@sammy, I’m not sure where you got the idea that there were “oreders from the top” to include gay characters, or that the producers where being “forced” to write them in. “Put some gays in or no show?” Do you REALLY think that’s accurate? I seriously doubt that. And what you refer to as a “trend”… it’s not like showing people wearing flare jeans or nose rings, it’s an accurate representation of a valid human population.

@USO6154 and @Vyse99, Yes, you could try to argue that to include one minority means that they MUST include every minority, but that’s simply unrealistic. Are you trying to say that if they have a Hispanic character, they MUST also have a character who’s blind, bipolar, Samoan, etc etc? Are you saying that there can be absolutely NO representation of a minority or underrepresented group unless you represent ALL of them?

Cooper/Wright seem pretty nonchalant about this to me. Like I 9and others) have said OVER AND OVER AGAIN, they didn’t hold a press conference to say “Look how PC we are! We’re including gays!”, they simply answered a question. They aren’t making a big deal out of this, WE are. The people who post here (yes, including me) have taken LITERALLY TWO SENTANCES and turned it into seven pages of heated debate.

Also, as I said previously in a much earlier post, people are automatically assuming that when the writers/producers say that they are focusing the show more on the characters relationships to one another, THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN ROMANCE! Daniel and Jack had a relationship. Teal’c and Sam had a relationship. John and Rodney had a relationship. It was called FRIENDSHIP and TEAMMATES. When you’re talking about a bunch of people stuck on a ship, isolated and fighting for survival, HELL YEAH I want to see relationships – friendships, teamwork, heck, even rivalries are relationships. Everyone is assuming the worst, that it’ll be One Tree Hill in Space, but I think what they mean is that, having to rely on one another to survive, deep bonds will be formed. And Ming-Na’s character is stated to be in an existing relationship with someone on earth. MUCH LIKE ELIZABETH WIER ON SGA. And was that touted as a major storyline? Did it detract from the show? How is this different? I mean, her partner is listed as a GUEST character. Even if she is a lead/reoccuring guest, she can’t be considered a major part of the show.

Also, @USO6154, there are most likely tracking cookies and spyware on your computer that extrapolate words from sights you are visiting in order to aim ads at your “interests”, and that is why you are seeing ads aimed at gay individuals. Gateworld has no control over what ads pop up when you read this article, it’s the stupid internet ad providers. For example, I knit, and just about every site I visit end up having an ad for yarn or needles on it. Wow! What a coincidence! Actually, it’s because I haven’t taken the time to get rid of cookies in my browser, and the ads are responding to the data saved therein. No insidious agenda, no subliminal messages, just an annoying lack of personal privacy online.

@redlotus I don’t care if the characters are gay or straight or whatever, I don’t want their relationships to be the central point of the show which TPTB said they are, I want a show with the traditional Stargate formula and its becoming more and more clear this isn’t it. Also I realize this isn’t a press release or anything, but clearly Gateworld saw this as a big enough deal to make a news headline for.

@USO6154, I will concede that I clearly do not have as much experience in computers as you, but I was not implying that you visited gay sites, porn, etc. I was saying that because THIS page references the words gay and lesbain, those sorts of ads were popping up. But thanks for stooping to the level of calling others simpletons – I haven’t been calling people stupid or other insulting names, but clearly that’s not enough to prevent others from doing the same.

@Vyse99, I understand your point and your concern. I’m really hoping that TPTB aren’t going to be focusing on romantic entanglements, as well. But I also don’t want a carbon-copy of SG1/SGA – what would be the point? It’s a seperate show, and it should be different. Hopefully they’ll find a good balance of the traditional SG aspects that we all enjoy, while still being able to make it unique and fresh.

@jyh, thanks. :) I agree with what you said about Jack and Daniel – the thing that made their RELATIONSHIP (nudge nudge) so interesting was how different they were, and yet their personalities really complimented each other. I think it’s the same with the John/Rodney dynamic: the laid-back military man and the high-strung scientist. The scene in “The Shrine” where they share a beer and talk, and aknowledge their friendship, was realyl touching. THAT’S what I’m hoping to see more of in SGU – the on-screen aknowledgement of the complicated ways people bond in intense situations. The way stress can produce strong friendships, or exaggerated rivalries. The way being stuck with the same people in life-threatening situations, and being thrust into responsibilities that the characters might not be prepared for (i.e. the Tamara Johansen character is the most medically qualified person on board, despite being just a paramedic) effects the way they react to one another and develop as people. I think that you can have that sort of in-depth character development without losing the adventure and sci-fi excitement that made the other SG franchises so much fun. Here’s hopin!

Some Faiths try to avoid being involved with the gay lifestyle, as well as doing drugs, or excessive drinking. It is a very Big Disappointment that a franchise I love and have followed from the beginning now makes me choose between my Faith or my favorite tv franchise. If the announcement about the new SGU was not expected to be read and commented on why was it posted on the site? It is not for me to have an expressed opinion about other peoples’ likes or dislikes because it is none of my business what any other person does, likes or is interested in. I do have a personal choice to make and this press release warns me what to expect in this show, that I was really looking forward to watching. I suspect several thousands of the fans of the Stargate franchise will be faced with the same choice and this article about Stargate Universe is the reason for my comment.. It is my choice to make and it saddens me to think I will likely not be watching the show. My faith is important to me, and so is my favorite tv shows. This loss is unnecessary but the showrunners and writers have decided require it of faithful supporters of the franchise.

