#specifically the nuances of ballet culture

[honeybcj]

okay hear me out…bartylus ballet dancers…just an idea…

[trojanteapot]

The writing blindspots in Infinity Train with respect to race

To get this out of the way, I love Infinity Train! It’s one of my favourite shows! I started writing fanfiction because of this show, and it still inspires me every day. 

I really do think that Infinity Train as a whole is a very thought provoking children’s show and I applaud it for exploring darker themes relevant to psychology and psychological well-being, which are topics often overlooked not just in children’s media but for adult media as well. However, I do want people to acknowledge some of its shortcomings, especially because it is a show that is dealing with such heavy and complex topics, and also positions its human characters as coming from a world which is pretty much a stand-in for our own.

Now I know that the storyboard artists for Infinity Train were quite diverse, but I don’t really know if it’s the same for the writer's room. The reason why is that as a POC viewer, it really does seem obvious to me from the way that the POC characters were written pre-season 4, that their race was mostly an afterthought.

Okay and to be perfectly clear, this is NOT A BAD THING. This is just a neutral thing. Obviously we don’t need every single story with POC characters to have to be about their experience as a specific racialized person. There are experiences that are shared among everybody no matter what race they are. I am not saying that you need to do super in-depth research into every single cultural nuance of every ethnic minority before writing them. It depends on if you really want to delve into how their heritage or traditions or specific life experiences inform their character arc. Not every character arc is about that. And it shouldn’t be!

With that being said, I do think that perhaps the writers should have tried to consider asking themselves very basic surface level questions on how being non-white would inform the problems and conflicts their characters would face. They don't need to know the ins and outs of each culture for each of their characters, but they could have just asked “How would I feel/react to others if people made weird assumptions about me based on my race? How differently would my parents raise me if they were afraid of prejudice or discrimination?” I think they should have reflected on that before setting in stone the backstories for their POC characters, especially with respect to Grace.

Part 1: GRACE'S PARENTS

So I am not Black myself, but I have had many conversations about Grace with one of my friends in fandom who is Black, and we both do get the sense that Grace’s race was very much just an afterthought to her characterization. To be clear, this is NOT because she has very wealthy parents. I am well aware that there are Black Americans with generational wealth. However, knowing what we know about affluent Black people in the real world, how Grace’s parents treated her makes absolutely no sense.

For example, among extremely wealthy people of any race, networking and knowing the right people is of the utmost importance. This is why so many rich people send their kids to prestigious private schools so their kids can get a heads start on knowing the progeny of other one-percenters. If you look up famous people with famous kids, chances are you’ll see a list of all of the very exclusive private academies that they all went to (looking at you, The Strokes). This is the case for wealthy people of all backgrounds, not just white people. And honestly, I imagine that the pressure is at least double for the kids of wealthy POC parents to get to know the right people as early as possible to be able to open as many doors as possible, in order to mitigate the inherent disadvantage of being a racialized person.

But what did Grace’s parents do? According to her, they never sent her to school of any kind, only having private tutors teach her, and her ballet instructor only made her join the other kids in her class once for a recital or something? This is, for lack of a better term... buck wild.

In addition, her parents are American diplomats. Diplomacy is an extremely people-oriented position. If anything, her parents would want her to not only be in the best private school, but to be the best student in school, to know the best people, to join the school clubs that all the other diplomats’ kids are in, and train her from a young age to be a social butterfly. Yes I know that diplomats will often leave their home country and be stationed somewhere else for long durations, and yes their kids could be taken out of school then, but some diplomats just enroll them in a different institution in the visiting country, or not take them out of school at all. This is what the IB Program was invented for, actually. Her parents being diplomats does not justify never enrolling Grace in school. In fact, it makes it less justifiable. 

The fact that they did the extreme opposite of that is so illogical to me that I wonder if perhaps the writers just cobbled together a whole bunch of tropes that they think apply to rich people without actually checking if any of it makes sense, doubly so for rich people who are non-white.

I think the reason why is because they wanted Grace’s parents to stifle her growth and her natural social skills, but on the Train, she can be who she truly is. I definitely agree that Grace finding herself and being able to truly blossom into the girlboss she is on the Train is a great plot point from a characterization perspective. However, I do not think that it should be because she was being stifled by her parents. The solution is staring the writers right in their face, but they can’t see it because it’s a blindspot for them.

