T'Pol Family

[TPoptarts]

It's like in those commercials when they have one person from each ethnicity. Like what the frell, why can't people just be people? Why does IDIC have to be so forced and fake??

I hate to break it to you, but some of us LOVE the commercials with the interracial couples. It's more common in real life than on commercials, so when we see it, we go FINALLY, someone NOTICED WE'RE HERE!

Same for Star Trek. Total lack of homosexuality to this point! Finally we get some homosexulaity in Star Trek. Great, because it reflects real life.

Also I edited my comment above, but it was too late. I don't want to instigate trouble. But your objection to the word "husband" in this context really . . . well I have to tone down my immediate response.

I will repeat a point from above that I put in the edited section. OF COURSE the recording was for Trip's nephew's fourth grade class. Otherwise, what a coincidence! It would be at least equally plausible to just say the children of the brother and brother-in-law exist, but weren't mentioned in TGTMD.

I wasn't talking about commercials with interracial couples, I was talking about commercials without couples that have exactly 1 person from each ethnicity to reach every possible "target demography", which for some reason is like either racist enough to not buy that whatever product if it's not like "endorsed" by a character with the same ethnicity ( ), or is thought to not buy a product that's not endorsed by the same ethnicity by advertisers who hold those racist views. Also I guess I forget sometimes not everyone actually gets to see it from all the angles and only see it on its face which might look better... but as someone who's seen the process and the behind the scenes aspect that's really kinda ugly

I have absolutely nothing against gays or interracial couples (hell I'm the product of an interracial marriage) or whatever "minority" etc I just have a problem with politically correctness, well obviously to each their own but personally I'm an equalist, and I think politically correctness like totally sucks mivonks because it's as far as possible from equality because its whole point is treating different people unequally because they're different. And in my opinion people are equal in spite of their differences. So for example what bothers me isn't the fact that there's an interracial couple, or a gay couple, or a purple cat. What bothers me is the fact that in most mainstream industry when there's an interracial couple, or a gay couple, or a purple cat it's usually to either stick it in our face (politically correctness) or make a whole lot of fuss about it (uh what's the opposite of acceptance?). Like speaking for myself, who the frell cares that the chinese chick has a white husband? How come no one makes a fuss of the white chick with the white husband or sticks that in people's face? What's there to make a fuss of anyway? Oh so that dude had a husband. Big frelling deal, my mother has a husband too. And that cat's purple? Heh I've seen a white cat once. And quite a few black ones, and plenty with spots. Guess what? They all say the same "meow"!

[/rant]

Um like I said I haven't read TGTMD so I have no idea how it's been done there, though if I take what's been mentioned it sounds like (correct me if I'm wrong) it was done just for the sake of doing it with nothing really to do with the plot which is a way I personally don't like, but anyway. I'm only responding to the comments about politically correctness etc and not really to the context of the book because I don't know.

[boushh]

Guys, it was a passing reference... How does one make it more subtle than that? Would "live in boyfriend" be better? Would "partner" be better? Should it not be in there at all just because you think it's there just for the sake of being PC?

T'Poptarts, it's one word. That Trip's brother has a husband. That's it. They appear later on in the book and there is nothing in your face about their interaction. There isn't a big deal made out of it. There isn't tons of fingers pointing saying "Look we're being PC"! It's a passing reference.

I'm sorry, but I just don't see what the big deal is.

[TPoptarts]

Yeah well like I said, I wasn't commenting about the book but about politically correctness in general.

[CX]

I think Bnb put it best. If it doesn't add anything to the story then it doesn't need to be there. If Trip's brother was straight or bi, or asexual, would it have been relevant enough to mention it even in passing?

This may actually shock people, but I'm for civil unions, for everyone, and defined as being between two individuals for tax/financial reasons as well as power of attorney for medical/legal stuff. That includes gay couples. And yet, seeing it presented as it often is, which is to make a point of it, as if in protest to the current laws regarding it, really takes me out of the story and literally makes me roll my eyes.

Pst... Let me let you all in a little secret. There are at least two gay characters on Foundations. Can you guess who they are? And no, I'm not going to confirm or deny any guesses anyone makes, because that's my point.

[JadziaKathryn]

Homosexuality is both a political and social issue. Shoving it your face is seen by some as the preferred mechanism to force acceptance.

Thank you thank you thank you! (And Rigil, the world would be such a boring place if everyone kept their mouth shut. ) But we all know I'm in the conservative, who-cares-about-PC camp anyway. Not that I'm some crazy nut job who thinks that homosexuals should be totally shunned or what have you, but hth2k summed up my feelings pretty well.

