Taelons = Queer Stereotype

Ezekiel Krahlin's
Gay Rants & Queer Insights

Blog For Free!

2008 February
2008 January
2007 December
2007 November
2007 October
2007 September
2007 March
2007 February
2007 January
2006 August
2006 May
2006 April
2006 March
2006 January
2005 December
2005 November
2005 October
2005 September
2005 August
2005 July
2005 May
2005 April
2005 March
2005 February
2005 January
2004 December
2004 November
2004 October
2004 September
2004 June
2004 May

My Links
Steal This Blog

My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images


Taelons = Queer Stereotype
02.13.08 (9:07 pm)   [edit]
I abhor the show, "Earth: Final Conflict", because it gets away with some very ignorant stereotyping of gay people, as manifest in the Taelon race. I know Gene Roddenberry dreamed of including gay folks as regular characters in his Star Trek series...though was censored by the Hollywood brownshirts.

When I first watched EFC ("Earth: Final Conflict"), I was shocked to see this Taelon character: very swishy, wrist-flicking, lisping, sissified, elitist, weird-looking, ASEXUAL geek. I had to conclude that these Taelons were created from the mind of a well-meaning, but ignorant, heterosexual. Sure, Roddenberry finally got his wish: but at what cost to REAL gay people still burdened with the yoke of tyranny by the same country that produces tripe like EFC?

Here we have an alien FAGGOT behaving like every good faggot should (in the eyes of dogmatic Christians that is), by not having any sex. And, by defining them as asexual, the show could go on without the censors' interference, which WOULD have happened if they were portrayed as outright homosexual. Of course, everyone KNOWS the Taelons are silly queers...and in that way, and only that way, would the Amerikan publik accept such regular gay characters.

If I were a well-meaning but ignorant hetero sci-fi writer, I guess I could come up with a race of queers that--by virtue of being asexual (as the Good Lord wants them to be)--would evolve into these freaky types with enormous brains that resulted from all this unused sperm backing up the spine. Now, they would be put to use serving (hetero) mankind.

These Taelon faggots are catering to every need of all the earthling, redblooded HETERO heroes...not a gay person among them. Again, the good Christian role of every queer is to not only be asexual, but a SERVANT, a SLAVE dedicated to the happiness of heterosexual relationships. Just like in that Australian film, "Priscilla, Queen of the Desert"; where some drag queens are stuck in a redneck town, enhancing the romantic lives of the hetero residents. Damned if they didn't assist the happiness of any GAY person living there (which residents didn't even seem to exist).

These Taelons are in no way handsome, or robust heroes as are the star characters, who are OBVIOUSLY Amerikan breeders. Also, "Taelon" suggests "talon", and you just know how faggots love to pull out their claws and scratch your eyes out, honey! Now, why stop with Taelons? Why not "Babloons": a dark-skinned race that trades in watermelon seeds, and whose lips are so big, they can actually vibrate into action, their marvelous rocket engines? Or yellow-skinned, slant-eyed "Bayjings", whose massive overbite can open fuel pods with a single chomp? Or "Gimplets" whose twisty vestigial legs can serve as hooks for grasping and riding on asteroids?

But my favorite idea is this: a sci-fi show featuring "Heteroids": giant, semi-intelligent hemorrhoids that are breeding themselves into oblivion by their own animal lust. They, too, would be heroes (in a way)...as an example of the horrors of overpopulation and dogma of heterosexual supremacy.

To: Final Testament Guestbook
From: Zebsurfer

I'd like to speak out against your derision of the show, Gene Roddenberry's Earth: Final Conflict.

First off if you think the Taelons, the alien species depicted in the show, is a representation (and as you say, a misrepresentation) of homosexuals you are wrong. The Taelons are no where within the scheme "human". They, in the show's mythology, are asexual and androgynous and more specifically, in their true form, energy based, having no physical exterior. So this already rules out genitalia, the one key factor defining sexuality. So they are neither MALE nor FEMALE, sexually, thus they CANNOT be homosexual or heterosexual. The Taelons are dubbed male, for the simple fact that it is eases reference (it superficially eliminates the need of considering them "it"). Why "male," may be the fact that you could probably be right in that the show tries to elevate the "male gender." But this argument is geared more to women's rights than gay rights.

