How To Interview A Trans Woman #GirlsLikeUs

Last week you may have seen quite a lot of angry tweetage about Piers Morgan’s disrespectful ambushing of Janet Mock on his chat show. Morgan will doubtless claim that prurient sensationalism is the only way that trans issues can be covered in the media (because, ewwwwwww!, right?). Well he’s wrong, and here to prove the point is Marc Lamont Hill doing a magnificent job of getting the best out of his guest and educating his audience.

Do watch it all the way through. There’s a bit at the end that will cause Piers Morgan to blow his tiny little mind.

Oh, and to all those white trans activists in the States who are going after Janet and Laverne Cox, kindly STFU. Janet and Laverne are the best thing that has happened to trans advocacy in a long time. You’d think that we, of all people, could manage a little intersectionality, but there’s always someone more interested in their own position than getting the job done.

Today on Ujima – LGBT History Month Part II

LGBTHMStarting off today’s show we had Terry Starr giving us some background on the history of LGBT radio, in particular the fabulous Shout Out show that he and Mary Milton founded.

Also in the first hour, and other Shout Out stalwart, Steve Shepherd, joined us to talk about his work as an LGBT advocate in the Unite trade union.

You can listen to the first hour here.

We open up the second hour with Lesley Mansell from the Bristol North NHS Trust, who talks to me about equalities issues in the health service. There’s quite a bit of trans coverage in that.

Finally I am joined by Judith Brown of the Bristol Older Women’s Forum and we discuss a variety of issues facing older people in the city.

You can listen to the second hour here.

The music for the show is all gay disco anthems, which were a lot of fun to play. Yes, I did get Amanda Lear and Dana International in the same show.

Next week, floods willing, I’ll be joined in the studio by C.N. Lester and we will talk about opera, boys playing girls, and castrati. C.N. has promised me a 17th Century opera, written by a woman, which is all about gender. It will, as they say, be awesome.

The Dangers Of Traveling While Trans

Every time I have to pass through a border control post into another country, I worry about what is going to happen to me. Most of you probably think that’s daft, but I invite you to consider what is happening to Avery Edison in Canada at the moment.

I get the impression from Twitter that lots of smug, self-satisfied cis people are saying this is all her own fault for having broken Canadian visa regulations, but as my own experience shows, such things are by no means written in stone. Besides, when I got denied admission to the US I was put on a plane home, not flung into prison. There are late night flights back to the UK from Toronto Pearson. I know, I have taken them.

In fact what constitutes a breach of visa regulations is very unclear. When I went to New Zealand for their NatCon prior to AussieCon 4 I discovered that having been denied entry to any other country, for any reason, can be used as an excuse to deny you entry to NZ. I spent a nervous half hour or so on the phone to immigration officials in Auckland (because there was no one senior enough awake in Wellington when I arrived) before being let into the country.

Actually I suspect that most countries allow their border control staff to stop anyone, for any reason, if they want to. They just have to be suspicious of you. The only thing reining them in is the sort of PR storm that is currently going on around Avery. I’m pretty sure that, despite all the documentation I have from the UK, my trans status is on the records that get shared around border control bodies. I am sure because I was asked outright whether I was trans once on entering the US. Lying would have provided justification to deny me entry.

Talking of those papers, they are not worth a damn in another country. Avery has an F on her passport. Canada doesn’t care. They have made their own determination of her gender, by their local rules. That’s a similar situation to this one where two Brazilian trans women have been jailed in Dubai for the crime of “Imitating Opposite Sex”.

I’m not up to date with what is happening in India, but last I saw stuff in the news it looked like that if Kevin and I went there as a couple we could be sentenced to life imprisonment for “homosexuality”.

For everyone out there who is smugly saying, “well Britain is civilized, we wouldn’t do that”, check this out. Britain routinely denies entry to LGBT asylum seekers, even those whose lives will be in danger back home, or who face certain arrest on arrival, because our standard immigration policy is to not believe anyone who applies for asylum on LGBT grounds.

More than once, on returning to the UK from an overseas trip, I have been given a look that clearly says, “If there were some way I could deny you entry to the country I’d do so.”

