Sense8 – Final Thoughts

I have now watched all 12 episodes of Sense8, and overall it is getting a strong thumbs up from me. Of course I am very much part of the target audience. So let’s try to break things down a bit.

I’ve seen a number of people online complaining about lack of plot, or the confusing nature of the early episodes. It is worth spending a bit of time talking about the structure of the series.

Some TV series are entirely episodic. The original Star Trek series, for example, had almost nothing of a connecting theme beyond being Wagon Train in space. The modern fashion is for story arcs, and some series have a very strong one. Sense8 does not. There is certainly a long-term plot concerning the sensates and the evil Mr. Whispers, but that isn’t close to being resolved in this series. There are no distinct plots for individual episodes either.

What we get instead are story arcs for individual members of the sensate cluster we are following. Sometimes they interact. Will and Nomi are crucial to the story arc for Riley. Other times the characters pretty much solve their own issues. Kala and Lito briefly turn up to help Wolfgang with specific tasks, but mostly he’s on his own. Some character story arcs are still unfinished at the end of the series.

Obviously if you are someone who needs a tight plot and a satisfying ending then Sense8 is likely to disappoint you. I’m rather more interested in it from the show-runner point of view. It is nicely open-ended, and yet still has multiple interesting story arcs. It is also very much character-focused. Compare that to shows like Star Trek, and even Babylon 5, where characters mostly existed to serve the plot, and only developed when it was their turn to take point on an episode.

What about the science fiction content of the series? Well, there are no invading aliens, no rebellious robots, no rampaging dinosaurs. If you were hoping for those things you’ll be disappointed. Sense8 is very much about humanity: two species thereof. It is, if you like, a story about mutants, except that the only super power that each sensate has is the ability to communicate with, and share skills with, other members of their cluster.

So, for example, if someone needs fighting skills then Sun can turn up and do her martial arts magic. If someone needs computer skills then Nomi is on hand. Capheus is a brilliant driver, Lito lies smoothly, and eventually Kala got to show off her scientific knowledge. The cluster is, in effect, a group of 8 people pooling some extraordinary but not supernatural talents in a single being.

Except they are not a single being. Some of the write-ups of the series say that the members of the cluster are all the same person. Certainly they are all born at the same time, but they are all very much individuals. Wolfgang, by his own admission, is a monster. Nomi has criminal tendencies, though she’s doing it for what she believes are good reasons. Capheus has a strong moral sense, while Lito is something of a coward. As with their skills, the cluster embodies many different aspects of humanity.

That, of course, is part of the diversity theme of the series. The characters represent seven different nationalities, half of them people of color. They include a gay man and a lesbian trans woman. It would not surprise me to discover that Sun is asexual. Their careers include a cop, a banker, an actor, a chemist, a bus driver and a DJ. The whole point is that they gather together diverse aspects of humanity.

In episode #9 Jonas makes a short speech that I think is key to the entire series. He tells Will that a key difference between sensates and humans is that sensates have the ability to share experiences and emotions with their rest of their cluster. Humans, being isolated individuals, lack that basic empathic ability, and as a result are pathological and dangerous. It is a very Hippy way of looking at the world. I’m sure that Amanita’s mom would appreciate it. Being of a similar age, I do too. How well it will go down outside of California is another matter.

In addition, of course, we have the LGBT content. As I noted above, the cast contains a gay man and a lesbian trans woman. I’m not in a position to pass judgement on the former (see Matt Cheney for that), but the treatment of the latter is exemplary. Lana Wachowski (I’m assuming she’s responsible for those parts of the script) has managed to include some of the awful ways in which trans people are treated with making Nomi an important part of the plot for reasons that are nothing to do with her being trans. Plus she has cast a trans woman in the role. Jamie Clayton does a good job with the part. It is hard to see how it could have been much better.

There’s also something about the way that Nomi is portrayed that I hadn’t spotted until I read this interview with Jamie at After Ellen. She notes that the relationship between Nomi and Amanita is the most stable and functional one in the series. All of the other characters have relationship problems of some sort, or no relationship. The cute, loveable couple that everyone ends up rooting for are two lesbians: a trans woman and a woman of color.

As I have noted before, some of the other aspects of diversity in the show have been less well handled. That’s almost inevitable. The whole point of doing diversity is that you include as many different aspects of humanity as possible. The chances of the script writing team being as familiar with all of those as one of them is with trans issues are pretty much nil. When you are judging a highly diverse show like this, you do need to be aware that it won’t get everything right. I absolutely accept that some people in, for example, India and Kenya, might entirely understandably be annoyed at how their people are represented. I expect them to understand that I’m delighted at how my people have been represented. Overall, it is far better that the program tried to do all of these things than it did not try.

Claire Light has written a very interesting review of the series in which she points out that by recruiting a far more diverse production team — scriptwriters, directors and so on — the Wachowskis could have got a far better handle on the non-US aspects of the story. Like her, I hope they do better in subsequent series. I suspect that there is pressure on them to not make the series too hard to relate to for a US audience. The show has an essentially white American worldview because it is intended primarily to sell to white Americans. It takes bravery to move away from that, but some significant steps have been taken.