To get back on their energy-based life force, the Taelons are in their long evolution attempting spiritual perfection, no longer needing or being inhibited by any physical factors. One fact could be that because they are "asexual" and also "physical-less", they lack sexual drive (without sexual organs, there cannot be sexual drive or even need of sex), thus not being either "heterosexual" or "homosexual." And one question is to you: where did you get the idea that they depict homosexuals? Every single Taelon shown on the show is played in real life by a female. The contradiction and attempt at "females" playing male-depicted roles is one problem that may support your argument of homosexuality. But, being an avid fan of the show, I believe this wasn't the purpose or philosophy behind the show.

And when you say that the Taelons are "slaves" to humanity, then I must say, you haven't viewed the show, or at least in an unbiased way. Gene Roddenberry derived much of the show's essence in depicting how humanity would deal with an advanced alien culture, and the roles and problems that may be encountered. This is what greatly drew me to show; it is unique and focuses more on humanity than any other alien species. The whole basis of the show was to show that despite the Taelons "benevolent" gifts to humanity, they have an ulterior motive to subjugate humanity to save their dying race and to fight off their enemies and genetic brethren, the Jaridians, by bioengineering, forced experiments, manipulation, subterfuge, and geopolitical exploitation. All these things are completely opposite to any slave or subservient qualities.

Lastly, the most important argument would be the one that encompasses "gender" as a whole. We can all agree that sex is "what's between the legs" and gender is "what's between the ears" (i.e. brain). Wholly considered, gender doesn't truly exist, only sex. "Male" and "female" genders are subjective and psychological labels we, as a society as a whole, have pinned on people. We came up with the idea that females are soft, sensitive creatures juxtaposed with males, the macho, dominant, in-control-of-their-emoti ons hardheads. If that is tue, would G.I. Jane be more male than female? Would the Amazon warriors of the ancient times be males in essence, although all being women? No. The inferiority complexes dubbed on females is groundless and the societal label of males as "sex obsessed, unintelligent, foolish pigs" is also just as bad.

This leads into the argument of homosexuality, which despite what is said, is pervasive (not in any negative connotation) in society, and has a long history extending as far as the beginnings of rational Homo Sapiens and is not cultured or imposed of only in America. It is said that if the world population was reduced to "100" people, "11" would be gay. Homosexuality exists among ALL people and places. But homosexuality exists exactly in the context it is limited to: sexuality, that is when a "male" (the sex of a human) has intercourse, copulation, or sexual union with a human of the same "male" sex. Where the whole idea of psychological viewpoint of lesbians as manly, or homosexual men, as feminine or soft, is as mentioned of the "gender theory", groundless. No matter how sensitive, soft, "sissified" a boy is, it doesn't make him a homosexual. Only when he copulates either through oral, anal or group masturbation (of sexual stimuli involving 2 or more people, of the same sex) gives the title of "homosexual" correctly justified.

I am in no way trying to justify the "heterosexual agenda," if such exists, or trying to spread my message of homosexuality or gender, either through a secular point-of-view or a Christian doctrine. Although, I am trying to defend your unjustified insult to Earth: Final Conflict, a unique science-fiction anthology that tries to analyze the basic ideas of what is "human." Before you can make a judgement, a viewpoint, a statement about anything, you must first understand it. After all, isn't that how all forms of abhorrent prejudice (racism, sexism, religious persecution, homophobia or even hetero-"phobia") is based - through unreasoned, unjustified, un-"knowledgeable" facts?

Dearetht Clueleth Breeder Earthling:

I know you ekthpect me to lithp, tho I'm giving you thome thatithfacthon right now. However, no more "lithping" for the rest of my essay, as my strong alien accent will only get in the way of important communique.

Every single point you make--however poorly--was already deconstructed in comrade Zeke's essay, "Taelons = Queer Stereotype", which anticipated such unworthy comments like yours. Your kind must suffer the sad fate that is the lot of heterosexuals, for it is not the Creator's intent that you be designed with too much intelligence!

Forget for a moment, all the Rodenberry crap plugging up your mind like a Klingon bowel impaction (which, incidentally, can go on for centuries; much like the ignorant hubris of your own pseudo-gay friendly hetero earthlings, who insist on being the last word on homosexuality even in relation to queers). Ever hear the saying: "One picture is worth a thousand words?" Well, put all those Final Conflict words out of your mind, if you want to get the picture! So just forget Earth: Final Conflict, Gene Rodenberry, and Star Trek! Forget they ever existed at all. Clear your mind like Exlax to anus...then look at us anew, with the unbiased eye of a Vulcan executioner (please scroll down):


Now c'mon, give us a break! How on earth wouldn't "faggot" be the immediate thing to come to mind, when seeing us for the first time? Most humans do, in fact, react this way as their first impression. (And please notice we are all clothed in shades of purple or pink: clearly an indication of being "that way"!) Do you think we were born yesterday? No matter how much you attempt to window-dress our species, slice dice or ice us, we still remain, as ever:

Stereotypical faggots from the 21st century; out of the twisted minds of possibly well-meaning
(but still dumb) Hollywood breeder elite script writers and producers.

