Homosexual/bisexual characters?

[Daniel Jackson]

So is torture & murder?

Quit overreacting. A comparable immoral behavior would be deception.

Both SG-1 & SGA have them (mass murder with little or no remose if you ask me) but somehow you see that as Family Friendly?

Guess who did the mass murdering? The bad guys! I don't have a problem with immoral behavior being depicted if it's the bad guys doing it. As for the good guys killing, it's always been in self defense. War isn't pretty.

Anyway I am an atheist so my opinion doesn't count.

Don't be silly, your opinion counts!

[Willow'sCat]

Quit overreacting. A comparable immoral behavior would be deception.

Oh sorry I had no idea there were levels of immorality... silly me.

Guess who did the mass murdering? The bad guys! <> War isn't pretty.

No in my opinion what Sheppard/Beckett/Ronon & even McKay did to the Wraith in Season 3 was murder. With little or no remorse. Also I do think war is morally objectionable.

I just don't think homosexuals are immoral just because they are homosexual or engage in homosexual behaviour *what ever that is*. And as long as the show doesn't show sex, which it never would as it is not that kind of show... well I see no reason why they couldn't have a character who happens to be gay.

[prion]

So is torture & murder? Both SG-1 & SGA have them (mass murder with little or no remose if you ask me) but somehow you see that as Family Friendly?

Oddly enough, yes. American TV is far more comfortable with violence and blood spattered walls, than it is with sex, although that's been changing in the past few years. Now you can get both violence and sex and murder in the CSI franchise!

Hmmm. Good point. I hadn't thought of that aspect of it. OK, skip Lorne, then. How about... Carson? Maybe that kiss with McKay in Duet really shook him up and he tried to deny it by dating Cadman, but their relationship eventually fizzled because he realized he couldn't deny his nature any longer! Ta-da! Or would people cry "foul" at the stereotype of gay guys being sensitive/emotional? Although Heightmeyer would be an interesting choice, too. Ignoring, for the moment, the fact that TPTB would never write a (good) gay character, of course.

ROTFL! I think legions of shippers would beg to differ. Stargate may not necessarily be about blatant relationships (except for a few regrettable- IMO- incidents) but the hinting and alluding and all the moopy eyes and double-entendres and whatnot have certainly been prevalent to those who choose to see such things (and occasionally to those who wish to hell they couldn't see them). So if that can have that kind of stuff for straight shippers, why not have it for the slashers as well? Of course there are those who'd say there's plenty of slashy stuff already, but there's no reason why it couldn't be made a little more blatant. Except for previously stated reasons/opinions regarding TPTB.

Unless there's a reason to show someone's sexual preference, it's not going to come out (pardon the pun). Face it, does anybody where you work suddenly just blurt 'by the way, I'm gay/bi/hetero'? Nope. Ditto with politics, and god, nobody talks salaries. That's even more verboten cuz it's more volatile than the other topics

Anyway, fans will see what they want to see in any show. The writers/producers give us a template, and fans do the rest. Mostly in fanfiction where basically anything goes. And a good portion of the base's complement isn't going to come out if they are so inclined - military - don't ask, don't tell. Blurt it out and you're out.

Of course, they can tackle it with aliens who appear just once, but even that sounds doubtful as I don't think the writers want to tackle these kind of social topics on a show that's about aliens and such.

[SG13-NightOps]

Oh sorry I had no idea there were levels of immorality... silly me.

Of course there is. Lying to your parents is immoral - but hardly comparable to premeditated murder.

I just don't think homosexuals are immoral just because they are homosexual or engage in homosexual behaviour *what ever that is*. And as long as the show doesn't show sex, which it never would as it is not that kind of show... well I see no reason why they couldn't have a character who happens to be gay.

Me either - but it would be utterly pointless. As Prion has said so well, you don't just go to work one day and in the middle of a conversation - "Oh, by the way, I am Gay". There could well be gay characters on Atlantis in the series right now - but there is no reason to even mention it. It has nothing to do with the core storyline of the show.