Sadly, I don’t expect the show to be terribly well received. As we have seen with the Puppies, any attempt to add diversity to what has previously been a straight white male preserve is seen as threatening by some. Equally others will say that they are just not interested in the stories of Korean bankers, Mexican actors, or trans people.

To understand how easily this sort of thing happens I recommend that you check out this blog post by Foz Meadows which demonstrates fairly clearly that the plots of The Matrix and Jupiter Ascending are more or less identical, and are equally wildly implausible. The two films diverge in that one is cyberpunk and the other space opera, but that doesn’t make a lot of difference. The major difference between them is that they are gender-swapped. In The Matrix the central character is male, and his concerns are male; in Jupiter Ascending the central character is female, and her concerns are female. As a consequence, The Matrix is held up as a classic of science fiction cinema, while Jupiter Ascending has been almost universally panned.

That, dear readers, is how sexist assumptions about fiction work. Those assumptions will affect Sense8 too. So while I accept that there are some very dodgy things in it, I still love it.

I understand that four series are planned. I’m very much looking forward to the next one.

Sense8 : First Thoughts

Nomi and Amanita


Thus far I have watched the first three episodes of Sense8. I thought I should offer a few views on it because I’m seeing people who have given up on episode 1.

I think the criticisms of the lack of story are fair. The series follows 8 major characters, and introducing them all over the space of a one-hour program is hard work. Many TV series take a while to get going, and this one maybe takes longer than most. Even after three episodes, some of the character arcs haven’t really got started. I’m keeping watching for other reasons.

What makes the series interesting, however, is that it is a genuine attempt to introduce a bit of diversity. We have characters from Mexico, India, South Korea and Kenya. The London-based character is Icelandic, and the Berlin-based character is Russian. We have a gay man, and a trans woman. This diversity is both a strength and a weakness.

Much of the weakness derives from the fact that this is not just anyone doing diversity, this is a bunch of rich Californians doing diversity. Much as I love California, certain amount of cluelessness is inevitable. Also there’s that whole thing that I talked about yesterday about having to present diversity to a non-diverse audience in a way that they will find acceptable. That can mean using clichés. Watching the India segments of episode 1 gave me a horrible, sinking feeling. That was confirmed when Samit Basu tweeted this:

And then they doubled down by putting a Bollywood dance number in another episode.

Head * Desk * Repeat

I haven’t seen any comment from Korean, Mexican or Kenyan viewers, but my gut feeling is that the level of stereotyping is getting close to the India segments for some of them. I’ve also seen African Americans expressing disgust with some of the Chicago material.

I do think that this is mostly a result of cluelessness, and lack of knowledge, on behalf of the writers. I say that because they also have a minority character with whom one of the writers has a fair amount of personal connection. There is Nomi Marks who is a trans woman, and in my humble opinion she’s awesome (at least so far).

Part of this, I will admit, is because of Freema Agyeman who plays Amanita, Nomi’s girlfriend. She’s the sexiest thing in Hollywood by far at the moment. If anyone could persuade me to become it lesbian it would be her. Especially if she brings… (whoops, TMI). She’s also a great actress, and Amanita is gloriously fierce. But most of it is because of the issues that get covered in the script.

A lot of you won’t have noticed much of what has gone on. For example, the scene where a TERF1 accuses Nomi of being a “colonizing male” and Amanita steps up in support is fairly short. You probably got that the TERF said something bad, but not what she said, or that she was a TERF.

Then there’s the scene where Nomi and Amanita are given pot brownies by a couple of Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence at the Palace of Fine Arts in San Francisco. Those are two actual Sisters playing at being fairies. I’m not sure which ones — Feòrag probably knows.

We also get a scene at an interpretive dance performance being staged as part of San Francisco Pride. This is The Missing Generation, an extremely powerful piece about AIDS staged by Fresh Meat Productions. The Artistic Director of Fresh Meat is Sean Dorsey, who is trans. Sean has a cameo in Sense8 in a scene with Nomi, Shawna Virago, a queer musician, and Jamison Green, a trans activist2.

In episode 2 we get introduced to Nomi’s horribly transphobic parents. Without giving away too much, Nomi’s story arc is turning into a tale of forced de-transition. It isn’t something that happens a lot, but it is something that absolutely terrifies trans people. Mostly transphobic families can’t do anything awful to us until we are dead, but if they can get us sectioned there’s no limit to the cruelty that they can inflict. Lana Wachowski has apparently said that parts of Nomi’s story are autobiographical. I do hope for her sake this isn’t one of them.

I’m sure that not all trans people will be happy with Nomi as a character, but as far as I’m concerned between them Lana and actress Jamie Clayton are doing a wonderful job. Nomi is somewhat lacking in agency at the moment, but the script wouldn’t have trailed her hacking skills if she wasn’t going to get to use them at some point. I’m pretty sure that she’s going to be absolutely key to the resolution of the plot.

And that, people, is freaking amazing. We have a science fiction TV series with a trans woman as a major character. The plot does address trans issues, but they are real issues that trans people face, not using transition as a plot device.