What they should have gone with is: Grace's inability to become a social butterfly and a queen bee in her daily life is because she is a dark-skinned Black girl!!!

Her parents have extremely high expectations for her socially. They could have pushed her to make friends with kids she didn’t like just because they wanted to be on better terms with their parents for networking or diplomacy purposes – which they could have shown with that one girl from her ballet class. Missed opportunity! But no matter how hard Grace tries, she will never be seen as the perfect girl because of other people’s assumptions about her just based on her race. 

Once she’s on the Train, Grace then uses her people skills and finds that they’re a lot more effective there, because it’s no longer Earth’s society, it’s a different world, literally! Plus this even allows her to be a little bit more mean, a little bit more honest, something she wouldn’t be able to get away with in the real world without being punished for it harder than her white peers. We already see hints of this with how she interacts with Simon, a white guy who is the same age as her. 

CAVEAT: The dialogue where Grace reveals that she never went to school was something that she told Hazel in a private conversation. So it could be that she did go to school, but lied about it to seem more relatable to Hazel, who had never been around other kids before. Lying is in character for Grace because she would pretty much do anything to get on somebody’s good side. But the way that they had her voice actress deliver those lines, and the way that her expression changes when she talks about how lonely she was indicates that she was telling the truth. To be charitable, I suppose we can land on the reading that Grace told Hazel a half-truth. She did go to school, but she was frequently taken out of class or skipped semesters because of her parents’ jobs as diplomats. So her loneliness in that instant is at the very least truthful. Your mileage is going to vary on this interpretation of course.

This points to a weakness that I can sort of see in Infinity Train in general, where they push societal problems into purely the realm of personal failings. “It’s not because of society that Grace couldn’t succeed, it was solely due to her abusive parents” being just one example. 

Never forget this monologue from a Black father to his daughter in Scandal:

Part 2: JESSE'S ARC WAS PRETTY GOOD THOUGH

The thing is they actually did write a POC character having to deal with a problem that was society-oriented quite well, at least in my view. Although, I am still pretty sure it was still coming from a race-blind method of writing the characters. Otherwise I feel like Jesse’s status as an Indigenous American would have come up more than a grand total of one time. That they could do this well for Jesse makes the fact that they didn’t do the same for Grace quite disappointing. 

Jesse’s main issue that he had to overcome was he kept caving to peer pressure and had trouble saying no to others for fear of disappointment. Now, this problem is universal, and it’s not solely something that is specific to Jesse’s race or ethnicity or cultural background. In fact, I am quite certain that they wrote Jesse as a character without even considering that this problem he faces is relatable to POC experiences. But I definitely know a lot of POC in my life who do take on more responsibilities than they can manage, or feel a higher pressure to fit in with their peers. Hell, I’m that POC in many cases! It’s kind of like background radiation to us as minorities that we just have to do more emotional labour in order to be seen as equals. That’s just the reality of the situation. You can understand and relate to Jesse’s problem without being Indigenous/Native American, but at the same time it feels like a natural problem for him to have, because he is non-white!

I will admit that a personal blind spot of mine is I don't know and haven't had the chance to speak to too many Indigenous people, so there could be aspects of Jesse's arc that don't really make sense. If you are somebody who knows more than me, please feel free to correct me! I would love to hear how you felt about Jesse's characterization and arc as an Indigenous person!

Part 3: SEASON 4, THE ASIANS 

Alright now it's time to tackle stuff that I actually could have any ounce of authority talking about? Which is how they wrote Ryan and Min-Gi in Book 4. I myself am Asian-Canadian. Specifically, I am a first generation Chinese-Canadian but I've been in Canada since I was six so I find a lot of the experiences of second generation Asian-Canadians more relatable to me. In addition, my partner is fourth generation Japanese-Canadian, so his dad would be the same generation as Ryan's dad. (I also am really really into rock music, but that's besides the point.)

What they got right:

So first off, I could tell that they really did consult Asian people in writing this season, so good on them! The difference in how Ryan’s parents raised him in contrast to Min-Gi’s parents felt very natural and realistic to me. Ryan’s family is more westernized and has assimilated more into broader Canadian culture. 