[Daniel Jackson]

[/COLOR]Oh sorry I had no idea there were levels of immorality... silly me.

I didn't say there were levels. I said it was comparable.

No in my opinion what Sheppard/Beckett/Ronon & even McKay did to the Wraith in Season 3 was murder. With little or no remorse.

Which episode are you refering to?

I do think war is morally objectionable.

Agreed, but it is necessary for survival. You can decide not to go to war, because war is bad. In the mean time, your enemy conquers you.

I just don't think homosexuals are immoral just because they are homosexual or engage in homosexual behaviour *what ever that is*.

A person is only homosexual if they engage in homosexual behavior. What is homosexual behavior? It's when two people of the same gender engage in behavior that is found between a man and woman like kissing, snuggling, sex, and so forth. It is the behavior I find immoral, not necessarily the person.

And as long as the show doesn't show sex, which it never would as it is not that kind of show... well I see no reason why they couldn't have a character who happens to be gay.

I've already stated my reasons, so I won't go repeating myself. I will say that a gay kiss or hug is no different to me than a full on gay sex scene. Gay is gay regardless of how innocent people try to portray it.

[ladyjanus]

I don't think the writers want to tackle these kind of social topics on a show that's about aliens and such.

And isn't that a shame. The best Science Fiction has always been used a mirror to reflect the human condition.

ladyjanus

[Rudy Pena]

I didn't say there were levels. I said it was comparable.


Which episode are you refering to?


Agreed, but it is necessary for survival. You can decide not to go to war, because war is bad. In the mean time, your enemy conquers you.


A person is only homosexual if they engage in homosexual behavior. What is homosexual behavior? It's when two people of the same gender engage in behavior that is found between a man and woman like kissing, snuggling, sex, and so forth. It is the behavior I find immoral, not necessarily the person.


I've already stated my reasons, so I won't go repeating myself. I will say that a gay kiss or hug is no different to me than a full on gay sex scene. Gay is gay regardless of how innocent people try to portray it.

So are you telling me snuggling with my dad, brother, uncle and grandpa(I dont have one) is gay and therefore we are gay?

[ShadowMaat]

This is why snipping quotes is bad. It removes the actual context that the comment was said in.

Sorry, I got caught up in the whole "Stargate wasn't about relationships" thing and was simply saying that I thought some fans might disagree. For those who want to see it, Stargate is chock full of relationshippy stuff.

introducing a character only for their sexual preference means that it would require a great deal of alluding to

While I don't think a character should be introduced ONLY for their sexual preference I don't think that introducing one (either new or existing) would require a lot of allusions (she said, ending the sentence without a preposition ).

In other words, introducing a character just because they are gay/bi, and only to make a spectacle of the fact that are gay/bi is well and truly inconsistent with that which Stargate is about.

True enough. And it's one of the good reasons not to introduce such a character.

Thats NOT relationships. Oh yes, we have looks here and there (some more innocent than others, like that promo Hug that people went feral over. Puh-lease) - but the only time they went out of their way to carry on a relationship storyline was with Pete - and it really didn't have any place.

Depends on how you define "relationships" I suppose. You'd have to ask a shipper for more insight on that. But as for Pete... *wince* That was a disaster from start to finish and it was primarily so because the writers themselves didn't seem to take it very seriously. They made it (in the opinion of some) ostentatious and in-your-face and (again, in some opinions) made the whole character of Pete a bit dodgy and behind the scenes they openly made fun of him (I seem to recall Joe Mallozzi making some reference to Pete as Sam's "stalker boyfriend"). The purpose of Pete was to throw a temporary wrench into the Sam/Jack love train and to "prove" that Sam isn't a black widow. The storyline was always doomed. If the writers had taken the relationship seriously I wonder just how "useless" it would have been?