There are a couple of things worth highlighting here. The first is that Lana knows trans issues well and is therefore able to represent them well. The show’s creative team clearly doesn’t have the same in-depth knowledge of, and sympathy for, the other diverse characters that they are trying to represent. The other is that having a high profile trans character is truly ground-breaking. Having an Indian character is not. Indian people have Bollywood, so there’s no chance of them being impressed by a bunch of Americans including a bunch of horrible stereotypes as representation.

Diversity is hard. We all screw up at some point. With eight differently diverse characters your chances of screwing up are pretty much 100%. But if we are afraid of screwing up then we’ll never make the attempt, so I try not to be too critical. Then again, if the trans content was as clichéd as the Indian content, and if I had lots of other shows with trans characters in them to watch, I’d doubtless be pretty annoyed. I’ll keep watching, because I want to know what happens to Nomi. I quite understand that other people might not want to.


1. For those of you who are not regular readers, TERF stands for Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist — basically a feminist who believes that trans women are men, and probably dangerous sexual fetishists to boot.

2. My thanks to Charlie Jane Anders for connecting me to Sean & Shawna’s work.

Caitlyn Jenner and the Cis Gaze

Watching the trans community’s reaction to Caitlyn Jenner’s high profile transition has been interesting. Other well-known trans women such as Laverne Cox, Janet Mock and Paris Lees have all broadly welcomed Jenner. They understand that having someone else to fly the flag, and take the heat, is extremely valuable to all of us. I’ve mostly been happy to go along with that.

Many trans women have pointed out that Jenner’s wealth and privilege have allowed her to transition in a way that is denied to almost all of us. It is hard not to be jealous of her access to top quality surgeons, stylists and photographers, not to mention that car. Others, inevitably, have felt duty bound to try to take her down, because the desire to police other women’s behaviour is by no means confined to New Statesman columnists.

Rather more seriously, some trans women of color have suggested that Jenner’s transition was born from a desire of white, mainstream media to have a trans icon who can replace Laverne Cox and Janet Mock in the public eye. From what I have read I’m convinced that Jenner’s trans identity is genuine. I no more think that she’d transition solely as a publicity stunt than I think that Mike Huckabee would have actually pretended to be trans just to perve at girls in high school. The cost is way too high for someone who isn’t genuinely trans.

Nevertheless, I am sure that Jenner will become the mainstream media’s go-to trans person, partly because she was so well known before transitioning, and partly because she’s white. I hope she’ll make a good job of representing us — all of us — but I fear that she’ll find it hard.

There was something nagging at the back of my mind when I was thinking about this. I have been writing a paper on trans characters in SF for the Trans Studies Now conference. Jenner’s transformation reminded me strongly of John Varley’s book, Steel Beach. It was a classic manly-man becomes girly-girl story.

Now of course such people do exist. A stereotype is always based on some degree of reality. We’ve got Jan Morris who climbed Everest with Hilary & Tensing; we’ve got Kirsten Beck who was a US Navy SEAL. Jenner is rather more girly than them, but then look at the rest of her family.

Nevertheless, the thing that bugs me about Steel Beach is that it is popular with cis people. It is almost as if that is how they want trans people to be; how they think we should be. The reality, it seems, is a bit too complicated, and not nearly as sensational.

On Wednesday I was listening to my interview with Sarah Savage in which we noted that both she and Fox felt under pressure to present their gender in a binary way on My Transsexual Summer. And then on Thursday I was listening to Elif Åžafak and Robert Irwin talking about Western narratives about Islam. Suddenly everything fell into place.

You see, Jenner’s job is to play a fantasy version of herself on TV. I say fantasy version because we all know that “reality” TV shows are heavily scripted, don’t we? For that matter, Jenner’s transition process has also been meticulously planned. Jenner will be making a TV series about her transition. She’ll doubtless guest on other shows as well. She’ll be under pressure to bring in audiences, and to do that she’ll have to present herself in a way that is palatable to cis people, whether she likes it or not.

Jenner has apparently said that she wants to use her high profile to do good for the trans community. I’m sure that she’ll try. How much she’ll be allowed to do so by studio bosses is another matter. What happens when the audience gets bored and she’s seen as just another aging woman?

I wouldn’t want to be in Jenner’s shoes when some smartass executive decides that it is time to run with the regret narrative. I’m pretty sure that, sooner or later, someone will.

Sense8 Trailer

So, Netflix only. But will it be on Netflix in the UK?

Also I love the joke they are playing with those “mirror” scenes.

And Agent Carter has been renewed. So not a bad day at all, TV-wise.

Sex On Sunday

I spent part of Sunday morning catching up on the final episode of Professor Diarmaid MacCulloch’s three-part BBC2 documentary series, Sex and the Church. It is a history of the increasingly fraught relationship between Christianity and sex. Part I is all about Jesus and the early church; Part II about the Medieval church and the Reformation, and Part III about how in the last few hundred years the church has lost control of sexuality in Western society.

As you might guess, the early programs were of more interest to me. Here are a few highlights of things most people probably don’t know (and which fly in the face of what modern Christian conservatives want us to believe have “always” been true).