The fact that Ryan has an English name and not a Japanese name immediately shows that. Min-Gi’s parents not choosing an English name for him is a bit of a surprise; very few Asian immigrants go without an English name back in the 20th century. Even nowadays it’s extremely common for us to go by English or Western names that we, or our parents chose, instead of names in our native language. But there are good reasons to not choose an English name. Perhaps Min-Gi’s parents wanted him to have a closer tie to his Korean roots, or perhaps if they travelled back to Korea to visit family it would be easier for them. 

Also, Min-Gi’s parents not supporting his dream of becoming a musician and want him to get a stable job in… I think it was finance? Definitely true back then as it is today. I’m not entirely sure how Ryan’s parents feel about his life choices, and we’ll get into that later.

The character arcs for Ryan and Min-Gi are excellent. This dichotomy of wanting to do the good, responsible thing that your parents want for you because they want you to have the best chance at a good life, and doing what your heart tells you to do, is an extremely relevant character arc. It’s a life decision that is not just an Asian thing, but something anybody can relate to. However, in East Asian cultures that were generally influenced by Confucianism, which includes both Korean and Japanese culture, upholding your duty as a child to not disappoint your parents in any way is something that Asian cultures are prone to emphasizing to a great degree. We see this in other media centered on the Asian immigrant experience as well, such as Kim’s Convenience, Turning Red, and Everything Everywhere All At Once.

What was a bit puzzling to me:

So I'll start off with the thing that definitely raised many many eyebrows if you were an East Asian or Southeast Asian watching the show: Why were Min-Gi's parents so friendly with Ryan's parents when they're Korean and Ryan's family is Japanese?!

So like, not to bring politics into it but… World War II happened. It affected, you know, the world and stuff. And in the Pacific Theatre (god I hate that term), the Imperial Japanese Army… invaded Korea?? Among many other countries??? And did a bunch of war crimes?????

Like, Japan was invading other countries well before WWII even started… This is common knowledge… for Asian people that is.

Yeah I know what you're gonna say. “But Ryan's family is Japanese-Canadian!! They wouldn't have done those war crimes! They would have been sent to internment camps!” Yeah dude, I know! My partner is Japanese-Canadian, remember?! And even if I didn't know him, we learned about the internment camps in history class. It's pretty common knowledge among progressives in Canada and the US. George Takei did a whole musical about it. 

But that's not how racism works. I can speak from personal experience that the scars of WWII trauma in Chinese and Korean communities run deep. Even my own parents needed a bit of convincing to be okay with me dating my partner, and my parents were born two decades after WWII ended. My partner said that one time when he and his grandmother got into an elevator with an elderly Korean woman, and at first she was friendly, but once she realized they were of Japanese descent, the elevator ride became deathly silent afterwards. 

So when you have Min-Gi’s parents, who were probably born during or slightly after WWII, immigrate to Canada, and then be like… totally okay and hunky dory pals with Ryan’s parents just because their kids were born the same day in the same hospital…? I mean sure, anything can happen. But it definitely speaks to how abnormally accepting, forgiving, and welcoming Min-Gi’s parents are. 

To be clear, this isn’t something that pulled me out of the experience, personally. Yes, it is strange, but it’s not impossible for a Korean family to be super okay and friends with a Japanese family. Maybe it’s because their small town has very few Asians and so they have to stick together due to solidarity or something. Maybe Min-Gi’s parents are the type of Christians that believe in the inherent goodness of everyone and giving everyone a chance. Maybe they are just extremely progressive and see Ryan’s family as Canadian more than Japanese (highly unlikely), or they know about the internment camps and that was enough to get over their biases toward them (also unlikely). I dunno, anything can happen.

The other thing that bugged me was that they really didn’t explore Ryan’s relationship with his family to the same depth as Min-Gi’s relationship with his family. 

They already set up the contrast of like, you have an immigrant who is more connected to their cultural background, and a third generation descendent who is less connected, and more alienated from his cultural background. That kind of stuff can really weigh on you as somebody who is a minority. You feel like you simultaneously aren’t Canadian enough because you aren’t white, and that you’re not enough of your cultural background because you had to assimilate, or were forced to assimilate. 