Vladius: one reason most sci-fi shows probably have only “3 main alien species” is probably a simple matter – budget. I imagine it’s pretty expensive to make a lot of different types of characters (extensive make-up, prosthetics, etc.). even so, I’m not sure what’s so magical about “three” alien species…..???

save Scifi: it’s NOT an announcement!!! how many times does that have to be pointed out? The whole possibility of a gay character would have gone totally unnoticed if someone hadn’t happened to ask Cooper & Wright a question. And again, this will be ONE character, and NOT a major storyline. Can’t you please try to be objective and watch the first episode before you write off the whole series??

Also, according to all definitions posted, I am a gigantic bigot. I must need to go to sensitivity training to see that I am a closed-minded individual that cannot accept any opinions pertaining to people different than me. (Not the first time this has happened.)
Speaking of gay people, RODENNY ADN DANELES LUV IS SO CANON!!!!111

just lost another viewer

@jyh – YES. People seem to be totally disregarding the facts on this, and blowing it totally out of proportion. It’s really quite sad that people are willing to write off the entire series based on the fact that ONE character has ONE aspect that they disagree with.

@save Scifi, you are of course entitled to you ropinion, but can you see how lumping gay people in with “drug use” and “excessive drinking” might be offensive to others? And I’m not sure how the show’s producers are “forcing” you to choose between your faith and a TV show. So you disagree with their choice, and you dislike the character. You can’t enjoy the rest of the show? Maybe avoid the episodes that deal with her character as a main story line? No one is “requiring” anything of anyone. I understand that it is YOUR choice, and I’m certainly not trying to force you into anything, I just want to clarify/understand your point of view here.

@SG1Fann, I fail to see how the mere presence of ONE minor gay character is “cramming it down our throats.” What you may see as the evil “long-term agenda if the left” is simply the development of a more tolerant and accepting society, which is the natural progression of things in this country. At one point, people who advocated for the right for women and people of color to vote would have been considered part of “leftist agenda”, but that VAST majority of people in this day and age see such rights as a given.

I just don’t get it, people. It’s not like this is a mass-marketing ploy to announce a gay character. It would be one thing if they were running ads that shouted “HEY LOOK! SG:U, NOW WITH HOMOSEXUALITY!!!” or even doing interviews on the subject and going on and on about it. IT’S TWO SENTANCES, IN RESPONSE TO A QUESTION FROM A FAN, not a marketing campaign. GET OVER IT.

The SG franchise’s biggest demographic of viewers is the 18-30 range (not saying that there aren’t loyal fans who are older, just saying this is the majority) and polls show that 87% of people in this age group have a positive or neutral reaction to homosexuality. So I doubt that this “HUGE REVELATION” will be the downfall of the show. And if a few intolerant people decide not to watch, fine. I doubt they will be missed.

@Vse99, Gateworld reports on all sorts on minor events. For heaven’s sake, they reported that Morena Baccarin (Adria on SG1) was cast in a remake of V. I mean, how many episodes was that actress in? And the article really had nothing to do with SG except for the fact that the actress in question had briefly guest-starred. If it has ANYTHING to do with the SG franchise, even tenuously so, they’ll report it. I don’t mean this as a slam to GW – just pointing out the facts. The point being, they make “news headlines” about a lot of small details. And this subject ACTUALLY had to do with the show, directly.

And while GW did not go ahead and title articles with the fact that Ming-Na’s character is Asian, or that Jamil Walker Smith’s character is African American, you can simply LOOK at them and see that for yourself. And in the news article that announced that Ming-Na had been cast, it DID state that “…she was born on an island near Hong Kong.” So you could make a point that GW announced that she was of Asian heritage. (There was already an article about her being cast – so your argument that the headline should have been “Ming-Na cast in SGU” instead of “SGU has gay characters” is a little irrelevant, since that was not the subject at hand.)

@Vyse99, because heterosexual characters are the norm. Gay characters are not. Trust me, I wish we lived in a world where it didn’t matter. In any news organization, they are going to report on the stuff that is UNUSUAL. You’ll never turn on the news and hear a report that says “Joe Schmo of Massachusetts did NOT win the lottery today,” because that’s an everyday occurance. It’s not news, it happens all the time. If, on the other hand, Joe Schmo DOES win the lottery, you’ll hear about it because it’s not something that happens every day. Can you really argue that this is NOT newsworthy in some respect, when so many people have posted comments and have such obviously strong feelings about this? As much as I wish it were a non-issue, the fact remains that gay characters are still somewhat of an usual occurance. And even more rare in serious dramatic roles (outside of HBO shows and LGBT interest shows like L Word etc). Like it or not, people are going to report on (and respond to) things that are different than the current standard.

@Vyse99, Ok, you’ve mentioned *three* shows. Yes, I’m sure you could mention others. But I’m talking about gay characters as MAIN characters, not something that’s mentioned once in a series as part of a single episode or short-lived story arc. You even said so yourself – ST only “touched” on it. And BSG… the only lesbians in that show were both psychotic and ended up dead – an all-too common phenomenon with gay characters. They either end up dead, crazy, or become straight. Hardly a flattering or realistic portrayal.

Personally, I still don’t see how simply reporting the facts in a non-incindiary manner equals “making a big deal out of it.” GW’s version of a headline is a tiny sentance in a byline on a website, not the freakin’ NY Times. It’s not like you logged onto the site to be greeted by a neon flashing banner screaming GAY.

You clearly have an issue with this whole thing, and that’s your perogitive. But really, you can’t understand what it’s like to be part of a marginalized and unfairly maligned demographic, and what it means to finally be able to see realistic representations of yourself in popular culture. In that way, yes it’s a big deal to some of us.

(I’m assuming you have no idea what it’s like to be marginalized based on your comments, but if I am mistaken by all means correct me.)