Aristotle taught that the entire human seed was present in male semen. The female body was simply fertile ground in which this seed could be planted and grown.

On the back of this (and other, similar, more ancient beliefs), the early theologian, Clement of Alexandria taught that all sex that could not result in a legitimate child was sinful. Adultery, concubinage and sex with prostitutes were all sinful because any child resulting would not be legitimate, and sex with your wife was sinful if she was already pregnant as she clearly could not get pregnant again.

Saint Augustine, of course, was a raging misogynist loon who taught that all sex was sinful, even within marriage.

Marriage was an important civil contract in the Roman Empire (hence Clement obsessing over legitimacy), but for more than half of its history the Christian church wanted nothing to do with anything so salacious. Marriage did not become an official sacrament until the Council of Verona in 1184. Even then marriages had to take place in the church porch, because a couple who were planning to have sex were deemed too sinful to be allowed into a church until their lust had been safely contained by marriage.

The third program is relatively free of such gems, but it does have some interesting correspondences with Amanda Vickery’s series on the history of feminism. It also has some rare footage of Sir John Wolfenden being interviewed on the BBC about his new (in 1957) report on the decriminalization of male homosexuality. And there’s a great section on missionaries trying to explain to Africans why it was OK for Abraham and Solomon to be polygamous but not OK for them.

MacCulloch talks a lot about the role of women in the church, but doesn’t talk much about gender. He glosses over Origen’s supposed self-castration as merely an extreme form of celibacy, doesn’t mention the prevalence of eunuchs in the Byzantine church, and ignores the idea of celibacy as symbolic castration. On the other hand, what he does say is often a lot of fun. He has mastered an almost Kenneth Williams-like salacious pout that he uses to discuss particular naughtiness, and he clearly has no truck with the pomposity of conservative Christian moralists. Overall, the series is a lot of fun, and has some good (for a TV documentary) history too.

Cersi is a Winner

Cersi


Every so often Covet Fashion has what are essentially cosplay competitions, in that you have to style a look from fiction. This week, to coincide with the start of the new series of Game of Thrones, they asked us to design an outfit for a ruthless queen of a fantasy kingdom. They weren’t allowed to use the name, of course, but from the background image it was pretty clear which fantasy kingdom they had in mind.

Naturally I had to do Cersi. The dress isn’t really very queenly, but as I’m new to the game I haven’t accumulated many ballgowns and can’t really afford to buy one. However, I had won a green one in a previous contest so I went with it. I’m really pleased with the choice of makeup. I think it makes our girl look suitably villainous yet still very pretty. And she got more than 4 stars, which means she won a prize for me.

How Not To Do Trans Kids on TV

This morning BBC2’s brand new daytime magazine show, hosted by Victoria Derbyshire, led off with a feature on trans kids. There were some very good things about it, but also some really bad stuff. I’m not entirely sure who to blame for this. In the article that she did for the BBC website Derbyshire is much more sympathetic towards trans kids than she was in the show. Also Lewis Hancox, who was on the show, commented afterwards that she’d been very nice. I suspect editorial interference. Here’s what happened.

The segment got off to a really bad start with Derbyshire stating that the two kids she would be interviewing were “boys who were living as girls”. She didn’t actually say that they were “really boys, and pretending to be girls”, but the implication was there. What’s more she repeated this phrase at least twice during the show, to make sure that the message got through. There would be no acceptance of the kids as girls.

Then we got to the interviews, which were pretty relentless. Almost every question that Derbyshire asked the two girls was designed to get them to say that they were just going through a phase and would change their minds later. The interviews with the parents focused on the idea that they were harming their kids by allowing them to transition, and that the kids’ gender-variant behavior was somehow the parents’ fault. Normally I’d be pleased to see a lesbian couple on TV, but it was pretty clear from the questioning that little Jesscia’s parents were only on the show to allow Derbyshire to insinuate that their lesbianness had somehow caused Jessica’s transness, and by extension that lesbians were unfit to bring up children.

Later in the show there was a panel discussion involving Lewis Hancox; Loretta, one of the vloggers from My Genderation; Jackson, a young trans man; and Susie, the current Chair of Mermaids. This was much better in that we had a bunch of adult trans people able to assert that transition had benefited them. Even so, Derbyshire’s questions were again largely antagonistic in content if not in tone. And there was the inevitable question about what each person had between their legs. I rather wish someone had asked the same question of Derbyshire.

To give you a better idea of how this all came over to me I’m going to pick up an example that Christine Burns used on Twitter. Suppose the show was about left-handed kids. Would you expect all of the questions to them be about whether they would grow out of it and learn to write properly? Would you expect the questions to the parents to be whether they were ruining their kids lives by allowing them to choose to be left-handed instead of insisting that they behave properly? Well of course not. And yet it wasn’t that long ago that such questions would have been asked. When I was at school there were still teachers who would punish pupils for writing left-handed.

That’s basically where we are with trans kids today. Most of society thinks that they are somehow unnatural, and that the right thing to do is bully them until they conform. It wasn’t until we got to the panel that Susie was able to raise the question of how harmful that might be. (Paris Lees makes the same point very well in this article about the Louis Theroux show.)