Yes it makes sense why Ryan would throw himself into his music, and be disconnected from his family. But they didn’t take the time to really explore why he is that way. Ryan barely talks about his family except randomly mentioning that they don’t care what he does with his life. I don’t even know if that really makes sense that they don’t care what he does? Maybe Ryan thinks they don’t care, but his assumption is wrong? Either way they don’t explore this point that much. Even if his parents were more assimilated they would still care if Ryan had a non-standard job, such as being a musician. There is a gap between Ryan and his family/parents that was alluded to, but not explored. Feeling like you come from two worlds but not neatly fitting into either is so quintessential to the immigrant experience of Canadians (and also Americans) it’s a shame they only paid lip service to it. 

I mentioned in a different post that Ryan would be monolingual while Min-Gi would be bilingual, and how this could cause tension between them. I imagine Ryan definitely feels inferior to Min-Gi in that sense of loss and disconnect with his heritage, just as Min-Gi is jealous that he feels he doesn't have the freedom to pursue his musical career in the same way that Ryan can. This is all stuff that can take a psychological toll on people, and is something which the Train as a metaphor for therapy should have been primed to tackle. But unfortunately we didn't really get that.

There is a term among the Chinese Diaspora known as “Hollow Bamboo (竹杠)” or “Rising Bamboo (竹升)” [more info]. It's an insult tossed at kids of Chinese ethnicity from judgemental adults for being unable to read/write Chinese or who cannot speak Mandarin/Cantonese/other Chinese languages fluently because they've been “too westernized”. They say we “look Chinese, but are hollow inside, like bamboo.” I don't know if there are equivalent terms for other Asian diaspora/immigrant communities but there must be. This term is controversial, and in my own opinion very unfair, because it blames the kids for this loss of cultural identity when there are so many different factors at play that makes them lose it, all of them outside of their own control. 

Again, I think this is a blindspot from the writers just not understanding how much this loss of cultural identity is such an integral part of the experience of being an immigrant, and that it's not only felt in first or second generation Asian-Canadians, but also third or fourth generation, and beyond. It's scary to go out there and redefine what your culture means to you, and how to pass it on to the next generation.

CONCLUSION

So there you have it, a summary of the strengths and the weaknesses in Infinity Train as it pertains to writing about racialized characters. Just want to restate that a lot of what I pointed out is pretty minor in the grand scheme of things and I do overall think the writing is solid. I am not going into this to say that I expected the writers to do a good job, because generally my expectations for media and pop culture to portray POCs respectfully is quite low. At least they didn’t fall back on tired stereotypes, which is a low bar to clear, but it is where the bar still is these days.

If on the off chance Infinity Train does get uncancelled and renewed for more seasons, I hope they take these lessons and craft better narratives for their POC characters. Maybe hire some more non-white writers while you’re at it!

[elumish]

After researching a topic, how do you use that research while writing?

I think there are two kinds of research for (fiction) writing: general research and specific research.

General research is to get a sense of the thing you're writing about, understand the culture/systems/processes/etc. If you're writing about ballet, you're going to do research on ballet to know what it loooks like, the terms, the training, etc. You then use this to inform how you write about it and give it a more realistic sense. It allows you to build in nuance and specifics and generally make it seem like you know what you're talking about.

Specific research is to answer specific questions. This may be a yes/no question (do male ballet dancers dance en pointe?), a "how does this work question" (how do you do a jeté?), a "what is this thing called" question (what is it called when two dancers dance together?), a "which of these things would my character be doing" question (what jump do you learn first in ballet?), etc.

Oftentimes you will need to do some general research to be able to do the specific research. If you know nothing about the topic, you'll have to do more research into the thing before you can get to the point where you know what specific questions to ask in the first place.

There's always a balance between using all of the research you've done to be as realistic as possible and not including things to make the story more interesting/less technical. This shows up a lot in sci fi, where the author is clearly very interested in the nuances of how some space engine would work, and the story gets lost in details about space fuel that doesn't impact the plot. This is where you need to use your instincts and experience as a writer to get that balance right. There unfortunately is no perfect answer to that part.