Travel is scary, every time. The only reason I get away with it is because I am white, middle class, and sufficiently old that my lack of good looks doesn’t raise suspicion. And because I am quite careful about which countries I travel to. I’m not sure that I want to go back to Canada in a hurry.

Join #TeamSquid Now!

Team Squid


Yes, it is another one of those anthologies. Women Destroy Lovecraft? Actually I think Howard had quite enough difficulty with women when he was alive. Women Destroy the Cthulhu Mythos, perhaps. Anyway: women, tentacles, what’s not to like? Go back She walks In Shadows on Indiegogo now, please.

This one, of course, came out of some male editor excusing the cockforest of his contents list by claiming that women don’t write Lovecraftian stories. So we have to prove him wrong.

By the way, my story in Airship Shaped and Bristol Fashion is totally Lovecraftian. And it has a lesbian heroine. Because there were lesbians in 19th Century Bristol, some of them quite famous.

In Which I Destroy Science Fiction

Women destroy science fictionWell, I try anyway. I suspect that I destroyed it for Dave Truesdale many years ago, but that’s another story.

As you probably all know by now, Lightspeed has a Kickstarter campaign going that was initially intended to fund a special issue called Women Destroy Science Fiction, but has so far exceeded its goals that it will now also fund Women Destroy Horror, and is close to also funding Women Destroy Fantasy. I had a really good story idea for the science fiction one, but I just don’t have the time to work on it. Also I suspect that the competition is intense. So you can imagine how pleased I was to be asked to write one of the personal essays that they have been using to promote the campaign. That is now online, and you can read it here.

All I need now is for someone to start a petition demanding that I never be allowed to join SFWA.

Saint Panti

If you follow anyone living in Ireland on Twitter you may have seen the hashtag #TeamPanti and wondered what it was all about. Well, here comes the explanation, courtesy of the most fabulous Panti Bliss herself.

As Panti says right up front, the problems of a gay white man being oppressed by straight white people in a relatively prosperous Western country are fairly minor in comparison to many other things. Nevertheless I think she does a great job of explaining how corrosive to live in a country where “respectable” people are forever commenting on how you should live your life. That applies to many more situations than hers.

I note in passing that Ireland has the worst record in the EU when it comes to transgender rights, according to this Amnesty International report issued last week.

Today on Ujima – LGBT History Month Part I

LGBT History Month logoToday’s show started out slightly chaotically because our regular engineer, Seth, wasn’t available, and Paulette had to cover running the desk. We got there in the end, but there was a bit of mild panic in the process.

My guest for the first half hour was the thankfully unflappable Daryn Carter who helped me give an introduction to the various events happening in Bristol over LGBT History Month. In the second half hour we were joined by an amazing older lesbian, Patsy Staddon. She talked with great honesty and bravery about what it was like being a lesbian in the 1970s. What Patsy has to say about marriage equality is perhaps a little controversial, but I’m perfectly happy with people having whatever family arrangements suit them.

The first half of the show is available to listen to here.

The second half of the show begins with a pre-recorded interview with Nalo Hopkinson. My apologies for some of the sound quality. That appears to have been my microphone, which is a bit odd as I’ve done lots of podcasts with it. Thankfully Nalo herself is nice and clear, and she is awesome as always. We followed the interview with Paulette talking a bit about what it means to write in Jamaican, or indeed any other Caribbean language.

Finally I’m joined by Sarah Thorp of the Room 212 Gallery to talk abut some of the great new art projects happening in the Gloucester Road area. We make vague plans for a show about May Day, which I now need to write to Liz Williams about.

You can find the second hour of the show here.

Throughout February I will be playing music inspired by LGBT History month. Today there were several songs from my teenage years, and one that is bang up to date. Did I get to play the Tom Robinson Band and Against Me! on the radio? Why yes, I did. Hopefully you like the selection. Next week will be all gay disco anthems, because I am nothing if not eclectic in my musical tastes.

What The Heck Is A Spousal Veto?

With LGBT History Month coming up, people are taking an interest in LGBT politics again, and I have been asked to explain this weird “Spousal Veto” thing that trans people keep yelling about. Well, it is a strange piece of legislation added to the England & Wales Marriage Equality Act which is profoundly homophobic in nature, and yet which only inconveniences trans people. Bear with me.

