Star Trek (DIS): Despite Yourself

[Worffan101]

it also kind of makes sense from a cynical POV why they'd kill the gay guy and why gay characters die regularly. The kind of people who become network TV show lead writers, who are often straight, white, male, and in their 50s, are on average (far from universally, but on average) not particularly talented or creative, nor necessarily all that passionate.

Therefore, when presented with a show that needs some more drama, they'll say "kill off a character. Secondary cast." Because you can't kill a main all that easily without dipping in ratings and nobody cares about a fucking redshirt. So they get asked, "OK, who do we kill? Because everybody on the team has a favorite secondary character." Now they'll generally think "OK, which character is hardest to write?", and since they don't really understand LGBT people that well and probably know it, the natural conclusion is "shit, I got no clue how to do that gay dude, but I can do the macho soldier and the hooker with the heart of gold easily", so they say "kill the gay one" and call it a day.

The CW's actually somewhat better about this despite all its massive LGBT fanbase perpetually raging about it not going far enough. They killed off Sara Lance to give her sister character development and make her girlfriend a bigger part of Arrow, then resurrected her when they fumbled the ball on the girlfriend's character arc and had Laurel's story arc consist of "Laurel gets her ass kicked because she's not as badass as everyone else". (and then they had Sara fly off through time with a bunch of fuckups and make a game attempt at seducing every woman in human history, which honestly is the most awesome comedy show I've ever seen and I laugh so hard I cry every time I re-watch the scene where Sara's about to be burned at the stake for seducing a bunch of women in Salem because jesus woman, keep it in your pants) They didn't kill off Curtis Holt and then made him and his problems with vigilantism straining his marriage a big part of the show when they realized that Curtis Holt is basically tailor-made to appeal to millennials and they got a good actor besides. They spent a whole damn season focusing on Supergirl's gay sister and made a whole episode about her being so badass that she survives a cartoonishly over-thought-out evil death chamber through grit and ingenuity.

I mean, fuck. The CW made, what, 2, 3 minor fuckups? Under really bad situations where they had no good options and had to move fast because the actresses were literally leaving, or they realized they had one too many characters and didn't want to cut Black Canary? And they learned from them all and tried to fix them, creating one fucking awesome comedy series and one somewhat more minor but still facepalm-worthy fuckup?

Meanwhile STD kills off the gay Latino guy for shock value?

I mean, I already hated Discovery for its embrace of cultural imperialism and shitty writing, and I was a vocal opponent of the Klingon makeup from the moment it was leaked, but...I don't know, guys. Something about just casually killing the only character on the whole damn show who is neither annoying nor an asshole, even if he did only have the one character trait of being gay, it rubs me the wrong way big-time.

I'm definitely not watching season 2 of this shit, or their overpriced webisodes. I have Netflix, I'll re-watch DS9 and remember that Garak and Bashir were only denied eternal openly-acknowledged love by the cruel fist of Rick "Destroyer of hopes and dreams" Berman. At least there I have only one person to hate.

[Admiral X]

Do you honestly think they set out to kill a gay character that they probably only created to virtue signal with to begin with? Or is it more likely that it just made the most sense to the writers given the set-up they had, as it makes sense that the doctor, out of anyone else on that ship, would be the one to figure out that Ash was actually Klingon, and that Ash might thus kill him as a result of this revelation?

[Worffan101]

Do you honestly think they set out to kill a gay character that they probably only created to virtue signal with to begin with? Or is it more likely that it just made the most sense to the writers given the set-up they had, as it makes sense that the doctor, out of anyone else on that ship, would be the one to figure out that Ash was actually Klingon, and that Ash might thus kill him as a result of this revelation?

What is clear and obvious to me is that they created a gay character because "you need one of those these days and god knows we don't have any OTHER ideas seeping out of Alex Kurtzman's fetid swamp of a brain", lacked the imagination to create drama except through shock deaths and cartoonish villainy, and so had the one secondary character who had any actual personality (because the bridge crew are furniture and Tilly is main cast as much as her ambiguous-disorder Young People shtick pisses me off) get killed off for cheap shock value even though they really didn't need to do that.

It also perpetuates a harmful stereotypical narrative in media that lots of people really wish would die already.

