a fortituous fanwank? (I tend to think the latter, but still, hee! I wonder if Quark ever "serviced" the Nagus...)

Ew.

Not because it's gay sex, but because it's the Nagus. Ew.

I guess I feel about homosexuality the same way I feel about yogurt. Icky for me, but if anyone else wants it, that's cool. And I'm certainly not grossed out by yogurt commercials, although the Nagus eating yogurt might gross me out. You know, I think the Nagus's existence grosses me out. Anyway...

Technically that rule is non-canon, and it's #113. It was in the Rules of Acquisition book. The authors of that book were Armin Shimerman and Ira Behr, though, which lends it some validity.

Was the book written after we learned how Ferengi women were treated?

I think the first Ferengi ep on TNG had them exclaiming, "You clothe your females???" which would seem to indicate that women didn't have a high standing in their society.

This will probably change the tone of the discussion, but...



I always thought that Rule was, "Never have sex with the boss' sister". Or alternately, "Always suck up to the boss". Can somebody double-check?

I don't know the numbers, but the rules you're thinking of, Elenita are:

"It never hurts to suck up to the boss!"

and then the one-two punch of:

"Never have sex with the boss' sister."

"Always have sex with the boss."

According to that site I linked above, that's a canon rule, and it's #112. Quark says it in "Playing God". In the book, it's followed up with non-canon rule #113, "Always have sex with the boss".


According to Amazon, the book was published in July 1995, which would be between DS9's 2nd and 3rd seasons, and after TNG was done. "Rules of Aquisition" is the 2nd-season episode where Pel digsuises herself as a male so she can earn profit and, regardless of anything that comes before, that episode is a lock on the treatment of Ferengi women.

Lt. Hawk?

I heard rumors, nothing that I can substantiate, that Lt. Hawk was supposed to be gay in the movie but TPTB wouldn't let it happen. Of course, this rumor may have started because of the novel.

Yup. Lt. Hawk. Who played him by the way? Cuz...HOT!!!

I actually owned the book and then gave it to my ex to read (he wasn't my ex at the time) and I never got it back. Stupid ex. : )

But the story took place AFTER the events of First Contact and we see his male partner deal with his death (Riker goes with him to tell the family, etc....) but then goes into Lt. Hawk's life a bit and how he was recruited into the, I forget the name of it, special security section of Starfleet that no body knows about and basically can do whatever the heck they want? Yeah them. They want Hawk. Frankly, who wouldn't??? And if I remember correctly, he exposes them, but again this was a while ago and see above regarding stupid ex.

Section 31. It was part of that series. Odd, though, I thought Bashir exposed them.

ETA, IMHO, having sex with the boss is a bad idea.

Heh. I've got an audiobook of Armin-as-Quark reading the Rules of Acquisition that my parents gave me for Christmas. He's very funny about the "sex with the boss" rule ...

I didn't realize it was non-canon because of that - once I've heard a thing in Quark's voice, I sort of automatically categorize it as "stuff I've heard Quark say." Silly brain. It's going to start mixing in some of Principal Snyder if I'm not careful.

Neal McDonough. Photo of hot Lt. Hawk

What the hell happened to cute Lt Hawk? He looks well rough in the pics from the I, Robot premiere.

Topic? Oh, right. I'd never heard that Rule of Acquisition ("Always have sex with the boss") before, and it certainly sheds a new and...interesting light on Ferengi society. Although, I don't actually want to think about it too much; all those wrinkles and pointy teeth. Ew.

I've always had a feeling, which I can't back up at all, that Trek always steered clear of gay characters because on some level TPTB think that their core audience is teenage boys - a group not generally known for their tolerance.

That assumes that none of those teenage boys are gay.

Hey I grew up like two towns over from Hottie Hawk!!

Although I am considerably younger.....

This might get me into trouble, but just as a fanwank, one reason there's no depiction of homosexuality in Star Trek is that some time in the future (possibly in the run up to the Eugenics Wars) genetic engineering reaches the point where genes for homosexuality can be found and eliminated. Thus, before tolerance is the norm homosexuality is eliminated from the population.

Hell, maybe that's what happened to fat people and ugly people too.

