Reader Commentary

Laura sent the following comments in August 2003.

1) "We mustn't harm the children with homosexuality! They may be *gulp* INFLUENCED!"

Children cannot truly be influenced by homosexuality. They do not have the hormones to feel anything of the sort. It might open their minds a little, for when they reach puberty, but I hardly think they would choose something so important based on what they saw on Star Trek. The fact of the matter is, the more homosexuality is shown as a positive thing, there will be less abuse for homosexuals in the future. Children ARE susceptible in that way, for they can learn what is right and what is wrong from shows like Star Trek with a high morality factor in the storylines, but again, you cannot teach a person to BE gay. It is a personal realisation, which you can choose to accept or fight, but it is NOT like choosing a political party or a cult to be joined. Sorry, we're not recruiting.

2) "If God did not approve of gay people then why did He make them?"

I'm agnostic, personally, but I made an effort to understand why people were telling me that something so integral to my sense of being was a sin, and this is what I came up with: God made people, gave them a place to live and a set of rules to follow. It's all about temptation. You could be homosexual, and so long as you never engaged in sexual intercourse with a member of the same sex and led a good life, you would have a place in Heaven. It seems to me that the entire process is a test, to see what you can do without in the name of God. Being gay is not the sin, it's gay sex, because it's all for pleasure. No breeding could ever come from it. In that vein, God gave people the ability to be gay to see if they could resist temptation, if you believe in that sort of thing. I couldn't, and I don't! ;)

3) "In the 24th century, being gay doesn't matter any more!"

That may well be true, in which case it's marvellous, however the show ran in the twentieth, and runs in the twenty-first century, and we still have issues with it here. Star Trek was known for having parallels with current events originally. It had members of all races working towards a common goal, which was great. Inspiring even. Pop-culture has more punch than people would care to admit in that respect. I think largely the problem is that there is a group of people out there who don't believe homosexuality is much more than a sordid underworld of sex and drugs. It's lack of appearance in shows like Star Trek screams to me that it was a fad that disappeared rather than something that was completely accepted. I think it's important that Star Trek should show, once again, that in the future diversity is not only encouraged but *necessary*. We're not going away.

As for Star Trek itself, I still cannot believe they missed the chance with Seven of Nine (I posted this on the messageboard, also). She would be the perfect candidate. Firstly, she could go through the realisation process, even though she's an adult. She missed puberty, so it's perfectly plausible. That would give confused teenagers something to relate to, at least. Secondly, it could be so innocent. Seven easily wasn't ready to engage in affection. All it would take is for a male crewmember to ask her out, and for her to *tell* him. I'd have been happy, for a while at least. Thirdly, the Borg are BIG on efficiency. That would be a major turning point in Seven's humanity, because gayness is NOT efficient, as it doesn't allow for breeding (without some innovative thinking, at any rate :)!).

On the old show with William Shatner it was established that in this world day is night, good is evil, etc. Why then do pro homosexual Star Trek fans delight in the numerous gay characters in these episodes!? Kira, Ezri, and Leeta's lesbianism and Garak offering Worf sexual favors to be spared execution are in my mind Star Trek's way of consigning homosexuality to a decadent nether region. These are episodes wherein anti homosexuals can watch and be titillated, but also remain secure in their bigotry with a context that strongly implies that these are indeed deviants! I really wish that the homosexual community would stop looking to these episodes as some sort of mildly positive representation. They are not!

Of course in being represented the gay community will have to realize that we will appear as heroes AND villains, something that is but a fair comparison to life, however Star Trek DS9 has EVERY gay character falling on top of one another through the metaphorical haze of some Berlin nightclub in the 30s.

Brian sent in the following remarks:

I don't think the shows' producers have been homophobic, exactly (at least I don't see any definite proof of that), they've just been cowardly. They know they're not going to lose the support of gay and lesbian viewers if they occasionally toss us a bone: The proof of that is in your interactive poll, where almost half who answered thought that the show had lost credibility on the g/l issue, but less than 10% of the total stopped watching as a result; while the largest segment (37%) would continue watching anyway (that was my answer too, actually). On the other hand, the producers may feel that the shows have a large appeal for adolescent boys and military types, two groups notorious for their homophobia. Rather than "alienate" them they've chosen to keep 24th century gays in the closet, only discreetly hinting at the subject in "disguised" form ("The Outcast", etc.)--and that only due to persistent requests from the likes of us.