[supergoodfilmanalysis]

Laughing Through Color: Alice Wu's Saving Face (2004)

Saving Face is a vastly underrated 2004 lesbian rom-com about Wilhelmina (AKA Wil), a young closeted Chinese-American surgeon whose mother Hwei-Lan, played by the inimitable Joan Chen of Twin Peaks fame, continues to try to set her up with Chinese men at community events, one of which leads her to the magnetic Vivian Shing, a dancer whose father happens to be Wil's boss. An unmarried 48-year-old widow, Hwei-Lan unexpectedly gets pregnant, is subsequently shunned by her community, and moves in with Wil all while refusing to divulge the identity of her child's father to anyone, including Wil. She hides herself from Wil, who hides herself in return as Vivian forces her to grapple with queerness in public vs. private. The mother and daughter both struggle with the ways their sexualities are on display, for Wil on the axis of queerness and for Hwei-Lan as a pregnant unmarried person and are afraid of how the cultural norms they transgress infiltrate their relationship with each other and the world around them, a fact that ultimately helps them relate to each other more.

It was the feature debut for Alice Wu, a Taiwanese-American lesbian director, and one of the most interesting things about it for me is how it explores Wil's queerness as a parallel to her mother's journey and the ways the two work against gendered and cultured expectations alongside each other. This movie is smart, sexy, funny, and thoughtful and demonstrates a possibility for the rom-com genre to traverse nuanced depths of love and relationships and how culture imbues them with questions that prove so difficult to answer. It doesn't rush to answer these questions or present them as simple dilemmas constructed as mechanisms to thicken the plot but positions them as part of the architecture of love. Saving Face is invested in how many things can be true at once. What if queerness could be relatable beyond its variable boundaries and could help articulate the disillusion of being marginalized by your own community? Hwei-Lan's journey with her daughter's sexuality prods at this, wades around in its fullness--she is at once in and out of her culture, held by its comforts and shunned by its rigidity, but when confronted with this complication in Wil she sees so much familiarity reflected back at her.

Wil's relationship with her mother starts to affect her budding romance with Vivian who, unlike Wil, is openly gay. Vivian is pursuing contemporary dance against the wishes of her father, who wants for her to continue in traditional ballet--at the nexus of this story is the conflict between individual desire and tradition, and the added layer of queerness implicates this conflict and creates in the characters differently complicated relationships with authenticity. Vivian transcends her ethnic origins in her espousal of American values, especially concerning individual freedoms, and Wil's reluctance to detach from these origins (and subsequently alienate her mother) starts to impact their relationship. Wil is afraid to kiss Vivian in public but loves her freely in private; Saving Face understands the ability to move through public spaces as yourself as a culturally specific phenomenon and presents the stories of people who never had to think about it so much as they do at this moment, who try to make it matter less but when it comes crashing down on them, discover how badly it is they wish to be seen.

Alice Wu sought specifically to make a movie by and for Asian-American queer people, repeatedly rejecting studio's pleas to cast a major white actress in one or both of the leading roles and the film having an entirely Asian-American cast is an significant diversion from the typical trajectory of Hollywood rom-coms--Kaklamanidou's “Romantic Comedy and the ‘Other’: Race, Ethnicity, and the Transcendental Star" points out that many people of color in the rom-com genre, Will Smith in Hitch being one achieve stardom and success through the ways they shore up comfortable, easily digestible and markedly neutral characters who happen to be people of color without isolating white audiences, wherein box office success is entrusted. Saving Face, however, demonstrates a lack of interest in mainstream success and is interestingly also somewhat lacking from the queer canon; it occupies a noticeably niche space in the realm of queer movies insofar that its mainstream success was limited but, unlike other "before-its-time" movies ascribed with queer cult status such as Jennifer's Body, didn't necessarily circle back around to audiences today. The lack of whiteness in this film is no doubt a salient causal factor in this lack of rebirth--while being funny, it also demonstrates a commitment to telling arguably a serious story, and the film doesn't necessitate a "campy" read as much as other retroactively added to the queer canon.

@theuncannyprofessoro

[evesh-mor]

I’m alive :D

And I brought a little reveal of my OC

Almost at the end of the work, I decided that the background was a bit empty, although this was partly what I had in mind, but I decided to make it look like a magazine cover with all sorts of facts.