Hmm... there's a line I heard once about proponents of tolerance being intolerant because they can't tolerate intolerace. I know it takes a minute to chew on to get the point, but I do mention this for a reason. Trek, and I think the reference in question is a prime example of this, is so tolerant that it can't tolerate intolerance.

[Rigil Kent]

Also I edited my comment above, but it was too late.

And it's still wrong. I was not "insulted" by the use of the word. If you go back and read what I actually stated, it caused me to roll my eyes because of - IMO - the overt political correctness of its usage. That's not the same as being insulted. If the authors' inserted something in there that really offended me, you'd know about it. It seems that you're ascribing certain beliefs to me that aren't accurate simply based on your preconceptions about what you think my political and/or social beliefs are.

OF COURSE the recording was for Trip's nephew's fourth grade class. Otherwise, what a coincidence! It would be at least equally plausible to just say the children of the brother and brother-in-law exist, but weren't mentioned in TGTMD.

Then why was Tucker so ready to bolt and head back to the engine room? If it was for his nephew's class, I would have expected him to A. Be interested in saying more or B. Having Archer actually make a comment to the effect that Trip is So & So's uncle. All I'm saying is that the Beebs had a track record for recycling certain elements (i.e., both Koss and Elizabeth being architects, or the pretty obscure name "Cyrus" being recycled at least twice), so we cannot automatically assume that they were one and the same. Since it was not officially stated to be so, it is not canon but rather fanon.

[hth2k]

I would like to add another thought.

There is a huge difference between tolerating something and embracing it.

It seems a current trend in our society is to attempt to destroy those that do not agree with our view.

I find this repugnant.

A spirited disagreement may be quite illuminating.

I was taught the first ammandment meant that while I may not agree with what you say I should defend your right to say it. I believe that with my entire being to this day. In my experience it is a pillar of the American way and one of the greatest strengths of our society.

Is this an unlimited statement? Absolutely not. Yelling fire in a crowded theatre, etc. are obvious exceptions.

I also expect the same consideration.

HtH

[justTripn]

The thing about this book TGTMD, is is does not focus on the sexual orienation of the gay couple. It does not mention that orientation just to drop it. There is a whole scene where Bert (Albert, Trip's brother) and his partner Miguel are sitting watching Archer's speach and Bert is ranting about how it is Starfleet's fault that Trip died and Lizzie died because they went out and "stuck their head in the Lion's mouth" and Miguel is trying to gently correct (or not so gently) correct him by asking if he is an isolationist like those Terra Prime people, this in turn hurts Bert's feelings and they go back and forth bicking but with obvious love. NO it is not sterotypical. These are two people, as flawed as most, as interesting as most, who HAPPEN TO BE GAY. Rigil, you said you liked that part, where the brother is angry about Trip's death and looking for someone to blame. So it must have struck you as real. If the writer didn't tell you these two were a couple, you'd figure it out soon enouph by the way they are interacting. Some of the OTHER people criticizing this book haven't read it.

And beleive me, some of us groups who have historically been discriminated against are sick of being invisible. This is what I'm hearing: Yes, we accept you, but be sublte about it please.

That's nonsense! Oh yes, and I've heard it! "I have nothing personally against blacks and whites marrying, but I think it is wrong because OTHER people will object, so it's not fair to the children who will be the product of the marriage." ARRRGGHHH!!! "Or, I just prefer to be around other people like myself, what's wrong with that?" My best friend's parents (white) once told her not to bring her biracial daughter to the house (yes, their GRANDDAUGHTER) because "Your younger sister will get the idea it is ok to marry black people. Not that there IS anything wrong with that, but. . . . " refer to the nonsense above.

[justTripn]

And another thing.

I think for everyone here, their heterosexuality is pretty overt. Whether it's the women drooling over Trip or the men drooling over T'Pol. No one ever asked US to be subtle about our sexuality. I see T'Pol's butt in my face everytime I get on her. That's part of the fun. Not my thing (T'Pol's butt), but I understand that it's KTR's. We write things that are pretty overtly sexual and read stuff on this site because, presumably, we are into this particular heterosexual pairing. So why the double standard? Heterosexuals can giggle and laugh and be overt, but homosexuals and bisexuals have to be subtle. I occasionally mention on this site something about "my husband" because . . . well I need to mention him because, it comes up in REGULAR CONVERSATION!

