 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 17, 2016 - 10:33 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
mstrox
(Member)
|
major way of life? no, it is not, it is about 4%, although the movement would like you to think it is indeed much more
I certainly have no hard knowledge re: what percentile any group falls into. 4% seems light, but might be accurate when you consider the massive number of children, surely a number of closeted non-reporters, etc. I'd imagine that percentage also comes from a binary (gay/straight) poll, as opposed to a spectrum/Kinsey scale-based study.
But all the same, 4% is not statistically insignificant, and 4% of 6 billion people is 240,000,000. A large group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Aug 17, 2016 - 10:46 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ian J.
(Member)
|
But all the same, 4% is not statistically insignificant, and 4% of 6 billion people is 240,000,000. A large group.
World population is now around 7.4 billion, putting the 4% at 296,000,000. Left handers, like myself, are approximately 11% of the world population. That's enough to have products specifically designed for us, so I'd say 4% is significant enough to be noted in entertainment shows. But like all things with minorities, it can get overdone when every single minority wants representation in everything most of the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 17, 2016 - 10:55 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Joe E.
(Member)
|
Why must they have to include another gay character? Yes, is is a major way of life now, but why do they feel the need to force this on us? I had all intentions to see Star Trek : Beyond until they announced that there was going to be a gay character. I still have not seen it and think I am done with any future Treks though the LGBT zone. I had high hopes for the new Trek TV series until the above news. Are they going to include a transgender character too? Doctor Who was also ruined for with Captain Jack. who they are talking about bring back and I never watched Torchwood.
The next thing they will probably do is a Supergirl / Flash musical cross over!
major way of life? no, it is not, it is about 4%, although the movement would like you to think it is indeed much more
Even if it's "only" 4%, that's still over 280 million of the world's seven-point-something billion people. I don't know how it doesn't qualify as a "major" way of life, certainly for those people who have it (and what "movement", anyway - the "movement" to treat them like human beings? Gosh, how outrageous!  ).
And yet Star Trek, with all the thousands of characters that have appeared in over 700 episodes and 13 movies, has never once in its history had a single canonically gay character* until the most recent film, released just weeks ago - pretty sad for a franchise that has long prided itself on a progressive message of inclusivity and representation. It's understandable, if regrettable, that there weren't any in the original series in the '60s, or the animated series of the '70s. But in 2016? Star Trek can justly claim to be pioneering and forward-thinking in some ways, but in this particular area it, it not only lost its chance long ago, it's been outpaced by far less ambitious shows. At this point it's just plain embarrassing that there haven't been more gay characters yet.
*I believe a minor character in Star Trek: First Contact was established as gay in some of the novels, but those ancillary publications have never enjoyed real canon status.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Aug 17, 2016 - 11:35 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Matt S.
(Member)
|
And yet Star Trek, with all the thousands of characters that have appeared in over 700 episodes and 13 movies, has never once in its history had a single canonically gay character* until the most recent film, released just weeks ago - pretty sad for a franchise that has long prided itself on a progressive message of inclusivity and representation. It's understandable, if regrettable, that there weren't any in the original series in the '60s, or the animated series of the '70s. But in 2016? Star Trek can justly claim to be pioneering and forward-thinking in some ways, but in this particular area it, it not only lost its chance long ago, it's been outpaced by far less ambitious shows. At this point it's just plain embarrassing that there haven't been more gay characters yet.
*I believe a minor character in Star Trek: First Contact was established as gay in some of the novels, but those ancillary publications have never enjoyed real canon status.
That's not *strictly* true....the DS9 episode "Rejoined" dealt with a potential same-sex relationship with Jadzia and Lenara Kahn, whose symbionts' previous hosts were lovers. It isn't treated as a gay/straight relationship, instead they create the taboo where Trills are forbidden to associate with former lovers when the symbionts get new hosts. So while Jadzia isn't "gay," per se, she is obviously conflicted and is apparently willing to have a relationship with a woman.
Also, in the mirror universe episodes, there is PLENTLY of homoerotic sexual tension, especially regarding Intendant Kira. I think the final mirror episode, "The Emperor's New Cloak," pretty much makes clear that Mirror-Ezri and Mirror-Leeta have the hots for each other at the end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 17, 2016 - 11:58 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Joe E.
(Member)
|
Even if it's "only" 4%, that's still over 280 million of the world's seven-point-something billion people. I don't know how it doesn't qualify as a "major" way of life, certainly for those people who have it (and what "movement", anyway - the "movement" to treat them like human beings? Gosh, how outrageous! ).
I cannot imagine you really do not understand what I meant, instead of going off into hyperbolic wonderland - -with the eyerolls too.
A character in a TV show or a movie is not the same thing as human rights.
A lifestyle or a gender identity is not the same thing as a racial minority.
A "lifestyle" is also not the same thing as a gender identity or a sexual orientation, either (and a gender identity and a sexual orientation are not the same as each other).
If you can't imagine what I really meant, then perhaps we're both missing something. Perhaps you'd care to enlighten me? All I really want to know is how including gay characters is going to somehow hurt the show (or any show, really).
(I'm also not sure what part of my post constitutes hyperbole, unless you're referring to Matt's post pointing out a handful of arguably gay characters, as well as ones who kinda sorta might maybe be thought of as gay, when I said there hadn't been any canonically gay characters. Do you mean 280,000,000? That really is 4% of seven billion, not an exaggeration. I did say over 280 million, true, but that's because the current global population is over 7 billion.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cool it, you guys!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