Generally the Marriage Equality Act is a good thing, even for trans people. It takes away the requirement that we have to get marriages annulled prior to transition so as to avoid a same-sex marriage, though it still rankles that no restitution was made for those people who were forced to destroy their marriages in previous years.

However, the government added a new requirement to the Bill to the effect that, if a trans person is married, and wishes to get a Gender Recognition Certificate, then they must supply a letter from their spouse giving permission, otherwise no GRC can be granted, hence the “Veto”.

Note that getting a GRC is generally seen as a basic human right for trans people. Indeed, the whole Gender Recognition Act was forced on the UK by the European Court of Human Rights. Ireland is going through a similar process at the moment. Getting a GRC is, I believe, the only human right in UK law which you can only get if you have your spouse’s permission.

I should make clear that this is nothing whatsoever to do with the actual process of transition. You can’t actually apply for a GRC until you have completed that process. You can’t normally get a GRC until you have been living in your preferred gender for at least 2 years. You may well have had surgery, though it is not a requirement. Mostly what the GRC does is changes your legal gender.

Nor does his have much to do with the majority of marriages. As you can imagine, if your spouse is unhappy about the direction your life is taking, they will probably ask for a divorce long before you get anywhere near applying for a GRC. And if you and your spouse do want to stay together, then getting the required letter should be a formality. Who, then, is the Spousal Veto there to protect?

The only case in which the Veto makes any sense at all is if your spouse is in denial about your transition and is determined to preserve a marriage to your pre-transition self. Said spouse is likely to be angry and vindictive, and doing their best to derail your transition in other ways too. The nice people at Westminster felt that spouses like that needed more ammunition with which to pursue their vendettas.

But why? What is so horrible about the GRC? Other than simple joy in causing further distress, why would anyone want to wield the Veto? Well, the thing about the GRC is that it doesn’t just change your gender now, it retroactively changes your gender. I have a birth certificate saying that I was born a girl. I am very proud of it.

But consider. Suppose you are in a heterosexual marriage to someone, and that person then gets a GRC. That means that history has been changed to say that you were party to a same-sex marriage. You have been retroactively made gay. And that is why people are prepared to fight tooth and nail to prevent their spouses from getting GRCs.

A few people at Westminster recognized what an injustice this was. As Sarah Brown explains here, people like Julian Huppert and Liz Barker lobbied passionately on our behalf. But the Civil Service adamantly refused to budge on the issue, and ministers took their advice. In stark contrast, although a similar clause was introduced into Scotland’s Marriage Equality bill, as soon as the issue was explained to them the Scottish Parliament’s Equal Opportunities Committee voted unanimously to scrap it. The important difference, of course, is that in Scotland the trans community has the support of LGB lobbyists, whereas in England & Wales the usual tactic by S’onewall is to offer us up as a bargaining counter: the sacrificial lambs to be persecuted at will so as to give the bigots a victory to cheer about.

So that’s what’s what a Spousal Veto is: a nasty piece of homophobic legislation allowed to pass in Westminster because it only affects trans people.

Research Squee

One of the interesting things about researching my LGBT superheroes talk is how the comics companies seem to be much more relaxed about addressing LGBT themes in comics aimed at a teen audience. Marvel are particularly good, with titles like New Mutants, Runaways and Young Avengers being famous for their LGBT content. I was not in the least bit surprised to see this post on Bleeding Cool which suggests that Young Avengers might be the first mainstream US superhero team comic to have a line-up that is entirely queer.

All of which gives me plenty of hope for the future.

On Gender-Swapped Gaming

Foz Meadows has a brilliant post up today abut the phenomenon of people who play gender-swapped characters in online games. Famously, on the Internet, no one knows that you are really a dog. Cross-species play is perhaps rare, but cross-gender play is apparently very common. Somewhat more women play male characters than men play female characters, but in both cases more than 50% had at least experimented.

What is so interesting is the reasons that people give for cross-gender play. With women the most common reasons for playing a male character are so that you can get taken seriously by the male players, and to avoid the constant sexual harassment to which female characters are subjected. Men, on the other hand, play female characters because they know that they can play on the insecurities of their sex-starved brethren and use “female” charms to wheedle favors out of them.