I'm not convinced that even if Roddenberry had lived we would have seen gay and lesbian characters on TNG. According the one of his biographers (the unauthorized one, I've forgotten his name) he vetoed a suggestion by David Gerrold to include a gay character on the first season of TNG. Since then the producers have kept dangling the possibility of gay characters appearing in order to keep us happy. Before DS9 aired, didn't all of us think that the Trill character was bound to be bisexual, because that had already been established as normal for his/her species in "The Host"? Wasn't that the reason for including the character in the first place? Alas, no. Two or three episodes into the series it was explained that the symbiotic relationship involves a "blending" of host and symbiont, with the host personality (in this case, the heterosexual Jadzia) dominant. So they really didn't have to deal with that other yucky possibility for quite some time. (And when they did they got it over with quickly.)

DS9 also offered us the ambiguous tailor Garak and Odo the shapeshifter (played by Rene Auberjonois, who has played a number of gay or gay-identified roles in his career) as characters we could presumably "identify" with, even though they weren't actually gay. In one of the last episodes to air, Odo, having becoming chummy with another, much less discreet Changeling, is accused by Quark of "flaunting" his shapeshifting abilities; he sneeringly suggests that Odo might want to march in a "Changeling Pride" parade on the Promenade, but he shouldn't expect anyone to cheer. (Yet another Star Trek subtle social parallel, on a par with the "Black/white vs. white/black" race war episode from the original series, or the "space hippies" one. But while the original Enterprise was, in fact, racially integrated, and Chekhov's hair was rather long for a while, Odo isn't queer--he's just odd.)

Then came Voyager... I know I'm not the only one who thought when the series began that (possibly) Harry Kim's friendship for Tom Paris might prove to be more than just a friendship, even if the feeling wasn't mutual. When that proved to be incorrect, I pinned my hopes on the holographic Doctor.

Who once again proved to be straight for no apparent reason. (Sarcastic, fussy, vain, neurotic, opera-loving,... what's the next word in this sequence?) I think in all these cases the producers were deliberately toying with us, just as they would do again with Seven of Nine.

Jackie shared this insight:

Although I'd love to see a reoccurring gay member of the Trek crew it will be impossible. In the next centuries to come gays and lesbians will be fed up with the crap of gay bashing and have moved to a planet of their own, Homosexuia. On our planet we live total bliss, peace and happiness. Freely expressing ourselves and our love for each other without censure from anyone. Our technology (since homosexuals are far more advanced than heterosexuals) has given us the ability to transcend time and space barriers and we go on excursions saving gays in all times and space from their heterosexual counterparts. We wait patiently for the heterosexuals to catch up to us and when that day comes we will allow them back into the fold that we call humanity.

An anonymous AOL user sent me the following commentary. I'm printing it here to make it clear once and for all that I do not automatically consider dissenting opinion hate mail. It only becomes "hate" mail when it crosses the line from civilized discourse to name-calling and other expressions of disrespect.

I can respect your point of views regarding your sexual preference, but being homosexual still carries a negative stigma in today's society. If the producers were to include homosexual crew members cast in a positive light, children that watch the show may be influenced. If they allow homosexual crew members to be shown on Star Trek, they should also show crew members smoking a joint or snorting a line of cocaine or whatever 24th century makes up. Sadly, homosexuality and drug use are stigmatized, so to include these elements in a positive show would not make sense.

