Because they’re humanoids. We see ourselves in them.
I don’t. I think one of the more powerful aspects of Star Trek has been accepting completely alien lifeforms as inherently valuable without anthropomorphising them. We can accept the value in life without making them just like us. That’s a cheap writing technique to shortcut any kind of important world and character building, or moral uncertainty. This is one of the reasons “new” Trek has been so controversial. Writing is as subtle and nuanced and interesting as a YA novel.
To be clear, I’m not claiming Star Trek has never anthropomorphised aliens. Nor am I claiming it should never do it. I’m arguing it should be done sparingly and only when it serves a more interesting narrative. To make a topical American culture war issue the defining characteristic of a Klingon is easily one of the laziest writing mechanics I’ve seen in Star Trek, ever. It’s beating the audience over the head with a message. Star Trek has always presented moral uncertainty to viewers and allowed them to make up their own minds. This is far more powerful and interesting storytelling. Ironically, this is why The Orville has been such a hit. Despite the comedy aspects, it feels like Star Trek because it’s comfortable with moral ambiguity and treats the audience like adults.
Kirk@startrek.website 23 hours ago
Don’t feed the troll, there is no need to allow yourself to be put on the defensive justifying why an LGTBQ character exists. The person you’re replying to needs to make the case for why shouldn’t matter (but they can’t because the reason is they are bigoted).