Specifically here is the “contemporary master” and “cursed by the ancient spirit of the aborigines.” As I said earlier with her post, Attwell was originally a New Yorker. An orphan, but there were distant relatives who did not know about her. After graduating from school and getting a kick in the ass from an orphanage, she was found by her uncle, who helped her enter a local university, paying for her education to major in cultural studies.

Throughout her studies at the university, she studied contemporary dance - a dance that combined ballet and other modern choreographies. Due to this, she gained smooth movements and plasticity, even in everyday life, but after the mutation she gave up due to internal complexes, although she still combines it with her martial art.

Attwell studied local culture and Aboriginal tribes. In one of these she was received quite friendly; the attendant was surprised by this result. One day, the situation in the tribe's society got out of control when a mutoskite flew out of the pouch and bit Ett at night. The people of the tribe took this as a sign from above, as if the spirits had sent them punishment. The accompanying person immediately found himself on the fire, and Ett was imprisoned in a trap, but was in no hurry to kill. The spirit of the tribe itself came to her and inhabited the nearest ritual mask. In fact, he threw this mask to Ett and, when she was in his hands, he immediately took control of her body and, under the cover of darkness, slaughtered the entire tribe as punishment for “inhospitality” and excessive “piety” for the benefit of the leader. Stressed, Attwell fled the scene of the massacre, ending up in Indonesia along the way.

A little later I’ll tell you about the nuances of the curse of the spirit in the mask.

Parameters:

5’41 ft.

29-30 years old at the time of canon after the Kraang invasion, at the same time she returned to New York

[cvsvanhireuk]

Seasonal trends: summer vs. winter van hire demands in London 

London, a city in perpetual motion, witnesses the ever-evolving rhythm of transportation demands, intricately entwined with shifts in weather patterns and seasonal festivities. From bustling holiday shopping sprees to the delicate ballet of relocation and deliveries, the demand for van hire in London orchestrates around the calendar's seasonal notes. 

In the pulse of London's dynamic atmosphere, the ebb and flow of van hire demand sync with the changing seasons, reflecting the city's diverse needs. The meteoric rise in activity during summer, with its vibrant events and peak travel, sharply contrasts the winter landscape with its unique logistical challenges and festive hustle. 

We will highlight the contrasting scenarios of summer and winter, unravelling the intricate tapestry of van hire trends. By dissecting the influences of each season on transportation needs, we illuminate the divergent pathways that guide van hire demands in London, offering insights into adapting services and strategies amid shifting seasons. 

This approach aims to dissect the nuanced fluctuations in van hire requirements, revealing how London's seasonal rhythms choreograph the city's transportation demands across the radiant warmth of summer and the frost-kissed embrace of winter. 

Summer van hire trends 

As London basks in the sun-kissed embrace of summer, the demand for van hires orchestrates a bustling symphony, accentuated by various seasonal activities and heightened logistical needs. 

Holiday Rush and Festivities 

The vibrant tapestry of summer festivals and celebratory events bedecks London with an exuberant flair, igniting a surge in van hire requests. From music extravaganzas to cultural festivities, the need for transporting event essentials amplifies, spurring an uptick in van rentals. 

Moving Season 

Amid the warm summer hues, the relocation symphony crescendos to a peak, making summer the quintessential moving season. The rising tide of house moves, student relocations, and office shifts paints a vivid portrait of increased demand for van hires, as families and businesses embark on new beginnings. 

Tourism and Travel 

London, adorned with its tourist attractions, becomes a magnet for visitors during the sunny months. This surge in tourism fuels the need for vans, catering to groups exploring the city's myriad sights or embarking on excursions beyond the urban landscape. 

The summer canvas in London unveils a bustling tapestry of festive fervor, relocation crescendos, and tourist trails, all contributing to the soaring demand for versatile van hires across the city's vibrant landscape. 

Seasonal van hire north London – A comparative analysis   

Comparing the contrasting rhythms of summer and winter demand for van hires in London unveils a tapestry woven with distinctive threads, each season painting a unique landscape of transportation needs. 

Demand Fluctuations in summer & winter 

Summer van hire London tends witness a surge in demand due to: 

Holiday Rush: During summer, requests soar due to heightened holiday events, festivals, and celebratory occasions. 