Foz, quite brilliantly, points out that the behavior of these gender-swapping male players is very much like something “fake girl gamers” get accused of. The intriguing possibility arises that the majority of the annoyingly manipulative behavior that male players are subjected to by female characters is in fact being done by gender-swapped male players. Of course we girls get the blame for this. No guy is going to admit to being conned by the feminine wiles of a gender-swapped male player. As Foz says, the whole thing is a giant misogynist shell game.

Because I am a bad girl and can’t resist turning something like this into a teaching moment, I have been pondering what this means for trans people. I can quite see that the TERFs1 will be all over this. They will see it as proof of the perfidy of trans women. But there some very major differences between people who gender-swap in gaming and those who do so in real life.

The male players who play gender-swapped in order to exploit their fellow men do not identify as women. They know that they are perpetrating a scam. That’s why they are not worried about the sexual harassment that their characters will inevitably be subjected to. It is not personal for them. Actual women, people who identify as women, whether cis or trans, have to live in the real world, and face the very real consequences of sexual harassment. For us, being subjected to such treatment in a game is deeply personal. Gender-swapped gamers behave as they do because they perceive real in-game advantages in doing so. Trans people live as they do despite the very real social and economic disadvantages that result from being trans in real life.

Nevertheless, many cis people persist in assuming that trans women are, in fact, deceivers, that we live as we do for the sole purpose of tricking other people into believing we are something we are not and, unless we are genuinely insane, know we are not. What they are doing is projecting their attitudes onto us.

It reminds me a lot of how Kevin and I have come to see people who accuse fan groups of conspiracies. Those people who are convinced that con-runners make a fortune out of putting on conventions are the sort of people who would not get involved in con-running unless they could make big profits from it. Those people who are convinced that all awards are fixed are the sort of people who would fix awards if they ran them. And equally people who accuse trans women of being out to trick others (whether to sneak into women’s toilets and rape anyone they find there, or to lure straight men into gay relationships) are the sort of people who can’t imagine transitioning for any other purpose.

Now if only those people could turn their attentions to people who are actually out to trick others — male gamers who play gender-swapped to trick other male gamers — then perhaps the rest of us could get on with our lives in peace.

1 TERF = Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist — sad people who think that being obsessed with hatred of trans women somehow makes them “radical”.

You Can Help Destroy Science Fiction!

Lightspeed magazine has had so much interest in their forthcoming Women Destroy Science Fiction! special issue that they are running a Kickstarter campaign to allow them to buy more stories and print a double-sized issue. They’ll be doing a trade paperback print edition too. You want this, you know you do. back it here.

Today on Ujima – Portland Café

Ujima is running a number of staff training days this month and one of mine overlapped with today’s show. Paulette has a big crew so having me out for most of the show is no problem. I’m a bit sad about it though, because from 12:30 to 13:30 they ran an interview with a lady called Di Parkin who has been a feminist activist since 1968. The team was buzzing about the interview in the post-show debrief, so I’m looking forward to listening to it.

I finally got into the studio at 13:30 when I did an interview with a lovely young lady called Salàma Kefentse who runs the Portland Café, just round the corner from the Ujima studios. Kevin and I ate there when he was over for BristolCon and we can recommend it.

The show is available through the usual Listen Again system. You can find the first hour here and the second hour here.

Recommended Reading: Kameron Hurley

Kameron Hurley has produced a couple of great posts this week, which I’d like to draw your attention to. Please note that this is not (yet) award-related as we are now in 2014 so the posts are not eligible for the current batch of awards.

The first post is on Juliet McKenna’s blog, and is about creating a realistic religion for your world. The tendency of fantasy writers to create religions as if they running a D&D campaign, and of readers to praise these, is a constant irritation to me. I now wish I had found the time to read Tim Akers’ books when they came out, because Kameron makes them sound very interesting.

