I wonder whether they'd handle a similar episode differently today, from a story perspective. They wouldn't. In the Star Trek utopian universe, we're not supposed to exist (on screen, that is, the fan-created comics/books/videos are completely different and have always contained LGBT characters - unsurprisingly, perhaps, as there are a fair few LGBT-identified creative fans out there). The LGBT crowd have been upset about the lack of inclusion since the late eighties, when the topic of LGBT crew members first arose. Gene Roddenberry - who said he had to overcome his own homophobia - is quoted on several occasions, saying that he'd think about including gay characters, in one interview shortly before his death even saying that the fifth season of ST:TNG would include gay crew members somewhere - but then he died and it never came to pass, until today - and the discussion and subsequently petitions and letter writing campaigns have addressed this issue with the last three shows which have been produced.
Of course there have been interludes, always relating to particular species, like in the case you mentioned: Trill. The episode in which Beverly falls for Odan, or the episode in which Jadzia is visited by her ex-wife Lenara - those made a lot of people very hopeful. Some people even go so far as to read Ezri as a representation of queer femininity (and this is because: she has short hair. I wish I were making this up, but some queer studies professor somewhere seriously sat down and wrote an essay and went ahead and published it in a book on gay science fiction characters) - but so far, the Star Trek universe is gay-free, and even though the godawful new series apparently contains some half-baked attempts at creating some lesbian subtext for added quota, it will most likely stay that way.
One reason may be the homophobia of the creators, but another factor seems to be the feared reaction of the US audience, and this is where I fail to get the entire discussion - the series which showed the first interracial kiss back in the day when they had to compete for their audience at their screen time with another popular series, were constantly on the brink of being shut down and had a microscopic budget, scared of angry phone calls from the South - today...? With "Star Trek" being what it is today? I simply don't get it.
no subject
They wouldn't. In the Star Trek utopian universe, we're not supposed to exist (on screen, that is, the fan-created comics/books/videos are completely different and have always contained LGBT characters - unsurprisingly, perhaps, as there are a fair few LGBT-identified creative fans out there). The LGBT crowd have been upset about the lack of inclusion since the late eighties, when the topic of LGBT crew members first arose. Gene Roddenberry - who said he had to overcome his own homophobia - is quoted on several occasions, saying that he'd think about including gay characters, in one interview shortly before his death even saying that the fifth season of ST:TNG would include gay crew members somewhere - but then he died and it never came to pass, until today - and the discussion and subsequently petitions and letter writing campaigns have addressed this issue with the last three shows which have been produced.
Of course there have been interludes, always relating to particular species, like in the case you mentioned: Trill. The episode in which Beverly falls for Odan, or the episode in which Jadzia is visited by her ex-wife Lenara - those made a lot of people very hopeful. Some people even go so far as to read Ezri as a representation of queer femininity (and this is because: she has short hair. I wish I were making this up, but some queer studies professor somewhere seriously sat down and wrote an essay and went ahead and published it in a book on gay science fiction characters) - but so far, the Star Trek universe is gay-free, and even though the godawful new series apparently contains some half-baked attempts at creating some lesbian subtext for added quota, it will most likely stay that way.
One reason may be the homophobia of the creators, but another factor seems to be the feared reaction of the US audience, and this is where I fail to get the entire discussion - the series which showed the first interracial kiss back in the day when they had to compete for their audience at their screen time with another popular series, were constantly on the brink of being shut down and had a microscopic budget, scared of angry phone calls from the South - today...? With "Star Trek" being what it is today? I simply don't get it.