One thing that both Theroux and Derbyshire harped on about endlessly is the idea that kids might change their minds about gender transition when they got older, and that as a result they were making a dreadful mistake by transitioning young. During the panel discussion Derbyshire brought in a specialist from New York, Dr. Aron Janssen who is (amongst an impressive list of titles) Clinical Director of the Gender and Sexuality Service at the Child Study Center at NYU Langone Medical Center. He was asked how likely it was that kids would change their minds, and his response was that current research suggests that around 75% of them would.

As you can imagine, my ears pricked up at that. After the show, Susie linked to him on Twitter so I was able to introduce myself and ask for more information. (I do have a very good excuse: I’m helping write some trans awareness training for Bristol University Medical School.) Dr. Janssen kindly replied, attaching a couple of papers by a Dutch team that has been working with trans kids for many years. Having looked through the papers, what I’m seeing is as follows.

Yes, a substantial majority of kids who are treated for gender variant behavior will eventually grow out of it.

However, a significant minority (around 25% according to Dr. Janssen) do not, and those kids are highly likely to benefit from medical transition.

The growing out of it generally occurs in an age range of 10 to 13 as puberty starts to kick in. This is also the point when puberty blockers would begin to be prescribed. Prior to that there is no medical intervention, so the kids who do stop their gender variant behavior will probably not have had any medication.

The data is for all kids who present for treatment due to having gender variant behavior. By no means all of them wish to transition socially. However, a desire to transition socially is a strong indicator that the gender variant behavior will persist through puberty.

What we are seeing here, then, is doctors learning how to distinguish between, on the one hand, those kids whose behavior isn’t stereotypical for their birth gender, and on the other those who really need full gender transition. As it turns out, the kids themselves generally understand their feelings pretty well, and those who need to transition will opt to do so socially before there is any need to do so medically.

Of course there is a lot more detail than I’ve presented here. The Dutch doctors looked at many different factors including the language the kids use when self-identifying, and their observed behavior. Interestingly they found parental reports of behavior of girls to be less reliable as an indicator than was the case with boys, suggesting that parental expectations of gender performance are more rigid for girls than for boys. Nevertheless, the point remains that the “making a mistake” issue can and should be challenged with evidence rather than being left hanging there as bait for haters.

It is still good that trans people are being allowed to speak for themselves, but on the basis of this show the media still has a very long way to go before it will treat us with respect, rather than as an excuse for artificial controversy and a target for their own prejudices.

Update: edited as per Jackson’s comment below. Profuse apologies for the error.

BBC2 Does Trans Kids

Last night BBC2 aired a program called Transgender Kids, fronted by Louis Theroux. It is available on iPlayer, for those of you who can get such things. It is set in the San Francisco Bay Area and focuses on a number of young patients of the Child and Adolescent Gender Center at UCSF Hospital.

I should start by saying that it is one of the best documentaries about trans people I have seen. In particular the kids were given plenty of air time to speak for themselves, the parents interviewed were mostly very supportive, and the program appeared to be trying to say the right things, though because it wasn’t very explicit it is certainly open to alternative interpretations.

Having said that, there were still some fairly serious problems, starting with the use of Theroux as the presenter. He appeared to be trying to be sympathetic, but his usual screen character is that of a detached, somewhat skeptical guide to the weird and bizarre corners of humanity. Consequently he tended to present his interviewees as lab specimens rather than patients.

This wasn’t helped by the program’s obvious need to ask the questions it felt the viewers would want asked. And because this is the cis gaze we are talking about here those questions tended to be intrusive and prurient. Sadly that sort of thing is pretty much inevitable in any program made by cis people about trans people, which is why projects like Fox & Lewis’ My Genderation, made by trans people for trans people, are so valuable.

The medical staff at the hospital appeared to be very supportive, and their boss came out with a couple of very interesting comments. Firstly she claimed to have seen kids expressing clear trans gender preference as young as two years old. I can’t remember anything about being two, and have only been confident about dating my own feelings back to around five years old. It’s highly significant to have evidence of trans identity long before then.

The boss doctor also did a great job of taking down Theroux when he came out with the standard fear-mongering complaint that allowing kids to swap gender so young in life is a huge risk. “What if it turns out to be a mistake”, he asked. The doctor responded that you also have to consider the risk of not providing treatment. Given the suicide rates of trans kids, not helping them is quite likely to result in serious injury or death.

What the program didn’t get right was do a proper job of stressing the difference between puberty blockers and cross-gender hormone therapy. The purpose of puberty blockers is to give the patient the opportunity to delay the unwanted physical effects of puberty while they try out their new identity. If they are withdrawn, puberty proceeds as normal. Cross-gender hormone therapy indices puberty in the preferred gender, and therefore has permanent effects. It sounds like hormones are made available at a somewhat younger age in California than they are here, but even so the program should have made it much more clear that the younger patients were not being given irreversible treatments.