About this GLAAD organization...do you guys have to be so hardcore? You guys make it hard to sympathize or understand your points of view when you're all frothing at the mouth over stupid things like homosexuals on star trek and eminem. I can't believe you guys have nothing better to do. Then again, I am writing this email. Unless its two hot lesbians, i say keep star trek homosexual free. Or show Picard smoking a blunt. yeesh

Joe sent in the following comments:

Hello,

My name is Joe. I am 25 years old. I have watched star trek for as far back as I can remember. From the days of the original series to the new Voyager series. I firmly believe in what the United Federation of Planets stands for. I am not overly bothered by gays or lesbians not being portrayed. I looked at it in this manner. In the 24th century the issue of being gay is not important anymore. In the 24th century and within the Federation you are free to love and or have sex with anyone you wish or anything as the case may be. It is of course regrettable that Rick Berman nor the other producers have the guts to atleast in some manner show that in the 24th century being gay is not an issue.

I read the hate mail you posted on your website. I would like to respond to the illogical, narrow minded, self -- centered, egotistical zealots who think that their way is the only right way. (You are free to post this or quote me if you like.) People argue that being gay is wrong or a sickness because it is not right according to the bible. I could quote every section of the bible that claims to condemn homosexuality, but I will not as I am sure most of the readers would already know them. However, there is one major problem I see with this argument. The Bible is thousands of thousands of years old. It has been translated over and over again and again. No one can say for certain that the Bible is now 100% accurate. Mistakes are made by humans that cannot be avoided. Therefore it is logical to assume that the Bible has been misunderstood or one word mistranslated to give the wrong impression. I will give an example of how the bible has been mistranslated or misunderstood.

The Story of Sodom - Genesis 19:1-25

Many people carelessly proclaim that God destroyed the city of Sodom because of homosexuality. A careful look however, reveals that this is unlikely.

Two angels were sent to Sodom by God, where Lot, Abraham's nephew, persuades the divine travelers to stay in his home. It is important to note that travelers depended on the kindness of strangers. Ancient hospitality codes required people to offer food, shelter and protection to people who were traveling. Without these codes travel would have been difficult, if not impossible.

After the Angels ate and were preparing for bed, all of the people of Sodom converged on Lots home, demanding that the angels come out so that the towns people might know(rape) them. In an effort to protect his guests, Lot denies the angry mob access to the angels, but offers his two virgin daughters instead. This suggests Lot knew his neighbors to be heterosexual. The townspeople refuse, and charge at Lot in an attempt to gain access to the angels. At this point the angels pull Lot back inside the house, and render the angry crowd blind so they cannot find the door. The angels then warn Lot to gather his family and leave the city because it will soon be destroyed.

Much confusion over this passage has to do with the phrase to know them. The Hebrew word yadha (to know) has several different meanings throughout the Bible. In most cases it means to "have thorough knowledge of." In many cases it means "to check the credentials of", and in some cases may mean to "have sex with". In this case, however, it is clear that the townspeople wanted to harm the strangers, and because of ancient hospitality codes, Lot felt compelled to protect his guests. The townspeople wanted to perform an act of violence by raping the angels, a grave violation of ancient hospitality codes.

Homosexual rape was not uncommon. Kings of conquered tribes were sometimes raped by the invading army as the ultimate symbol of defeat and humiliation. The men in these armies were not homosexual, they were heterosexuals performing an act of violence. Never in any culture has more than a minority of the population been homosexual, and it is unlikely that all of the men in these armies or all the men of Sodom were gay.

Unfortunately, some people have focused on rape as a sexual act, rather than an act of violence, and have missed the point completely. The reason for Sodom's destruction is made clear in Ezekiel 16:48-50. According to Ezekiel, the sins of Sodom were pride, laziness, being inhospitable, neglecting the needs of the poor, greed, and idolatry (the worshipping of idols). Nothing about homosexuality is mentioned, nor is it mentioned in any other passage of Scripture which refers to the account of Sodom.

The above is only one example of the misunderstanding of the bible with regard to homosexuality.