Even you as much as said we are women stuck in male bodies! How's that for an obvious stereotype? And that's just one among numerous examples so expertly presented in comrade Zeke's brilliant essay. (Brilliant for an earthly sentient being, that is.)

Yes, we are portrayed as asexual and androgynous; which cleverly passes the TV industry's anti-homosexual censors. But we assure you, Zebsurfer, that between tapings we just can't get enough of each other's frail little jail bait bodies as much as possible. Why, we're about as horny as those randy little Tribbles! (Minus the fertility factor of course.)

While we are portrayed as heroes--like our earthling counterparts--not one of us is the least bit attractive. Unlike the human stars who, we might add, are all portrayed as heterosexuals! Like all previous Rodenberry series, not so much as even one clearly homosexual character has appeared in any of their myriad shows!

We are the closest things to homosexuals ever portrayed in Star-Trek-like series. the (obviously heterosexual and--if gay--hetero ass licking) writers may have been well-meaning, but we are portrayed as sterotypical faggots, because your sub-intelligent culture would howl in outrage should we ever come out of our closet on the boob tube!

Zebsurfer, your hetero slip is showing, when you make a statement that homosexuals can only be defined by having sex with another hominid of the same gender. A fine example of breeder hubris! As if heterosexuals were the only gender to dignify their relationsips...by defining queers as incapable and even unworthy of having affectionate and spiritual feelings for those they truly love. Just like those unworthy breeders (as you most certainly are, poor ape) to define who and what queers are; never mind asking sexual minorities how they see themselves in the scheme of things!

You said something very revealing: "Gene Roddenberry derived much of the show's essence in depicting how humanity would deal with an advanced alien culture." And it is all too clear to us Taelons (and enlightened human queers), that both your race and our "advanced culture" are devoid of any homosexual presence or even acknowledgment. What happened to them? Were they all exterminated, or perhaps isolated on some hideously remote and dark planet, out of view of any godly heterosexual (or asexual)?

And where you say: "Before you can make a judgement, a viewpoint, a statement about anything, you must first understand it." I can only shake my bulbous head in pity, for it is all too obvious that you remain ignorantly heterocentric to the core. For you willfully remain pathetically ignorant about the true spirit of homosexuality, which is: brotherly (or sisterly) love. And to understand that, you must first understand queers. You, dim-witted antrhopoid, do not.

But we queers of the universe always have the final laugh (if not the final conflict [*snicker*] ), because we have a secret we shall now reveal to you:

No sentient being can travel beyond the immediate vicinity of its own home planet,
unless and until the entire global population is totally homosexualized!

For the details on this cosmic law, see Zeke's essay entitled "NeoChristianity"...and perhaps "The First Christ", where Kurt Vonnegut's Tralfamadorians reveal themselves to be 100% homosexual.

In conclusion, we can only wag our imaginary penises (which have been unceremoniously castrated by Rodenberry's disciples) and remark:

"Why wear the pink triangle, when you look as faggoty as us?"

Ambassador Da'an [ Taelon Synod, North America ]

One of our human admirers, John Havrilchak, e-mailed these flattering illustrations by his own hand:

Thanks, John! Next time you're abducted, we'll treat you to one
week's free holiday on the next artificial planet we build.

We are inspired to replace your Mt. Rushmore with this more down-to-earth rendering.

Your Name:

Your Comment:

Church split over gay bishop invites gays to attend
Feb 13, 3:36 PM
Seattle's Capitol Hill sees spike in malicious harassment attacks
Seattle Times
Feb 13, 2:37 PM
Lawyer: Ban on gay sex is still on books
The Hutchinson News
Feb 13, 2:05 PM
Clinton leads among gay super delegates
By LOU CHIBBARO JR., The Washington Blade
Feb 13, 1:51 PM
Retired Kolbe backs McCain for president
By CHRIS JOHNSON, The Washington Blade
Feb 13, 1:31 PM
Members of Fort Worth's Broadway Baptist Church call for pastor's firing
Dallas Morning News
Feb 13, 12:58 PM
School again wins free speech decision over anti-gay shirt
San Diego Union-Tribune
Feb 13, 12:04 PM

More Headlines

About BladeWire
Add BladeWire to your site