The other post is on Kari Sperring’s LiveJournal and is mirrored on Kameron’s blog because LJ is apparently being awkward again (I’m expecting it to go down for the duration of the Sporting Tournament We Are Not Talking About). It is all about gendered behavior, and how our stereotypes for male and female behavior affect how we read characters. God’s War and its sequels do a wonderful job of turning gender expectations on their heads, and I heartily recommend them, but as Kameron says the portrayal of realistically violent women characters brings with it a whole bunch of extra baggage.

This is, of course, of particular interest to me as it has bearing on how trans women get treated. If I adopt a behavior that is typically gendered as male, such as enjoying watching sport, I know that some people will see it as proof that I am “really” male. On the other hand, if I adopt a behavior that is typically gendered as female, for example having an interest in fashion, that will get dismissed as evidence that I am “trying too hard” and “adopting a female stereotype”. Both reactions stem from an assumption that my gender presentation is false, and therefore everything I do must have some ulterior motive. It is all very trying.

My History Month Talk – LGBT Superheroes

This has been announced on Facebook, so I guess it is OK to mirror it here.

Anyone old enough to remember the Adam West Batman TV series will know that it would be hard to imagine anything more camp. And yet at the same time superhero comics were strictly controlled with regard to content for fear of corrupting the youth of America (and doubtless the rest of the world as well). A lot has changed since the 1960s, and occasionally the mass media gets all excited about a superhero coming out as gay. But do those men in tights still expect us to believe that their dress sense is purely utilitarian? And how about the rest of the LGBT spectrum? Do they get a look in? Cheryl Morgan takes on a tour of a world in which we have been asked to believe that a man can fly, but not that he might fall in love with his teen sidekick.

Sunday, 23 February, 2.30-3.30pm, M-Shed, Bristol

And can I say that I am having huge fun researching this. 🙂

Sadly I won’t be able to podcast it because it has lots of illustrations.

Long Hidden ToC & Cover

Long Hidden cover - Julie Dillon

Rose Fox and Daniel José Older have announced the Table of Contents for the Long Hidden anthology. You can see it here. The cover above is by Julie Dillon. I’m really looking forward to this one.

Today On Ujima: Books & Booze

Well, that was back into harness with a bang. Today was all me all the time on Women’s Outlook.

The first hour was all about books we had read over the holiday period. Several of the team were in on the discussion, and mostly they are not SF readers, and we made room for their choices too. The second half hour, however, was mainly SF-focused. Paulette had been reading The Radleys by Matt Haig, which is a very funny book about a family of suburban vampires determined blend into normal society by restraining their natural urges. I have a few reservations about it, but the central theme of the book is how Mr. & Mrs. Radley have avoided telling their children the truth about their nature, and how this leads to tragedy. That led us into discussing Mortal Fire, by Elizabeth Knox, which also has parents manipulating children at its core, and then to Hild by Nicola Griffith which may be an example of justified parental dishonesty.

You can listen to that first hour here.

The second hour saw us discussing a forthcoming conference about Women & Alcohol. I was quite nervous about this as I had no idea what tack the studio guests would take. I had visions of getting a health fanatic who thought that all alcohol consumption was wrong, or a Daily Malice reader who wanted to force women back into the home and make them financially dependent on their husbands so that they can’t (easily) drink. Thankfully my two guests, Patsy and Sabitha, were very sensible and level-headed and I think we had a good conversation.

You can listen to the second hour of the show here.

One of the changes we have made this year is that we are going to have more music in the shows. Paulette brought in some music today, but I chose the tracks. I was delighted to be able to play Carole King, Amy Winehouse and Dusty Springfield. For February, which is LGBT History Month, I’m going to be in charge of the music choices. I want to have all LGBT artists. That should be fun. Definitely on the list are Sylvester, Labi Sifre and Tracy Chapman. Oh, and Josephine Baker. Might have some white folks too. Can’t do it without Cyndi Lauper. But suggestions for more LGBT POC musicians would be appreciated. Please remember that we are heavily regulated for language so we can’t play anything sweary.

The Great Firewall of Britain: Assistance Requested

Every since the Internet started, I have been worried that big business and government would try to take control of it away from ordinary individuals, to the detriment of small businesses and minorities. It has taken a while, but that now appears to be happening in the UK. I make a point of getting my Internet service from a small, business-focused ISP, but most people in the UK will get their home and mobile service from large utility companies, and they are starting to find that sites are being blocked.

