http://tinyurl.com/zgu6r64
Apparently she annoyed a bunch of slash and yaoi fans by telling one of them on Twitter that Sirius Black is straight, so now they're calling her a homophobe. Ms. Rowling, welcome to what
Star Trek has been dealing with since the '60s. May Q have mercy on your soul.
EDIT: Replaced direct link with TinyURL because the autocensor got in my way.
Comments
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Any sort of orientation does not have to be hidden, but they should not be pushed either.
Pushing any sort of agenda for X orientation would diminish the story.
For them, Dumbledore wouldn't count, because he was a) too old, and b) not actively making out with anyone.
Well I don't think they'd want it to be present very clearly or have it be the main focus of a specific character. That would obviously diminish the story (much in the same way I once read in a critical review on Voyager, about Chakotay and that his indian background was too much the central feature of the character, that the character revolved too much around this thing).
Instead they just seem to want the characters to be TRIBBLE or bi, so they are pushing it, but just in the real world. I don't think they're necessarily saying that the story needs to focus on these characters' orientation.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
If a writer says that their character is g.ay/straight/bi/whatever, then that is the end of the discussion. Can a fan say that they think a character may behavave in a way which might appear a certain way? Of course they can. We're all entitled to our opinions, but opinions aren't facts, and can't be allowed to become considered as valid as facts, especially when countered by the writer responsible for a character's creation.
Besides, of course Sirius wasn't g.ay, he was as after Lily as everyone else in her school year...
PS James Potter was a bullying a55hole...
By the looks of things they started it, then the LGBT extremists jumped in which didn't help any.
If they are interested in two men being involved, leave them be, most people wouldn't even bat an eyelid if it was a man writing about two women. It's the "dirty fan fiction" people that really need a bit of scrutiny because they have a tendency to get a bit... unhinged when their fantasies are denied.
No doubt there are a thousand fanzines doing the same with Mr. Potter.
My character Tsin'xing
There's actually quite a few lemons out there that are really good. I wrote a TV Tropes page for one of Mass Effect that was essentially a non-p*rn story that happened to have two or three sex scenes (basically a sci-fi romance novel), but even where the story is solely a self-contained sex scene there's a few diamonds.
My problem with it is really when you do stuff that flies in the face of established characterization, like all the K/S slash where people conveniently ignore Kirk's legion of girls-of-the-week and that Spock has likewise only ever displayed anything resembling romantic interest towards female Vulcanoids. I said it myself regarding Sulu in Star Trek Beyond: as a general rule you really shouldn't just randomly make established characters LGBT as if you're filling a quota (although given the format of the Kelvin Timeline as films only, with the attendant time restrictions on character development in an ensemble cast, I understand and tentatively agree with why they decided to do it that way in that particular case).
Rowling herself really said it best after the Dumbledore thing: she didn't write Dumbledore as "obviously" g*y because A, he wasn't the protagonist and his sexual orientation wasn't relevant to the plot, and B, "because g*y people just look like... people" (direct quote from one of her Twitter responses).
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Don't get me wrong, I have no issue with fan fiction (even some of the... more unusual stuff). It is just this particular group tend to get a little too attached to "their" characters and don't like it when the original writer tells them they are wrong.
Happens with other groups too, some of the Trek role players still demand TNG is non-canon because it screws up their vision of the FASA Trek universe. When their vision conflicts with the original it causes this friction we see here. Separating fiction from fiction can be hard for some people.
Could always stick to canon couples, but barely anyone does even though the material is clearly there to be expanded on... now please excuse me, I have to see what Riker and Troi are up to now.
As Seven pointed out, 'fan' comes from 'fanatic'...
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
My character Tsin'xing
You're seriously scaring me. :P
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
With any splinter group, there is a desire to 'normalize' what others consider odd or 'bad' behaviors. History is rich with such examples, but let's pick one example that is likely to be familiar, but non- controversial: Rock and Roll.
Elvis came on the stage and offended many parents with his antics. The kids loved him. All the girls wanted to be with him, and all the boys wanted to be him. They dressed like him, walked like him, and talked like him. These early fans were treated poorly by an unapproving society, but Elvis was soon on every radio and TV station and the fan base grew. By the time Elvis was working in Vegas, it was common to see men of my parent's generation wearing long sideburns and slicked back hair. (A little dab will do ya!)
All splinter cultures want an Elvis to normalize their behavior to society. They will often project their point of view onto a likely candidate popular in culture at the time, and this sort of projection often becomes a cultural truth, regardless of the intent. One such example is "TRIBBLE Sulu" over Roddenberry's stating he was straight, and George Takei's objection on the grounds that canon should be respected. Far too many people have emotionally identified with 'TRIBBLE Sulu' to ever again accept a straight Sulu. I, like Mr. Takei, think he is a good enough TRIBBLE actor to play a straight man on TV. But then, I have no emotional investment in the issue.
People of any subculture deserve respect and human dignity. Period. We as lifelong Star Trek nerds should be the first to understand, given our cultural identity over the last 50 years. For most of my life, the word Trekkie was meant as an insult. But then we had Stewart, Brooks, Mulgrew, and Bakula putting Trek in everyone's face. Now I can admit to liking Trek in public without fear of being ridiculed. That was not always the case.
So, some weird people got upset when the author of a fictional work discredited their projection. So what? It's not like that never happens in STO.
For the record, I REALLY hope Finn and Poe turn out to be g.ay for each other... On the one hand, it would be a nice step forward to have some decent openly-g.ay characters for folks to look up to, and on the other, the dynamic between them (and the comments by Oscar Isaac) genuinely seems to support the possibility, rather than SnowflakeProjection of something which isn't there at all (such as Sirius Black)
Star trek canon is the material included in the shows or films not any behind the scenes material at all. Sulu had no sexuality onscreen not influenced by a virus and is a blank slate as far as canon is confirmed.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
His daughter who bore his family name appeared in Generations. This is not evidence he is straight, but Sulu was shown on screen on more than one occasion displaying interest in females.
While there is no proof, the preponderance of evidence shows he isn't. Until Beyond.
I'm of the opinion that sexual orientations of characters are only important if there is a plot purpose or point of characterization to be made. Simply going down the roster and checking off boxes in the name of inclusiveness does nothing to advance the story, and may well distract from it. Others feel differently on the matter, but I refer you to Douglas Adams for more discussion on that topic.
My character Tsin'xing
Yeah, same here. I do like how they handled it with Sulu in the actual movie, though: his husband and kid are visible for all of twenty seconds in the entire film and he's still the same talented and confident conn officer we've known for two movies. I.e. "Yeah, he's g*y, so what, who cares, let's go back to sci-fi coolness now."
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/