I see where you going, the gene was eliminated before genetic engineering was regulated when homosexuality was considered undesirable (I hated typing that) and so there is no homosexuality in the more tolerant future. I don't know that science, at this point, can back up that homosexuality is entirely genetic in source.

Also, to equate sexuality with a disease or a deformity, or for it to be something to be manipulate, even in the Trekverse past.

Trek is not too great with this nor religion, though I tend to think it's the producers etc who nix any mention of homosexuality and religion in order to not push anyone's buttons, which is truly sad.

There are more than just humans in the Trek galaxy. Anyway, Trek isn't a history. There's not a set series of events that happened pre-Federation explained in any great detail and no mention of the elimination of homosexuality inducing genes. If they haven't said it happened in canon, then there's still no excuse at all. It's fiction, it's not like TPTB can't change anything they like. So the idea of something happening around the Eugenics Wars and Bermaga can't change that is silly, because outside of Space Seed and WoK Bermaga pretty much make up what happened in the Eugenics Wars to suit them.

While I can see the more intolerant types trying to eliminate a "gay gene", Khan himself struck me as being in luuuurv with Kirk...and vice-versa. So while that may not directly contradict canon, it does mess with a personal take on at least one relationship.

That's more HoYay than what's germane in this thread.

This might have been brought up in the old version of the thread but I wasn’t around then.

I don’t know of any primary source for this, but I distinctly remember that when DS9’s “Rejoined” first aired, there was discussion about how far Trek would ever go in depicting homosexuality. I remember hearing that TPTB considered their hands to be tied by the fact that Gene Roddenbury specifically did not want that to be included in his Utopian vision of the future. I know from reading the religion thread that his dictates there have been bent a bit and the consensus in TNG thread seems to be that his releasing of the reins on that show was the best thing that ever happened to it. I also believe that the currency debate was brought on by some episodes (of all the incarnations) adhering to his ‘vision’ while others tried to realistically portray complex societies- thus contradicting each other. As far as sexuality goes, I get the impression that when the creators really, really want to break his ‘rules’ they do with very little hesitation, but that when they would rather not deal with controversy they can hide behind Roddenbury’s wishes.

One of the great freedoms the Enterprise creators have is that the show is set before GR’s imagined Golden Age and thus characters could easily be portrayed with attributes that GR would have considered flaws without setting off the die-hard purist fan base. I guess what I am trying to say is that I can see why the previous series did not include more than brief hints of same sex relationships, but that, in my opinion, hampering Enterprise with those constraints is a cop out- they had an understandable (not good, but understandable) excuse before, but with this show, they have an out, and I am extremely frustrated that they are not taking it.

I've never heard that before. Roddenberry didn't like conflict in his Utopian society. So introducing gay human characters and having other humans have a problem with them would be against Roddenberry's ideals. But I've never heard that Roddenberry was against homosexuality. Not even in the DS9 Companion entry on "Rejoined".

Not that I'm defending Roddenberry against that accusation. I've just never heard his opinion on the matter either way.

I actually wrote to TPTB when TNG first premiered about the inclusion of a gay character and got the usual form letter from Roddenberry's office thanking me for taking the time to write and blah blah blah. On the convention circuit he talked about wanting gay characters, but then you listen to people behind the scenes who say he actively didn't want it.

"Rejoined" was a good passive statement on gay activity. None of the characters acted as though it were odd that it was two women. I don't expect ENTERPRISE to go boldly in this area. Their only concern is staying on the air not blazing any trails.

Yes it is 2004, yet even the producers of Will & Grace say they won't give Will an "active" love life like they do Grace due to not wanting to "turn off" their audience. I guess they don't really know who's really watching after all.

Let me qualify this by saying that my source here was probably my “die-hard purist” friends and that if anyone here has better information, I would love to know for sure.


ETA: Found some stuff. Qwho, it seems to go along with what you heard.
Cool timeline of homosexuality in Trek here.
Interesting tidbits:



This site shows instances where GR made promises of gay portrayals that weren’t kept. But, yes, he was publicly in favor of it. All conspiracy theorists can meet at my place. Who are these “people”?

It almost sounds like Roddenberry wanted everyone to be omnisexual in the future.