this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2026
46 points (89.7% liked)

Star Trek Social Club

14343 readers
209 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.


Rules

1 Be constructiveAll posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.


2 Be welcomingIt is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.


3 Be truthfulAll posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.


4 Be niceIf a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.


5 SpoilersUtilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episode. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.


6 Keep on-topicAll submissions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books, etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/Quarks.


7 MetaQuestions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.


Upcoming Episodes

Date Episode Title
02-19 SFA 1x07 "Ko’Zeine"
02-26 SFA 1x08 "The Life of the Stars"
03-05 SFA 1x09 "300th Night"
03-12 SFA 1x10 "Rubincon"
TBA SNW 4x01 TBA

In Production

Strange New Worlds (TBA)

Starfleet Academy


In Development

Untitled theatrical film

Untitled comedy series


Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.

Allied Discord Server


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 26 points 15 hours ago (6 children)

Setting aside a tiny fraction of people who -- as Diane points out in the article -- make their living farming outrage, does anyone actually care about a gay character on Star Trek in the year 2026?

Also, I assume that many of the Klingons we've seen on Star Trek over the years were gay. I think he's just the first Klingon which was identified to the audience as gay.

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 12 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I like how he rocks the skirt, I'm glad SFA finally resolved the skirt thing by having absolute gender chaos.

[–] kieron115@startrek.website 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Worf: I do not see why it is necessary to wear these... ridiculous uniforms.

Riker: Protocol.

Worf: They look like dresses.

Riker: That is an incredibly outmoded and sexist attitude! I'm surprised at you. Besides, you look good in a dress.

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 6 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

That's true in theory, but TNG still had a gender imbalance in who chooses to wear what under normal circumstances. And of course there's Berman's sexism with Troi's clothes. SFA has complete gender equality with regards to clothes.

(But we can still talk about how Darem and Genesis are very similar characters, but act very differently because of gender socialisation. Caleb and Tarima also have lots of gender socialisation going on)

[–] nightofmichelinstars@sopuli.xyz 2 points 9 hours ago (4 children)

Was there ever an explanation for why Troi was always dressed for jazzercize? She was a regular Starfleet officer, wasn't she?

[–] hallettj@leminal.space 9 points 9 hours ago

All we know is that Jellico swooped in and saved the day!

I guess there is sort of an implication in Chain of Command that Troi chose to wear a "non-standard uniform" until Jellico ordered her to change. He says, "I prefer a certain... formality on the bridge. I'd appreciate if you wear a standard uniform." I've just done a TNG rewatch, and I'm pretty sure there is no other in-universe explanation given.

[–] exaybachae@startrek.website 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

She's the ships counselor, who at any moment may need to have deeply personal and unofficial private conversations with anyone in need. Those discussions are officially informal. Thus she maintains a casual professional appearance.

It's not jazzersize, it's public lounge wear, she is at ease to help aid her clients ability to transition to an at ease state.

While doing official duty on the bridge it is appropriate for her to dress in uniform, but those duties tended to be momentary, not planned, so a wardrobe change would've been an odd choice.

[–] kieron115@startrek.website 5 points 8 hours ago

Her official role was ship’s councilor, so I’d guess it was to make people feel more at ease and less like they’re talking about their issues to an officer. But mostly - Rick Berman.

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 6 points 9 hours ago

Doylist: Berman was a fatphobic piece of shit who told her to lose weight before she could wear the uniform.

Watsonian: She had a special exemption to wear those clothes because of her culture and job. We actually see the same with Dr Migleemo. It appears to be tradition that counsellors and therapists wear less formal clothing to set their patients at ease.

[–] tacosanonymous@mander.xyz 23 points 15 hours ago (1 children)
[–] MadMadBunny@lemmy.ca 19 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Same. And Diané absolutely rocks the character. A+ acting.

[–] Dr_Fetus_Jackson@lemmy.world 15 points 14 hours ago

Agreed. An engaging character that, like Star Trek is oft wont to do, has an interesting arc that challenges the status quo and pushes for understanding.

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 16 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

"A Russian in a USS ship? This cannot be"

"A bald captain? This cannot be"

"A woman captain? This cannot be"

...

The same people that said Tilly didn't belong in ST because weight are the same that say people in STA are too good looking. Choose one side, people. Either "no non perfect people" or "no beautiful people", not both.

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Wait, people think Tilly is fat??

[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works 8 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Mary Wiseman is fat. [1] [2] Not obese, but overweight. It's okay to acknowledge reality and not make fun of her for it. I don't see why we need to gaslight people about being overweight. We can all see she's overweight. This is such a silly hill to die on.

[–] exaybachae@startrek.website 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

She may have actually qualified as obese at times, as there's an actual medical classification.

I don't think that's likely to be the case in that second photo you shared, she does have a heavy build in general, but there have been times since being on ST when she likely did qualify.

IIRC, obese is anything over a specific rage of BMI or BFP, whichever you use. So if a healthy BMI for you is 18-25 and you are 30 then you are obese.

I'm not a pro, so I'm not sure about the hard details, but the point I'm making is that obese isn't a personal opinion of looks too fat. A person doesn't necessarily even need to look it, but they could still qualify.

My SO looks fine at 30, but not much above that. I think they're sitting at 28 currently.

[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago

To muddy the waters, being overweight exists somewhere between healthy and obese, and there isn't a clear definition. So there is definitely subjectivity involved. But I think that when someone toes the line of obesity, they can absolutely be classified as overweight.

