I totally agree (a) about the homophobia and (b) about K+S in the reboots. Actually, I'm 100% behind the idea of making K/S explicit text in Strange New Worlds. I think there's maybe a 10% chance they will, but I'd be for it. No matter what official releases say, NuTrek is clearly in a parallel universe from TOS, so the old K/S dynamics (beautiful in themselves) don't need to be the same. They've already made Spock radically different from Nimoy Spock, so if they're still planning to break up Spock and T'Pring, as the "Ston" reference suggests they may be, why not have him get together with Kirk? It could be an interesting thing to explore, say I.
Re. (a), in addition to your Star Trek example, I'm reminded of Angel season 5 where (spoilers) Fred had just died and the remaining main cast, all male, where just standing around at a fully Covid-compliant 6 feet apart, looking miserable, completely unable to do anything to comfort each other lest it look gay, I guess.
For me, an important question is where to locate the sexual vs. platonic m+m relationships, and everyone's going to have a different take on that. For me, here are some key questions (and folks will have all sorts of different opinions):
* Does the culture the people are in seem to support a sexual relationship of the kind to be depicted?
* Do their personalities/dynamic seem to support it?
* Is there already subtextual queerness to expand on?
* Are they already one of the rare examples of a very close, loving m+m partnership that doesn't suggest any sexualization, which case I wouldn't queer their relationship because I think we need to not lose the platonic representation.
no subject
Re. (a), in addition to your Star Trek example, I'm reminded of Angel season 5 where (spoilers) Fred had just died and the remaining main cast, all male, where just standing around at a fully Covid-compliant 6 feet apart, looking miserable, completely unable to do anything to comfort each other lest it look gay, I guess.
For me, an important question is where to locate the sexual vs. platonic m+m relationships, and everyone's going to have a different take on that. For me, here are some key questions (and folks will have all sorts of different opinions):
* Does the culture the people are in seem to support a sexual relationship of the kind to be depicted?
* Do their personalities/dynamic seem to support it?
* Is there already subtextual queerness to expand on?
* Are they already one of the rare examples of a very close, loving m+m partnership that doesn't suggest any sexualization, which case I wouldn't queer their relationship because I think we need to not lose the platonic representation.