It also got back on the fear-mongering track with one of the older trans kids. The girl and her parents were understandably worried about what the future might hold. At 14 you are thinking about boyfriends, and possibly about marriage and children. Young trans people clearly don’t have the same prospects as cis kids of the same age. At this point there was no friendly doctor to step in and ask, “ah, but what sort of life will they have if they don’t transition?” The assumption is that you’ll have a terrible life as a trans person, and a better future if you live the rest of your life as a lie, knowing that you had a chance of authenticity and turned your back on it, and worrying that all of your friends would abandon you if they knew the truth. Of course when I was a kid the argument was generally, “you’d be better off dead than transitioning”, so I guess we’ve made progress.

What could have been the best part of the program was the variety of different attitudes that kids had. There was little Camile who at 5 was absolutely adamant that she was a girl, but in contrast there was Cole/Crystal who was very happy being a girl at home, but equally figured they’d probably grow up to be an effeminate man. There was a young trans boy who had just had top surgery but didn’t see the need for anything else. And even Camile’s parents, faced with the question as to what they’d say if their daughter changed her mind later in life, simply said they’d accept it and support her decision.

All of this should have resulted in an emphasis on the variety of trans experience, and on the need for each patient to find the solution that fits them best. However, because this was never explicitly stated, and because Theroux came over as unable to get his head around all of this, the program could easily be seen as setting one type of trans experience against another, and perhaps holding Cole/Crystal up as as the sane version.

Thankfully, because the kids and their parents were so great, I think the program was still very positive overall. As someone (I think Helen Belcher) said on Twitter, one thing it did do very effectively was give the lie to the idea that being trans was an adult phenomenon, probably something to do with a perverted sex drive.

The final positive thing that came out of it was that everyone I knew on Twitter started banging on about the need to support the UK’s only charity for families with trans children, Mermaids. Hopefully they will have got some money out of it. I note with some concern that they were left off the BBC’s own list of sources of support, and I don’t believe that can have been an accident.

Suffragettes Forever!

That’s not just a rallying cry, it is the title of a three-part documentary series on BBC2 fronted by Amanda Vickery. It is a great piece of history, because it reminds us that while the nature of liberation struggles might change, the tactics used by those in power, and by those fighting for their rights, don’t change much. I’ve just watched the final program, and as Vickery points out there’s no question that what the suffragettes did in Edwardian times would count as terrorism today. The heavy-handed and violent police suppression of demonstrations is also very familiar (though at least they don’t come at us on horses and armed with sabres as was the case with the Peterloo Massacre — and no, that wasn’t specifically a feminist protest, but scroll down that link and you’ll see that the soldiers deliberately targeted female protestors).

The final program featured a short clip from a 1959 interview with Nancy Astor, the first woman to win a seat in Parliament. The interviewer did the classic thing of asking her if it wasn’t true that women were temperamentally unsuited to a role in government. Her response was pure Joanna Russ. No, she noted, it is men who are temperamentally unsuited, because they are so weak-willed. With just a little flattery you can get them to do anything. All you have to do, she said, is smile sweetly and say, “tell me more about yourself.”

I may have punched the air at that point.

Something else I discovered from the program is that the feminist hatred of sex workers may date back to a book written by Christabel Pankhurst. In The Great Scourge and How to End It she argues that wives should avoid having sex with their husbands because men are forever going off with disease-ridden prostitutes and bringing their infections back home. I note that Christabel was also opposed to including working class women in the movement.

Of particular interest to me was he way in which the government tended to dismiss the suffragettes as mentally ill (“hysteria” being the usual diagnosis). It is so like the way that trans people’s concerns are dismissed these days.

Vickery makes it clear that while feminism has won many victories, the struggle for equality still has a long way to go. There are more men currently sitting in Parliament than the total number of women MPs who have ever got there. Vickery also makes mention of the online abuse directed at women. There is indeed much to be done.

Had I not had duties at Sofacon I might have been in Bristol for the Women’s Literature Festival. Then again, it is probably better that I wasn’t, because I would probably been thrown out as a dangerous rapist. They had a panel on women and journalism that was stuffed with TERF sympathizers. Obviously I’m only going by other people’s tweets, but the hypocrisy on display appears to have been jaw-dropping.

This from a woman who spends much of her time paying white, middle-class women to persecute trans women and deny them access to, well, everything, starting with bathrooms.

The only reason that most trans women get to tell their stories, you arrogant, self-righteous prig, is that they are stuck at home being unemployed, and because they are willing to write for no pay just to get the message out there.

To quote Amanda Vickery’s final line from the series, “It isn’t over”.

Too damn right it isn’t.

Making eBooks Work – The Anime Encyclopedia

Inevitably, this being “World” Book Day in the UK and Ireland, some bright spark in the media thought this would be a good time to do some more controversy farming on the subject of ebooks. Stepping up to the plate as designated outrage merchant is Fay Weldon, who opined in The Independent that authors should write specially dumbed down versions of their books for release as ebooks because people who read such things can’t be expected to be as intelligent as those who read paper.

Yes, well. The less said about that the better. However, I do have an ebook that I want to bring to your attention, because it makes brilliant use of the format.