I don't really think these fucking idiots set out with active malice, no, I just know the showrunner's work pretty intimately, and I've seen some of these idiots produce material before, and it has all universally sucked without fail. Kurtzman in particular--he lacks any understanding of how to create drama outside of cheap shock deaths and ever-increasing stakes to the point of absurdity (which, btw, is why the ISS Charon is going to DESTROY ALL UNIVERSES unless it is stopped--Kurtzman is literally too stupid to understand low-stakes drama and how to make it work, so he raises the stakes until it shatters suspension of disbelief, every time)--but also Goldsman, Harberts, and other alumni of the Bad Robot school of shit screenwriting.

tl;dr: The writers aren't evil, just lazy, stupid, not very good at writing, and apathetic. I hate them and want them to all lose their jobs, but only because they're the storytelling equivalent of the hypothetical lovechild of Wally from Dilbert and the pointy-haired boss.

[Admiral X]

What is clear and obvious to me is that they created a gay character because "you need one of those these days and god knows we don't have any OTHER ideas seeping out of Alex Kurtzman's fetid swamp of a brain", lacked the imagination to create drama except through shock deaths and cartoonish villainy, and so had the one secondary character who had any actual personality (because the bridge crew are furniture and Tilly is main cast as much as her ambiguous-disorder Young People shtick pisses me off) get killed off for cheap shock value even though they really didn't need to do that.

Now you're coming off as paranoid. I wonder, if it were a hetro couple that they happened to kill half of, would you care? I mean, if shows create LGBTQ doubleplus good characters are they going to have to be careful nothing bad ever happens to them? Because that's kind of a drama killer right there.

It also perpetuates a harmful stereotypical narrative in media that lots of people really wish would die already.

What narrative would that be?

tl;dr: The writers aren't evil, just lazy, stupid, not very good at writing, and apathetic.

Cool, I guess we actually agree on something.

[Worffan101]

What is clear and obvious to me is that they created a gay character because "you need one of those these days and god knows we don't have any OTHER ideas seeping out of Alex Kurtzman's fetid swamp of a brain", lacked the imagination to create drama except through shock deaths and cartoonish villainy, and so had the one secondary character who had any actual personality (because the bridge crew are furniture and Tilly is main cast as much as her ambiguous-disorder Young People shtick pisses me off) get killed off for cheap shock value even though they really didn't need to do that.

Now you're coming off as paranoid. I wonder, if it were a hetro couple that they happened to kill half of, would you care? I mean, if shows create LGBTQ doubleplus good characters are they going to have to be careful nothing bad ever happens to them? Because that's kind of a drama killer right there.

I'd be pretty pissed off, yeah, especially if I was invested in the characters. Killing one half of a relationship for cheap shock value is shitty.

It also perpetuates a harmful stereotypical narrative in media that lots of people really wish would die already.

What narrative would that be?

That gay characters (and thus, gay people) don't get happy endings.

I've previously posted a pretty lengthy article, by a gay dude no less, about why that's actually really important.

tl;dr: The writers aren't evil, just lazy, stupid, not very good at writing, and apathetic.

Cool, I guess we actually agree on something.

I mean, Alex Kurtzman is so lazy, stupid, incompetent, apathetic, and just generally awful that he might as well be evil.

Seriously, that man's worse than Colin Trevorrow, and that's saying a lot.

[clearspira]

What is clear and obvious to me is that they created a gay character because "you need one of those these days and god knows we don't have any OTHER ideas seeping out of Alex Kurtzman's fetid swamp of a brain", lacked the imagination to create drama except through shock deaths and cartoonish villainy, and so had the one secondary character who had any actual personality (because the bridge crew are furniture and Tilly is main cast as much as her ambiguous-disorder Young People shtick pisses me off) get killed off for cheap shock value even though they really didn't need to do that.

Now you're coming off as paranoid. I wonder, if it were a hetro couple that they happened to kill half of, would you care? I mean, if shows create LGBTQ doubleplus good characters are they going to have to be careful nothing bad ever happens to them? Because that's kind of a drama killer right there.

I'd be pretty pissed off, yeah, especially if I was invested in the characters. Killing one half of a relationship for cheap shock value is shitty.

It also perpetuates a harmful stereotypical narrative in media that lots of people really wish would die already.

What narrative would that be?

That gay characters (and thus, gay people) don't get happy endings.

I've previously posted a pretty lengthy article, by a gay dude no less, about why that's actually really important.

tl;dr: The writers aren't evil, just lazy, stupid, not very good at writing, and apathetic.

Cool, I guess we actually agree on something.

I mean, Alex Kurtzman is so lazy, stupid, incompetent, apathetic, and just generally awful that he might as well be evil.

Seriously, that man's worse than Colin Trevorrow, and that's saying a lot.