It is all done with the best of intentions, of course. For a long time now, tabloid newspapers and other purveyors of Moral Panic have been complaining that the Internet allows children access to pornography. As public displays of pornography are generally only available in tabloid newspapers, and apparently the ladies toilets of hip London restaurants, Something Must Be Done.

So, the Government passed the usual sort of Something Must Be Done Act, and accordingly something largely useless was done. ISPs agreed to filter out “porn”. Lots of people who know stuff about computers said that this would end in tears. No one took any notice because Something Must be Done and we had to Think Of The Children. Now we are suffering the consequences.

A lot of the problem is that people don’t know what is being blocked, or why. I suspect that the support staff at the ISPs don’t understand the system very well, and don’t have much ability to fix issues. It may well be that companies have been buying third party software that they don’t fully understand, and which may contain proprietary features that they are not even allowed to query.

The results, however, are pretty clear. Chaos is being caused. Lots of people are upset. It is not hard to see why. O2, possibly uniquely, have provided a website through which you can check whether your site is blocked or not. I tested some of my sites, most importantly the bookstore, which is rather important to me from a business point of view. This is what I got back.

WTB blocking

That didn’t worry me too much. The site does, after all, encourage people to spend money. I can see parents wanting to restrict access to such things. But just to be sure I checked the competition. Here’s what I got for Amazon.

Amazon blocking

As you can see, there is a difference. It is not clear what that means, and O2 does not provide any explanation. But the only explanation I can come up with is that kids can be blocked from buying anything on both sites, but they are blocked from browsing mine, whereas they are not blocked from browsing Amazon. Given that they are likely to sell all of the books that I sell, I don’t see why that should be the case. Indeed, O2 appears to be giving preferential treatment to a big, powerful company.

Just to be sure, I checked a few other bookstore sites. They all came up similar to mine. Even Waterstones.

Waterstones blocking

So clearly the list of companies with powerful lawyers that O2 is afraid of and prepared to make exceptions for is quite short.

When queried on this, O2 tend to hide behind bureaucracy. Their Twitter account points people at this document which talks about how mobile Internet providers have got together to agree on a censorship scheme. However, that doesn’t explain in any way how these censorship decisions are made. Instead it talks about sites being, “classified suitable for those aged 18 and over”. Any site which is not so-classified may be subject to parental blocking.

As traffic on Twitter today has shown, many, many sites are being classified as subject to parental blocking. Those include the Wizards’ Tower Press site, Salon Futura and Emerald City. I checked with the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) to see what they think ought to disqualify something from being views by people under 18. The list is here. What of this am I actually guilty of? Strong violence or horror? No. Actual sex? No. Discriminatory language and behavior? I hope not. About the only think I could think of that might warrant such a classification is the occasional use of “fuck” or “cunt”.

Whoops, now this site is going to go on the block list.

Part of the problem is that the classification scheme for Internet censorship has only one cut-off point, at 18 years of age. Film censorship has several: 12, 15 and 18. It turns out that you can do almost anything you would do in an adult film for 15-rated films, except show actual sex and use “cunt”. 15+ teenagers using the Internet don’t get that option.

By the way, I did a quick check on Salon Futura. It ought to classify for a 15 rating. It fails the Internet censorship rules because it has a couple of uses of “fuck”. Karen Burnham and Sam Jordison, you are very bad people.

Another problem is that, as I understand it, parental controls are turned on by default. Lots of people either won’t know that they are on, or won’t be able to turn them off. It is opt-out censorship, not opt-in.

Finally, we don’t actually know how most of the ISPs interpret the need for parental controls. Where we do, what we see is horrific. The guidelines that O2 pointed to are for mobile providers. Home Internet providers do not use the same rules. BT has published a list of the categories under which parents will be able to block access, and it goes well beyond what the BBFC would do. For example, parents are able to block off access to the official websites of pop groups (but not to websites of sports clubs), to sites giving fashion and beauty tips, and even to search engines. Perhaps most controversially they can block sites on the grounds that they provide “sex education”. This can mean something as seemingly obvious as teaching “respect for a partner” and, inevitably, “gay and lesbian lifestyle”. It doesn’t mention trans lifestyles, but I’m betting they are covered too.

