Klingons are very definitely one of the species who have always been heavily anthropomorphised
As for “American culture war issue”…dude, gay people exist. It’s okay for gay people to exist in fiction, too. If you think this barely-mentioned aspect of his character is his “defining characteristic” then either you’re highlighting the fact that you haven’t watched the series you’re criticising, or you’re highlighting how disproportionately large this particular characteristic looms in your mind
Yes, you bashed out the tired old trope that if gay people are to exist in fiction then there must be a narrative reason. That’s nonsense. The fact that gay people exist IRL is all the reason that’s needed for them to exist in fiction
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.
If my interpretation is incorrect, please clarify what you meant
Klingons are very definitely one of the species who have always been heavily anthropomorphised
As for “American culture war issue”…dude, gay people exist. It’s okay for gay people to exist in fiction, too. If you think this barely-mentioned aspect of his character is his “defining characteristic” then either you’re highlighting the fact that you haven’t watched the series you’re criticising, or you’re highlighting how disproportionately large this particular characteristic looms in your mind
Of all the thought terminating cliches to ever exist, this one exists the most. No one claimed gay people don’t exist. Re-read what I wrote please.
Yes, you bashed out the tired old trope that if gay people are to exist in fiction then there must be a narrative reason. That’s nonsense. The fact that gay people exist IRL is all the reason that’s needed for them to exist in fiction
No, that’s not what I wrote. If you’re going to try to strawman my position the least you could do is put some effort it.
This is what I was responding to:
If my interpretation is incorrect, please clarify what you meant