[Linda]

I am very supportive of IDIC. With an ethnically mixed family, Native American, Caucasian, and Black family members, and a gay sister, it's a naturally position to take! Thats why I like the Star Trek universe - it tries to be 'politically correct', though I never liked that term. Political, yes, everyone is. But adding 'correct' smacks of limiting views in some way. I always suspected that the term was coined by people objecting to diversity. Well, in any case, I think Star Trek has always tried to reflect the less limiting, more liberal views, though it falls short sometimes - like with women and gay people. But it tries. And I think there is enough room in the ST universe for people on the whole spectrum of political views, you just gravitate to the sites and the stories which interert you and tolerate those that don't interest you. But at least respect the right for them all to exist.

[CX]

So it must have struck you as real. If the writer didn't tell you these two were a couple, you'd figure it out soon enouph by the way they are interacting.

Exactly.

And beleive me, some of us groups who have historically been discriminated against are sick of being invisible. This is what I'm hearing: Yes, we accept you, but be sublte about it please.

Excuse me? You remember who you're talking to, right? I happen to be from one of those groups that have been historically discriminated against and who has constantly been made out ot be a stereotypical bad guy by Hollywood. All the instances that Native Americans showed up on Star Trek I've had to roll my eyes at how they were presented.


As to your rant, this has nothing to do with discrimination, it has to do with how something was presented in a book that people read for entertainment.

[CoffeeCat]

I think it's a matter of getting into your character's head and thinking from their perspective. My normal reaction to having a gay character in anything Star Trek is "OMG they're going to screw this up and insult their audience. Again."

I think that is my biggest worry. As far as this debate is concerned, I can see both perspectives and where everyone is coming from.

But...

Think about this for a minute. If Trip's brother in TGTMD was married to a woman, would it have been written the same way? If so, would you be here complaining that the author was making a political point? Would you brush it off? Would you even ask "what was the point of adding this detail?"

Just curious. I only skimmed the book so far, but I think it's important to ask yourself if you are holding others up to some double standard.

[CX]

Would you even ask "what was the point of adding this detail?"

Yes.

[CoffeeCat]

^ I think I might have too.

[TPoptarts]

Bert (Albert, Trip's brother)

Dude. His name's "Bert"?? Is that like a Sesame Street reference?

And beleive me, some of us groups who have historically been discriminated against are sick of being invisible. This is what I'm hearing: Yes, we accept you, but be sublte about it please.

Not what I'm saying at all. All I'm saying is I don't like it when it's presented to highlight that group as if that's something like not "normal" ( ) or stuff. Again not for the context of this particular book because I haven't read it but in stuff that I have read/watched it's usually like always a fuss-maker. And personally I just can't see anything like "abnormal" whether it's a white dude married to a white chick, or a white dude married to a green chick, or a white dude married to a green dude. I don't know maybe it's just me but I just don't get it. But I wouldn't go fuss about the first couple, why the frell would I wanna go fuss about the other two? I don't know what you mean by invisibility but if you mean like to hide one's preferences/orientation etc and not express them in society at all only in private or whatever, I agree people shouldn't be like "invisible" just because it doesn't match other people's opinions. I mean if couple #1 gets PDA then why can't the other 2 couples? Etc etc. But if by "invisibility" you mean like being part of the crowd without being pointed out for that kinda stuff then I disagree because in my opinion there's nothing to point out.

Well for me personally, speaking of society outside the entertainment industry because the entertainment industry is like a totally bad example for everything, so in society I've never been like pointed out, or discriminated against/in favor of just because my mother has pink skin, straight brown hair and gray eyes, and my father has dark skin, thick curly black hair and dark brown eyes. Well actually it's only been pointed out to me by my mother but she's like totally nuts so that's no example. And at least for as long as I can remember my parents have never been pointed out or discriminated against/in favor of for being with each other. And honestly I'd feel really uncomfortable if say a friend introduced me like, "this is T'Poptarts my biracial friend". I mean like if it's so okay then why would they feel the need to point it out? That's what I don't get. Well it's kinda like when my friend introduces me to people and tells them I'm "freakishly strong" (because I'm really short and really muscular). If I was of average strength and build would she feel like compelled to tell people I'm "averagely strong" or something? And does it even matter?? I'm not "freakishly" anything. I'm just another color in the spectrum

That's nonsense! Oh yes, and I've heard it! "I have nothing personally against blacks and whites marrying, but I think it is wrong because OTHER people will object, so it's not fair to the children who will be the product of the marriage." ARRRGGHHH!!! "Or, I just prefer to be around other people like myself, what's wrong with that?" My best friend's parents (white) once told her not to bring her biracial daughter to the house (yes, their GRANDDAUGHTER) because "Your younger sister will get the idea it is ok to marry black people. Not that there IS anything wrong with that, but. . . . " refer to the nonsense above.

I think that's just eye-rollingly sad. Gah.