A member whom posted a hate letter to your board stated that the treatment of Blacks and Jews cannot be compared to the way Homosexuals are treated. This person is clearly blind to the facts and logic. People seem to forget that during WW2 homosexuals were also rounded up and put to death. If I recall the number correctly somewhere between 600 and 6,000 homosexuals were murdered. Some were even forced into the German military to carryout suicide missions. So yes, homosexuals mistreatment can be compared to the Jews. However, Gays and Lesbians are not treated has badly today has they have been in the past. Yes, gays can be compared to how the black people were treated. Blacks were kidnapped, bashed, insulted, beaten, and murdered because of who they were. Blacks were seen as less than men a sickness to white society. Gays are kidnapped, bashed, insulted, beaten and murdered today like the blacks were in the past and still are in some cases today.

Another member who sent a hate letter to you stated that we should hide our sexuality and not show it to kids. I do not see the logic of this person either. There is a phrase that I assume almost everyone has heard. " What is good for the goose is good for the gander." Straight people are permitted to show affection towards each other. It is considered normal, what the majority of the people do. Kids see men and women having sex on TV and at the movies. This is considered typical behavior. Straight people seem to have conveniently forgotten one key element in this entire debate. Love is stronger than anything in this world. If two people love each other, then they by God have a right to show it. God says that we are supposed to love everyone including those who transgress against us. He also say "Judge not lest you be judged." So, those of you who claim that the Bible is almighty and God is never wrong. You are not following your own teachings. So who is committing the greater crime against God? Is it the Homosexuals? Or is it those who profess to follow the word of God yet do not?

This country, The United States of America was founded to escape the tyrannical King of England so that people would be allowed to express their trueselves and true beliefs without fear of being charged with a crime.

Another member stated that homosexuality was the cause for the world getting worse. This made me laugh. There is a historical study that traced homosexuality through the past. Homosexuality can be found throughout history. It cannot be ignored. In fact the study showed that throughout history the population of homosexuals has remained roughly constant at about 5% of the population in any given area. So, the world has a population in the billion range. Lets say 1 Billion at 5% that would mean there are roughly 300 million homosexuals world wide. That is not a whole lot of people in the grand scheme of things. Nor will it or can it result in the extinction of the human race as some claim. Because the majority of the population of straight far exceeds the gay population.

Another fact for the people who condemn or hate gays. God does not make mistakes. well, if this is the case. Then why are they gay people. If he did not approve of homosexuality then why would he put gay people on this earth? The bible does say that it does not condone cult prostitution. Both straight and gay prostitution. It does not say anywhere that love between two people of the same sex is wrong.

So in conclusion. I would simply like to say to the people who sent hate mail. That I hope you have gained or will gain knowledge from this. We has a society cannot be closed minded on any issue that we face. We must look at all sides of any issue. We must be willing to listen to the different views of those who are different, even if we do not approve. We must be willing to accept things that are different so that we can also embrace the things that we have in common. For example. We all hate the things the KKK say about black people and the Jews. Yet, we have the freedom of speech. We allow them to say what they wish. Because we came to learn that if we surpressed their right to speak. It would have set us on a path that we would have been restricted on other forms of speech. So, while you may feel that homosexuality is wrong. You nor anyone else has a right to stop us from being seen or heard.

Another AOL user with a funny name sent in these thoughts (Mon, 05 Mar 2001 13:11:50 PST):

I've just finished browsing through your sight, and I must commend its originality. I've done countless searches on gay/lesbian interests, and being a longtime Star Trek fan, I had always wondered why the gay and lesbian issue was never addressed in any of the series. Surely in this time, with gays and lesbians becoming increasingly visible in the entertainment world, such a chararcter wouldn't be so controversial, even on Star Trek. I feel any protest would be minor. Also, I read the hate mail page, and I feel fortunate that I can swollow the rage that fills me when I read the ignorant comments made by homophobic, misunderstanding individuals. I feel as though it is my sole responsibility to change the minds of every such individual. But in reality, it is every gay man and lesbian who mush make the changes they can in the area that they live. These strictly "religious Christians" who preach hate should listen to themselves and take a long hard look at what the Bible says about loving thy neighbor. They say they must pray for us to change. I say we should pray for them to change their mistaken ways. Arguing will get us nowhere, but patience and love can accomplish much more.

If you would like your page added here, or want to share your opinion, or information, write me!