I have not seen a physical copy of the new 3rd Edition of The Anime Encyclopedia, but I expect it to be huge because Amazon tells me that it is 1160 pages. They don’t give a weight, but it is 9.2″ tall and 2.5″ thick. Reading it in bed would probably give you a wrist injury. In any case, the price of the paper edition is over $80 (though it may be cheaper in the USA as I’m probably getting stung for VAT). In contrast the Kindle edition is a bargain at under $18, and is in some ways a much better book.

Why? Because it is cross-referenced with hyperlinks. So if you go to the section on Sailor Moon you will find links to everything from other works by Naoko Takeuchi to the inevitable erotic parody of the series (Venus Five, for those of you sufficiently desperate to go and look for it). General entries such as “Science Fiction” or “Wartime Anime” inevitably contain heaps of links. As someone who has edited ebooks, I am well aware of the vast amount of work involved in producing something like this, and am delighted to see it has been done.

Of course both books contain the fabulously erudite and often cutting text provided by Helen McCarthy and Jonathan Clements. I naturally headed straight for the Sailor Moon entry to see what they had to say about the initial US releases. I was not disappointed:

With reincarnation a given, the show is unafraid of death; the first season closes with a harrowing assault on the icy lair of the evil Queen Beryl, in which the entire cast is killed off (albeit temporarily). Needless to say, the sanitized U.S. release unconvincingly pretends they have merely been detained elsewhere.

You can spend ages just flicking through the book and following links. I’m by no means qualified to judge the content, but I know Helen and Jonathan and have great respect for their knowledge.

I am also reminded that I really need to get a copy of Wandering Son, one of the few animes to actually address the issue of real trans people rather than using gender-swapping as a plot device or joke. (I am likely to thump the next person who tells me that Ranma 1/2 is a story about a trans kid.) The entry for Wandering Son is very positive from the artistic point of view, and when it comes to the subject matter McCarthy & Clements say:

This is a magical series, one of very few to address the issues facing transgender or gender-conflicted children with the respect and love they deserve, but so rarely find.

Yeah, if you have any interest in anime, buy this book in electronic form. It is a bargain for all sorts of reasons.

Much Better Trans Actress News

So yeah, as per yesterday, mostly Hollywood is pretty crap when it comes to trans characters. But what if one of the directors happens to be a trans woman herself.

Yesterday Netflix set a date of Friday June 5th for the Premier of Sense8, a new SF TV series from Lana & Andy Wachowski and J. Michael Straczynski. The cast list looks every bit as diverse as that for Jupiter Ascending: Naveen Andrews, Daryl Hannah, Brian J. Smith, Tuppence Middleton, Aml Ameen, Freema Agyeman, Tena Desae, Doona Bae, Max Riemelt, Alfonso Herrera, Erendira Ibarra, Jamie Clayton, Miguel Silvestri and Terrence Mann.

Daryl Hannah needs no introduction. You should all remember Freema Agyeman as Martha Jones in Doctor Who. Tuppence Middleton was in Jupiter Ascending, and Doonae Bae was in Cloud Atlas. But the name that jumps out to me is Jamie Clayton. I believe that she’s playing the part of a young trans blogger. Guess I need to sign up for Netflix, though doubtless there will be some stupid reason why the show is not available in the UK.

#TeamLana #GirlsLikeUs

Making Engineering Fun

One of the great holiday season traditions in the UK is the Royal Institution Christmas Lectures. Started by Michael Faraday in 1825, these lectures feature a top scientist talking to an audience of children. The BBC naturally picked up on this, and have been broadcasting the lectures for longer than I’ve been around. When I was a kid I would have been thrilled by lectures from the likes of David Attenborough and Eric Laithwaite (the inventor of MagLev). While I was at university Carl Sagan did a series. It was great stuff.

Of course in the early days the lectures were quite stuffy and the lecturers mostly male. That has most definitely changed. This year’s lectures were given by Danielle George who is a professor of engineering at Manchester University. And the lectures are not just being given by a women engineer, they are being given by a heavily pregnant woman engineer, because it is important to show the kids in the audience that mums can be engineers too.

Prof. George has a lot of fun in her three lectures. For each one she set herself an engineering challenge to do something awesome with fairly everyday kit.

Lecture 1 saw her turn the side of the Shell Center in London into a giant Tetris game, playable by wifi with a remote console.

Lecture 2 involved getting her assistant for the show to be telepresent in the lecture theatre as a talking hologram, and adding in kit to demonstrate the state of the art technology for remote touch, taste and smell.

And finally lecture 3 saw the Doctor Who theme being played live in the lecture theatre by a robot orchestra. In addition to more traditional instruments, the orchestra included a dot matrix printer, a cymbal played by a flying drone, and a theremin played by a humanoid robot. Keyboards were played by members of the University of Plymouth robot soccer team (each of six robots taking one portion of the keys).

All three lectures were a lot of fun. Those of you in the UK can find the programmes on iPlayer. The RI website has information about seeing the programmes in other countries — currently Singapore and Japan. It also has an archive of some of the star past lecture series, and these may be available anywhere.