What exactly does “gay and lesbian lifestyle” mean? Well, it is standard homophobe code for anything that presents being gay or lesbian and in any way normal or acceptable. It is Section 28, or the new laws in Russia, being given to parents to implement in their homes. Does anyone ever ask to censor sites that portray “heterosexual lifestyle”? Of course not. And by the way my “trans lifestyle” includes eating, sleeping, reading, doing housework, running my businesses, and indeed everything else that I do because I am guilty of Living While Trans.

Here too we have come full circle. Teenagers desperately need advice on sex. They need support if they think they may be one of QUILTBAG. They need to know the risks of sexual contact. Parents are often the last people they will go to for such advice. The Internet has been a valuable resource for very many of my young trans friends. So we start by saying, “Will No One Think Of The Children”, and end by putting kids in danger. Well done, government.

Anyway, I did say at the top that I would appreciate some assistance. Most companies have not been as helpful as O2 and BT. With many of them there is no way to check whether your site has been blocked except by trying to access it over a connection supplied by a specific provider. Nor, indeed, is there any central point where you can complain if you think that your site has been unfairly blocked. So I’m hoping that UK readers will be able to test my various sites for me using their own connections and report back. I am particularly interested in cases in which sites are blocked outside of the parental control system, and where my bookstore is blocked but Amazon and other larger competitors are not. Please report in comments if you notice anything. And thank you for any help you can give.

Good Show, Paris

While I was out hosting BristolCon Fringe last night, Radio 1 was airing a rare documentary. The primary subject was Laura Jane Grace, the lead singer of the punk rock band, Against Me, and one of the more famous trans women in the world. This was then used as a hook to discuss trans issues more widely. The show was hosted and probably largely scripted by trans journalist, Paris Lees, and also featured the trans comedian, Bethany Black, both of whom I have had the honor to hang out with. There are also snatches of interviews with various young people, some of whom I’m pretty sure are friends of Roz whom I have met at some point.

I note these connections, not to name drop, but to emphasize that this was a mainstream national radio show produced by and for, and featuring, people like me. It is probably the only time in my life that I have heard such a thing. Sure there have been shows on local radio in Bristol and Brighton, but this is the BBC, this is national. In a small country like the UK, that matters a lot.

The great significance here is that trans people are getting to tell their own stories on national radio. Previous coverage on radio and TV has all been a case of cis people interpreting the trans experience for a cis audience. Frequently, even when such shows were well-intentioned, the message that trans people would get from them is, “you freaks are difficult to understand and people will not accept you”. Even a show like My Transsexual Summer was deliberately packaged as entertainment for cis people, with the real narratives of the stars often being bent to fit that requirement.

In contrast, while Paris was happy to explain things along the way, she, Laura and Beth were also talking to trans people. In particular there was mention of hormone blockers for trans kids, and encouragement that the world is getting better for people like us. The most common type of comment I have seen on Twitter about the show is how much hope it will give to currently closeted teenagers.

I’m not going to give the BBC too much credit here. They probably see Paris as someone new and different and edgy that can give them a bit of street cred. That won’t stop them from airing dozens of comedy programs that humiliate trans people before the next time they allow her on air. And we’ll doubtless see some concerned feminist writing in The Guardian soon about how Radio 1 is promoting child abuse. But I also have perspective. I also know how far we have come, and how big a step into the future this has been.

Well done, Paris, love. May this be the first of many.

You lot probably already understand most of what was said, but if you are interested the show is available on iPlayer here.

Ladies: Destroy Science Fiction Now!

Yes girls, it is time to load up on the cooties and sally forth to terrorize those legions of 50-year-old adolescent boys who cannot bear to see their beloved genre polluted by things feminine. Lightspeed magazine is preparing a girls-only special edition with the title of Women Destroy Science Fiction! Submissions are now open. To learn more about this one-in-a-lifetime opportunity to spread terror and tampons through the gleaning chrome halls of boys own fiction, go here and read a special message from guest editor, Christie Yant. Your gender needs you!