If they were to bring in a gay character (and lord knows, there could already be one, but doesn't walk around throwing it in everyones face every five seconds) then i cant even think of a way for them to introduce them without having to make some big deal about the fact they are gay - this it would only be to make a spectacle of the fact that they are gay.

Again, I don't think it WOULD require a lot of effort; just a few hints, some sly looks, a casual touch or two... *shrug* Although you're also right in a way, because given how TPTB tend to operate, any attempts they DID make would be just as obnoxious and blatant and sledgehammery as possible.

Shows that feature around homosexual relationships do as well as they do because everyone knows what it is they are going to watch in the first place.

Can't say I expected it on Doctor Who. Captain Jack came as a bit of a surprise... although I was thrilled with him in a couple of heartbeats. But that's what good writing, good acting and a flexible format will do for you. Stargate simply isn't flexible so in that respect, yes, it would be pointless.

Oh, and as for the whole random announcement of "BTW, I'm gay" thing, I've actually had that happen in a convo here. So it does happen, in its own roundabout way.

[Jackie]

This is a very interesting thread. As a viewer, I wouldn't mind seeing a full time character or even lead that "happens" to be gay or lesbian. As long as the "look I'm gay" doesn't BECOME the main plot.

In Stargate--the best way to make an impact (IMO) with a gay character is a closet gay. Regular military character that has to keep the significant other or life partner a secret or they will lose their career. If it mirrors reality--I would love to see it.

Now, speaking as a writer--I do have two gay characters in this epic I'm writing. Both are military and they have to keep it a secret. One of my characters (Robbie) is flaming gay, very girlish acting. The other is the straight man, (Floyd) who tries to keep it a secret. I have a situation were Floyd is somewhere between life and death. As far as Robbie knows, Floyd is dead. Now, I have a character who is grieving for the loss of his partner and can only talk about it to one female friend. This is one of many little subplots I have in the over all arc. I'm surprising myself when I write for Robbie and Floyd as secret lovers. As I bring their emotions to life--they are no longer just two gay guys. They become flesh and blood and nearly real feeling.

I wouldn't want to see a comedy show about gays or lesbians. I also wouldn't want to see a soap opera type drama about gays either. But approaching the subject maturely and accurately with "real people feel" can make for some very interesting plots.

[Daniel Jackson]

So are you telling me snuggling with my dad, brother, uncle and grandpa(I dont have one) is gay and therefore we are gay?

I can't believe you can't figure that out.

[Rudy Pena]

I can't believe you can't figure that out.

Huh!

[SG13-NightOps]

Sorry, I got caught up in the whole "Stargate wasn't about relationships" thing and was simply saying that I thought some fans might disagree. For those who want to see it, Stargate is chock full of relationshippy stuff.

I think all I was trying to say, is even the shippers (Jack/Sam Shippers most of all) can see that relationships will never take any major part in the show. Its about the big honkin metal ring.

While I don't think a character should be introduced ONLY for their sexual preference I don't think that introducing one (either new or existing) would require a lot of allusions (she said, ending the sentence without a preposition ).

You ended that sentence with a preposition. *^$#@! LOL

True enough. And it's one of the good reasons not to introduce such a character.


Depends on how you define "relationships" I suppose. You'd have to ask a shipper for more insight on that. But as for Pete... *wince* That was a disaster from start to finish and it was primarily so because the writers themselves didn't seem to take it very seriously. They made it (in the opinion of some) ostentatious and in-your-face and (again, in some opinions) made the whole character of Pete a bit dodgy and behind the scenes they openly made fun of him (I seem to recall Joe Mallozzi making some reference to Pete as Sam's "stalker boyfriend"). The purpose of Pete was to throw a temporary wrench into the Sam/Jack love train and to "prove" that Sam isn't a black widow. The storyline was always doomed. If the writers had taken the relationship seriously I wonder just how "useless" it would have been?


Again, I don't think it WOULD require a lot of effort; just a few hints, some sly looks, a casual touch or two... *shrug* Although you're also right in a way, because given how TPTB tend to operate, any attempts they DID make would be just as obnoxious and blatant and sledgehammery as possible.