Worf, I have to agree with Admiral: you are inferring so much about their motives here and really are coming off as just a wee bit paranoid. 2018 has some of the most homosexual friendly television, books, movies and videogames in human history. Point to me some other time where we have had so much sexual diversity in our media (as forced as so many of us may think it is).

And if I may say so, the idea that straight white men would automatically resort to killing off the gay characters is heterophobic. I don't care if the word does not exist, I am coining it to describe this kind of negative view that we just would not accept if talking about any other demographic.

[TrueMetis]

Now you're coming off as paranoid. I wonder, if it were a hetro couple that they happened to kill half of, would you care? I mean, if shows create LGBTQ doubleplus good characters are they going to have to be careful nothing bad ever happens to them? Because that's kind of a drama killer right there.

There's literally a trope named after the really shitty and sexist way that's done. Women in refrigerators man. This is nothing more than an extension of that lazy bullshit.

Worf, I have to agree with Admiral: you are inferring so much about their motives here and really are coming off as just a wee bit paranoid. 2018 has some of the most homosexual friendly television, books, movies and videogames in human history. Point to me some other time where we have had so much sexual diversity in our media (as forced as so many of us may think it is).

And if I may say so, the idea that straight white men would automatically resort to killing off the gay characters is heterophobic. I don't care if the word does not exist, I am coining it to describe this kind of negative view that we just would not accept if talking about any other demographic.

Just quickly 2018 being more sexually diverse than most means very little inofitself, as you can say that about basically every year for the past 200 years. Moreover being diverse does not by itself imply that the diversity is done well, eg Steven Universe still has a metric shit ton of problems despite some good examples of LGBT relationships. And if someone brings those problems up just saying "but diversity" doesn't actually solve anything.

And if I may say so, if you come a conclusion about the show creators based on the shit they do in the show that's not at all a condemnation of those people's demographic. Honestly I've no idea how you looked at worffan101's criticism of specific people and decided that this then applied to an entire demographic.

[clearspira]

Now you're coming off as paranoid. I wonder, if it were a hetro couple that they happened to kill half of, would you care? I mean, if shows create LGBTQ doubleplus good characters are they going to have to be careful nothing bad ever happens to them? Because that's kind of a drama killer right there.

There's literally a trope named after the really shitty and sexist way that's done. Women in refrigerators man. This is nothing more than an extension of that lazy bullshit.

Worf, I have to agree with Admiral: you are inferring so much about their motives here and really are coming off as just a wee bit paranoid. 2018 has some of the most homosexual friendly television, books, movies and videogames in human history. Point to me some other time where we have had so much sexual diversity in our media (as forced as so many of us may think it is).

And if I may say so, the idea that straight white men would automatically resort to killing off the gay characters is heterophobic. I don't care if the word does not exist, I am coining it to describe this kind of negative view that we just would not accept if talking about any other demographic.

Just quickly 2018 being more sexually diverse than most means very little inofitself, as you can say that about basically every year for the past 200 years. Moreover being diverse does not by itself imply that the diversity is done well, eg Steven Universe still has a metric shit ton of problems despite some good examples of LGBT relationships. And if someone brings those problems up just saying "but diversity" doesn't actually solve anything.

And if I may say so, if you come a conclusion about the show creators based on the shit they do in the show that's not at all a condemnation of those people's demographic. Honestly I've no idea how you looked at worffan101's criticism of specific people and decided that this then applied to an entire demographic.

''it also kind of makes sense from a cynical POV why they'd kill the gay guy and why gay characters die regularly. The kind of people who become network TV show lead writers, who are often straight, white, male, and in their 50s, are on average (far from universally, but on average) not particularly talented or creative, nor necessarily all that passionate.''

How else am I meant to take that quote other than ''the heterosexuals are killing the gays because they are heterosexual''?

[Worffan101]

Worf, I have to agree with Admiral: you are inferring so much about their motives here and really are coming off as just a wee bit paranoid. 2018 has some of the most homosexual friendly television, books, movies and videogames in human history. Point to me some other time where we have had so much sexual diversity in our media (as forced as so many of us may think it is).

And if I may say so, the idea that straight white men would automatically resort to killing off the gay characters is heterophobic. I don't care if the word does not exist, I am coining it to describe this kind of negative view that we just would not accept if talking about any other demographic.

That's an unnecessary and unjustified overgeneralization.