Enjoy. 🙂

I ♥ @JanetMock

Today the Tangled Roots writing workshop that I featured on my radio show is happening in Bristol. I won’t be there, partly because I am way too busy, and partly because my experience of mixed cultures is insignificant compared to what people of color face. However, I have just seen a great interview on the Larry King show with Tracee Ellis Ross (that’s Diana’s daughter) about her new comedy series, Black-ish. It is good to see US TV exploring these issues in such a positive and high-profile way.

What really impressed me, however, was that Larry didn’t do the interview. He handed the job over to Janet Mock.

So this is what we have: a trans woman of color, standing in for Larry King, doing an interview with a top actress, on a subject that is nothing to do with being trans, and doing a superb job of it.

Possibility model, Janet. Possibility model.

The interview is online, but doesn’t appear to be embeddable. You can watch it via Tracee’s website.

Black Sci-Fi & Wangechi Mutu at The Watershed

Family Tree - Wangechi Mutu

We had another fine evening of Afrofuturism at The Watershed last night. The event was introduced by Ytasha Womack, inevitably, and by a new voice to me, Ingrid LaFleur. Ingrid is an Afrofuturist art critic, and for me the most interesting things she said were about using Afrofuturism to help with the revitalization of Detroit. Was she at DetCon 1? She should have been.

We began with a short film by the Kenyan artist, Wangechi Mutu. Again I had not heard of her before (except doubtless in passing while reading the art section of Ytasha’s book too quickly). Edson had brought in some books of her work, and I was totally blown away. If you are in London, she has an exhibition on at the moment at Victoria Miro. And if you are not some of the pieces in the exhibition are available on the Guardian website. I note that people often seem to use the word “cyborg” in connection with Mutu’s work. Donna Haraway should be proud.

The film by Mutu was The End of Eating Everything. It is around 8 minutes long. Part of it is available on YouTube. The part of the monster is played by the musician, Santigold.

The main film of the night was Black Sci-Fi, a BBC documentary from 1992 which features Samuel Delany, Octavia Butler, Steve Barnes, Mike Sargent and Nichelle Nichols. Chip and Octavia were on fire. I wanted to tweet just about everything they said. Sadly I wasn’t anywhere near fast enough. You can see some clips from the film at this Tor.com post. Unfortunately for you it doesn’t include the best bits in which Chip reads from Dhalgren against a background of deserted and derelict parts of New York. (Of course that does mean that you don’t see how the BBC managed to mis-spell Chip’s name in the titling, but so it goes.)

The Tor.com post says that the film has been lost, but it hasn’t. It is just unobtainable unless you have the sort of access to the BFI archives that The Watershed has. We had a unique opportunity to see an incredibly rare documentary featuring two of science fiction’s greatest writers. And the cinema was almost empty. Well, that’s your fault, Bristol. I saw it, and you didn’t.

Some Robot History

Today I caught a replay of Mechanical Marvels: Clockwork Dreams, a BBC4 documentary on the history of robots. It is by Professor Simon Schaffer, and it looks at clockwork automata, from the earliest mediaeval clocks through the magnificent toys of renaissance courts and on to the invention of industrial robots such as automatic looms. It is worth watching just for the early automata that he has working, but at one point during the program Schaffer says:

A science fiction novel written in the 1770s to attack the aristocratic regime described courtiers as: “Bodies without souls, covered in lace. Automata that might look like humans, but weren’t.”

Given that this was in the run-up to a section on the French Revolution, I suspect that the novel in question was written in French. Probably that’s why Schaffer didn’t mention the name or the author. But he does call the book a science fiction novel, and the date puts it before Frankenstein (though after The Blazing World). I want to know what it is. Can anyone help?

Time Out Of Mind – Episode 4: Anne McCaffrey

Here is the fourth episode of Time Out of Mind. It features Anne McCaffrey. The fifth and final episode, shot at the 1979 Worldcon, has already been uploaded to YouTube by someone else and can be found here.

Aside from the small amount of copyright material in the John Brunner episode, everything appears to have gone up OK. Fingers crossed it will stay there. Of course I hope that the BBC still have the original files somewhere, and will one day produce decent quality versions of the series for sale, but for now I hope you have enjoyed what we have got. Thanks again to Arnold Aiken for sending me the recordings.

Time Out of Mind – Episode 3: Michael Moorcock

Here’s the third episode in BBC2’s 1979 series, Time Out of Mind. It features Michael Moorcock, but comes with bonus appearances from M. John Harrison, Tom Disch and Fred Pohl. There are also some clips from a Jerry Cornelius film that You Tube has not (so far) objected to. Mike and Mike are their usual, uninhibited selves and do not shy away from slagging off those whose work and/or tastes they deem not up to scratch.

Time Out of Mind – Episode 2: John Brunner

Here’s episode 2 of Time Out of Mind. When I first uploaded this to YouTube they complained about copyright content within the video. As this was likely to cause the whole thing to be pulled I edited it the remove the offending sections. They were a clip from a dramatization of Brunner’s story, “The Last Lonely Man”, and a montage of images of pollution with a soundtrack of music by Eno. Neither segment is vital to the episode.