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

We can all see she’s overweight

I can't. My perceptions have been altered by the high prevalence of obesity in our society. I now have higher standards. She looks a little thicker than most people, but not in a way I'd been conscious of before today.

[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

It's true that general obesity can make it hard to identify overweight people today. I'm lucky to live in Europe, and it's not as bad here yet. Wiseman is somewhere around 35-40%, which is where the official diagnosis of "obesity" begins.

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

This is a good example of soulism. Something as basic about our perception of people as whether they're fat changes based on our home culture. Ultimately, the quality of being fat is a social construct. Science can't give us a hard cutoff, only culture can do that. Science can only give us degrees.

A naive realist would respond to this ambiguity by denying its existence and saying whatever they think is fat, is fat. A scientific realist would try to find an objective answer in science, perhaps using appealing to the authority of BMI, or looking for a more reliable measurement. A social constructivist would accept that there's no answer. But a soulist would begin asking what definition of "fat" helps society the most, so we can make a conscious choice of what to believe. The soulist is the only one displaying true agency in how our perceptual world is created.

[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I like how that focuses on the desired outcomes. Research shows that health risks increase (on average) after a BMI of 25 (slightly more for women). So I would propose a soulism approach in which anyone over a BMI of 25 be considered overweight. That's generally how medical guidelines categorise weight now.

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Well then John Cena is overweight. In fact, he's obese, with a BMI of 33.9. So BMI isn't objective reality. And I think it's useful only as a very rough guideline.

Now I want to question something that's gone unsaid in this conversation so far. We started with the question "Is Tilly fat?" And now suddenly you're talking about medicine and health. Is fatness purely a matter of health? I don't think so. I think fatness touches beauty standards, body autonomy, culture, gender presentation, expression, and identity, and a lot more. I don't think it's just health.

And if it is, then Tilly isn't fat, because she lives in the Federation where they have advanced medical technology. I don't believe Tilly's weight is a health concern in the same universe that has dermal regenerators in every first aid kit. I think her blood levels are all great, her physical fitness is within regulation, and her joints are all in perfect condition for her age. I assume that about every Starfleet Officer. I think they have the technology to make all that possible at any weight we've seen in the show.

Furthermore, I think Tilly could lose weight very easily if she wanted. Starfleet has synthetic alcohol that breaks down in the presence of adrenaline, I think meals to match an ideal nutritional profile regardless of your fitness goals and portion size are easy in comparison, given replicator technology. I think Tilly chooses her weight because she likes the way she looks and feels the way she is.

So, given all this, is Tilly fat? Well, I think that's her choice. If we've controlled for health, then the biggest effect of the definition is her own comfort. So we should be asking her if she'd like to be called fat. Some people do, and that's valid. Some people don't, and that's valid. I believe in technology and personal choice.

[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works 2 points 58 minutes ago

Well then John Cena is overweight. In fact, he’s obese, with a BMI of 33.9. So BMI isn’t objective reality. And I think it’s useful only as a very rough guideline.

BMI is a population level tool. There are individuals who are extremely muscular who can be in the obese range. I'm not seeking a perfect description - nor will ever such a description exist. If that is your standard then you are taking a postmodernist approach which is "everything is made up and the words don't matter." If up means down and the person in the discussion genuinely doesn't care, there's no real way to have a discussion after that.

We started with the question “Is Tilly fat?” And now suddenly you’re talking about medicine and health.

Because you raised the concept of soulism and utility. If we were to consider soulism and utility, I think using objective metrics make sense. I agree that there are many other frameworks we could use.

Humans view the world through their lenses of experience. Tolkien wisely remarked on creating fictional worlds that we should endeavour to change as little as possible compared to our world in order to suspend disbelief. When we do make changes, they should be meaningful, important for the story and world, and consistent. Unless Tilly's weight is explicitly described as healthy and normal, and it is part of some new universe law and storyline, I don't think we should be making any such assumptions. I think most people would balk at such a storyline and in-universe change. It would feel performative.

[–] Kirk@startrek.website 19 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

does anyone actually care about a gay character on Star Trek in the year 2026?

According to Karim's recent AMA here, yes, a lot. I'm old but I have to imagine it's a lot harder being a queer kid in 2026 than it was a decade ago!

Also, I assume that many of the Klingons we’ve seen on Star Trek over the years were gay. I think he’s just the first Klingon which was identified to the audience as gay.

Also yes, the headline makes it clear this is Star Trek's first gay Klingon. Not the Klingon species' first gay.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 17 points 15 hours ago

does anyone actually care about a gay character on Star Trek in the year 2026?

Well, yes - plenty of people care about, and celebrate, representation.

[–] Lucky_777@lemmy.world 8 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Depends what platform you're on. Facebook? Omfg. They think the whole series is worth abandoning because of the "woke" agenda. Even though ST has been woke since 1960.

Personally, I don't give a fuck. Kind of like in a game. If a character turns out gay, then so be it. I have no emotion towards it. Overall Academy is a fun series. Just finished the Stars episode with The Doctor and Sam. Fantastic episode. Looking forward to cleaning up the first season

[–] Kirk@startrek.website 3 points 2 hours ago

A lot of people didn't give a fuck about Uhura being on the bridge, but that is not a reason to NOT include her character on the bridge. Just because you don't consider yourself bigoted does not mean that gay characters should not be celebrated for breaking new ground.

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 2 points 12 hours ago

I prefer every player-romanceable character in video games to be bi. If an NPC is monosexual, they should go date another NPC. If a character is ace, then there's no problem. But I don't like monosexual characters that date one player character but not the other.