I just can't see how they would slip that in. Honestly, you can see that people will take what they want to see and will run away with that on some crazy jaunt while others are blinking and saying - "it was because they are close friends. There doesnt have to be anything romantic/sexual in it.."
Even if it was 'subtle' - i would simply find anything more as unnecessary, like the Shep Kirking - really really unnecessary!

Can't say I expected it on Doctor Who. Captain Jack came as a bit of a surprise... although I was thrilled with him in a couple of heartbeats. But that's what good writing, good acting and a flexible format will do for you. Stargate simply isn't flexible so in that respect, yes, it would be pointless.

Havent seen the new Who. Saw B5 and the Ivanova/Winters thing was subtle
and not harped on. It was like a fleeting glimpse that was not out of place, because relationships had already been a large part of the B5 plot. It would not be the same in a show that only ever once dipped their toes in those waters - disastrously. That was IMO, only a disaster because it was completely inconsistent with the rest of the series.

Oh, and as for the whole random announcement of "BTW, I'm gay" thing, I've actually had that happen in a convo here. So it does happen, in its own roundabout way.

Never been in a conversation like that before myself. Although "Oh, BTW, I'm pregnant" happens a lot.

Just to make it clear, I have nothing against gay/bi people. Have friends, as do others no doubt. I am not some bible thumping crazy christian (thats not a generalisation of all chrisitians.. just the bible thumping crazy ones - if you are offended, then I probably am talking about you, LOL ), I have no issues whatsoever having anything like that on my screen.

I honestly just dont believe it has a place in Stargate. It would be so far out of character for the show that it would literally alter the dynamic - far more than I think is necessary due to the fact that its doing just fine without the "human condition" parts due to ONE part of the Human condition only - sexual preference. There is more to life than that - and it really seems (at the risk of repeating myself again) pointless.

[Trek_Girl42]

Can't say I expected it on Doctor Who. Captain Jack came as a bit of a surprise... although I was thrilled with him in a couple of heartbeats. But that's what good writing, good acting and a flexible format will do for you. Stargate simply isn't flexible so in that respect, yes, it would be pointless.

I absolutely agree, I felt the same way about the character, and it's all about the writing and acting. If the character is well realized, they'll win the majority of viewers over, no matter what their sexual preference(s) is/are.





Though I do think it could work for Stargate- it will never work to the same effect as it has on DW, but I think it could work. I'll put it this way: I'd rather see them try than not.

[ShadowMaat]

I absolutely agree, I felt the same way about the character, and it's all about the writing and acting. If the character is well realized, they'll win the majority of viewers over, no matter what their sexual preference(s) is/are.

I love him more than I love the Doctor, which is probably blasphemy.

I'll have to agree with NightOps about a gay character not really fitting into Atlantis, though (or any future shows). The writers are not, IMO, up to the task and their structure is too rigid to allow for it. There's nothing necessarily wrong with having a show that focuses on the action, but the writing had better be good enough that the audience is satisfied with the format.

[Trek_Girl42]

I love him more than I love the Doctor, which is probably blasphemy.

Heh, maybe almost blasphemy.....I could never choose a favourite between Jack and The Doctor though, so I don't.

I wouldn't want to see a comedy show about gays or lesbians. I also wouldn't want to see a soap opera type drama about gays either. But approaching the subject maturely and accurately with "real people feel" can make for some very interesting plots.

I absolutely agree- the whole Willow discovering her sexuality subplot on Buffy was fascinating- it was another aspect of growing up on a show that was exactly about that. That will never work in the Stargate universe, and I don't want there to be subplots on it in the show, but there's nothing wrong with having a character that is gay in canon. Doesn't mean we actually need to see a relationship! We don't for heterosexual characters. It's more about adding to the canvas of the reality of the show. Of all the characters we've been introduced to over the ten seasons of SG-1 and three of SGA, statistically a number of them have to be gay/bi.