I am CLEARLY referring specifically to the community of 50something white straight male Hollywood screenwriters, most of whom are lazy and without talent (particularly those involved with Bad Robot, which is essentially a breeding ground for lazy idiots who think they're clever), who are regularly given big-budget screenwriting jobs despite churning out a nonstop string of failures. They are largely cut from the same cloth as the sociopathic executives they serve, and while less evil they are no less lazy and trend-chasing.

Never once has Alex Kurtzman written a good script. Alex Kurtzman's one time directing was an unmitigated disaster. Never once have Robert Orci, Damon Lindelof, or Akiva Goldsman written good scripts. I mean, at least Brannon Braga is situationally talented. These fuckers are just bad.

Here's the thing; I don't give a shit about most straight white male characters dying because there are a LOT of straight white male characters, many of whom are in genres that I like, and the vast majority of them live. Just to demonstrate: Name me 10 action movies with straight white male leads. Now name me 10 with female leads. Now 10 with black female leads. Now 10 where the protagonist is LGBT. See what I mean? Even if you can fill all of those categories, it's much easier to fill #1 than #4.

In contrast, historically gay characters would either have to have their sexuality hinted at (Xena) or would be killed off--this latter part goes all the way back to that preachy 1919 German film where Magnus Hirschfeld, literally a year after Germany went from on the verge of victory to humiliating defeat and while Germany was in the throes of a messy socialist rebellion (because Hirschfeld was the kind of guy to let nothing get in the way of telling people 'please stop lynching gay people'), anyway in this film the protagonist of the story part ends up committing suicide. It's continued to the modern day; Atomic Blonde? Dead gay. Hitchcock's "Rebecca"? Dead gay (not that they were allowed to acknowledge her sexuality, Code and all). Best Exotic Marigold Hotel? Gay character dies. "Your Highness" (stoner comedy fantasy film and 90 minutes of my life I ain't getting back) even mocked this shit. Independence Day 2. The Big Sleep. Brokeback Mountain. Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series (though why anybody would voluntarily read those is anyone's guess). Most absurd case I can remember is a character in those Hunger Games ripoff books where there's 5 factions instead of 12 districts was dying, and came out while fatally wounded which is like, lady, that's not how you do representation. Many newer soap operas pull this stunt. Buffy did it. Name a piece of media from the '90s or 2000s that has a gay character, and the odds are that character will die. Not all of those are necessarily unjustified, but many of them are.

I mean, fuck, Arrow had to bring the bi woman they killed off in season 3's opener back from the dead, had a whole convoluted diversion from season 4's ridiculous main plot so they could resurrect her and then hold a seance to restore her soul, AND made her Captain of a timeship full of a bunch of losers that she uses primarily to get lots of tail in every notable period of history, AND got her a new girlfriend as part of season 3 of Legends of Tomorrow's story arc, just to apologize for killing her off, because people are so sick of it. (also the CW actively courts LGBT audiences, so they kind of HAD to apologize because the fans were upset)

the problem is, quite simply, that Alex Kurtzman and the other Bad Robot morons are lazy. They are out-of-touch men in their '50s who've gotten where they are on connections and an ability to produce cheap shit that lines up with what executives perceive as popular trends. They are lazy, they are stupid, and they do not understand anyone but themselves and the short list of genre tropes that are the characters they know how to write.

So yeah. Kurtzman is shit, and him resorting to killing off the gay dude is absolutely par for the course.

If you want examples of straight white guys who know how to write? Russo brothers. They are basically the polar opposite of Alex Kurtzman. Ron Moore. JMS. Those are guys who actually bother to write well and intelligently--and it's telling that JMS, in the early 2000s (aka the peak age for killing gays on TV) fully intended to have an out lesbian couple on the show and was only prevented from doing so by having Talia Winters's actress leave. Ron Moore and pals were barred by Berman (AKA The Great Satan) from having Bashir and Garak be out, but that didn't stop them and the actors from implying heavily. They then shot an episode with a lesbian romance plot and had both characters survive, in prime time, on one of the most popular shows on TV.

Keep that in mind. DS9 handled this better than STD, and it was made 20 years ago. Sure, DS9 rocks. Sure, it's the best Trek. But STILL. You'd expect even Alex Kurtzman, a sentient idol to the gods of sloth and incompetence, to have learned a bit.

Unfortunately, it seems that's too much to expect from Alex Kurtzman, a man who, because he is capable of human speech, technically qualifies as a thinking creature.

[Admiral X]

There's literally a trope named after the really shitty and sexist way that's done. Women in refrigerators man. This is nothing more than an extension of that lazy bullshit.

Doesn't answer my question though.