West wasn’t gay.
And he wasn’t black, either. Sorry, Will.
And Frodo and Sam.
And Holmes and Watson.
And Achilles and Patroclus (OK, they might’ve been onto something with that one.)
I would be astonished if there were not Jim/Artie fanfiction out there somewhere.
He wasn’t a real person.
I’m SHOCKED! I never knew that!
What about Jim Kirk? Don’t tell me if he isn’t.
Then why did you insist he was white?
Don’t be disingenuous.
I find a ‘lady’s man’ so tiresome. Whether the women in Wild Wild West were beards or not, continually parading one pair of booobs or another around doesn’t make me think, ‘oooh, what a man!’ Makes me think a womanizer ‘lady’s man’ doth protest too much. But I guess the tired old trope is appealing to men watching the show (‘dang, he gets more pusssy than the Humane Society!’)
It was pretty unrealistic to say that the United States would have employed a black man as a high ranked secret agent in 1869. Or that a black man would hold the Army rank of Captain in that year. Of course we’re talking about a movie with a giant spider robot so the realism standard has been set pretty low.
Historically, Henry Flipper was the first black officer in the United States Army and he was commissioned in 1877. Flipper never held the rank of Captain because he was discharged from the Army after a controversial court martial in 1881.
John Alexander was the second black officer in the United States Army. He graduated from West Point in 1887. He served until his death in 1894 and never rose to the rank of Captain.
Charles Young was the third black officer in the United States Army. He received his commission in 1889. He had a twenty-eight year career in the army and was the first black man to be promoted to Captain (in 1901). He was retired at the rank of Colonel in 1917. Young had reached a point in his career where the Army would have to promote him to the rank of Brigadier General if he remained in service. Several southern congressmen protested against this possibility and President Wilson agreed so Young was placed on the inactive list against his wishes. He died in 1922.
It’s James Bond in the old West. Womanizing is a key element of the character.
Yes, I know. No matter what era, what story, what media, I find it tiresome. Too much loud ‘lookit me, what a magnet I am for the laydeeez’. As if that makes him admirable. Ick. Too much of that seems he is fighting against his inner gay.
Because the show always strived for historical accuracy.
On this issue, the TV series was more historically accurate than the movie.
I guess the show also more historically accurate than the movie on the issue of giant spider robots but that was probably more of a budget thing.
I would argue that the show was more accurate on race because of inherent racism in the writers and viewers.
I wouldn’t say the show was racist all that much, except by omission, considering pretty much everyone was white. The worst example was the Sammy Davis Jr episode. He’s a “magical Negro” probably before the term was coined, but despite that was still a good episode.
If you count the follow on “reunion” movies, Dr Loveless Jr invented a nuclear weapon in the 1880s. I’m pretty sure that wasn’t historically accurate. 
I think the androids weren’t, either. (were they steam powered? I don’t remember…)
Racism by omission is the most common type. Declaring that a fictional character must remain white is not a very constructive outlook; that’s Megyn Kelly at the BET Christmas party level.
No it isn’t.
Saying a character in a historical setting should be a member of a race and gender that is appropriate to that setting is not racism.
As long as everyone’s consenting, I am not going to shame people for their choices.
The same women that were sleeping with West and Gordon one week maybe slept with Matt Dillon the next. I think that was likely in reality.
I know men who like variety, that first sex is best sex. That is their viewpoint. For what it’s worth, I was married and faithful. I was left for another man. I don’t prefer hopping around, but I know I run the risk of being left in every relationship. I won’t make that mistake again. I haven’t changed my preferences a lot, but now I know that I’m only one of two people, and my ability to affect the outcome is limited at best.
So I don’t engage in shaming. Especially in a world where we’re encouraged to be tolerant, I don’t think shaming of any consensual behavior has a place.
I understand what you’re saying. To me, the ‘hound dog’ lusting after every woman seems to be trying too hard. It’s a cliche, it smacks of insecurity and confusion deep within. More power to the ladies’ man, but I find him faintly comical. That’s just me. He is no doubt successful and happy, like a strutting #1 Westminster Show Dog - you go, boy!