Moving Season: The summer months witness a peak in relocations and house moves, escalating the need for van hires. 

Tourism and Travel: Increased tourism brings forth elevated demands for vans, particularly for sightseeing trips and group travels. 

Winter self drive van hire London present a contrasting set of needs: 

Holiday Logistics: The winter months witness demands for van hires predominantly geared towards holiday logistics, encompassing delivery services, shopping, and gifting. 

Weather Challenges: Snow removal, navigating icy conditions, and the influence of weather on transportation amplify the need for specific van hires. 

Business Logistics: Businesses adapt during winter, requiring vans for seasonal sales, product deliveries, and trade shows, presenting a different facet of demand. 

The shift in demand patterns between summer and winter van hire London distinctly reflects the diverse needs and activities influencing van hire preferences across the seasons in London. 

Availability and costs 

- During peak seasons like summer, there's often a surge in demand leading to potential scarcity in van availability. 

- Summer often witnesses increased pricing due to heightened demand, potentially resulting in fewer promotions.  

- In contrast, winter might see slightly more availability due to fewer demands for leisure activities. 

- Winter, on the other hand, might feature promotions or altered pricing structures to attract customers amidst lower demand and more competitive pricing. 

These shifts in availability and pricing strategies illustrate how van hire London services adapt to the ebb and flow of demand, ensuring they meet customer needs while remaining competitive in the market.   

Absolutely: 

Preparation by Van Hire Services 

Companies may forecast demand trends to anticipate and prepare for peak seasons, adjusting their fleet sizes accordingly. Preparing vehicles for weather-related challenges by ensuring they're winter-ready (for instance, fitting snow tires).  

Further, offering specific packages or deals aligned with the unique demands of each season. Providing more flexible booking options during high-demand periods to accommodate varying customer needs. 

These initiatives showcase how can van hire services proactively gear up for seasonal shifts, aligning their services to better serve customer requirements and maintain operational efficiency.  

Adapting to London's Seasonal Fluctuations 

Acknowledging the unique demands of each season in van hire London ensures a smoother experience. Anticipating needs and booking early during peak times secures desired services. Flexibility for users and providers to adapt to changes in demand is crucial. Aligning strategies based on summer and winter needs ensures efficiency and top-notch customer experiences in London's van hire services. 

[productionbynomad]

The Uniqueness of Film Production Services Company Unveiled

In the vast realm of storytelling through visuals and narratives, the unsung heroes behind the scenes are the wizards of film production services. Far beyond the glitz and glamour of Hollywood premieres, these services are the architects of the magic that unfolds on the silver screen. Let's embark on a journey to unravel the unique facets that make film production services an indispensable and remarkable force in the world of cinema.

1. Tailored Solutions for Creative Alchemy

Film production company are not a one-size-fits-all affair. They are agile chameleons, adapting to the unique needs of each project. From indie films to blockbuster extravaganzas, these services tailor their expertise to bring forth the specific vision of filmmakers. Whether it's a gripping drama, a whimsical fantasy, or a heart-pounding action thriller, film production services lay the foundation for creative alchemy.

2. Seamless Integration of Technology and Artistry

The magic of cinema lies in the seamless integration of technology and artistry. Film production services are at the forefront of this technological revolution, embracing cutting-edge innovations while preserving the essence of storytelling. From state-of-the-art cameras to advanced editing software and mind-bending visual effects, these services bring the director's vision to life with a blend of technical prowess and artistic finesse.

3. Global Collaborations: The United Nations of Creativity

Film production services act as the United Nations of the creative world, bringing together talents from various corners of the globe. They navigate cultural nuances, language barriers, and diverse perspectives to create a harmonious symphony of creativity. This international collaboration not only enriches the filmmaking process but also contributes to the global tapestry of storytelling.

4. From Concept to Post-Production Mastery

The journey of a film is a marathon, not a sprint, and film production services are the steadfast companions throughout. They begin with the conception of an idea, guiding filmmakers through pre-production intricacies, managing the chaos of production, and finally, sculpting the raw footage into a polished masterpiece during post-production. This end-to-end involvement ensures a cohesive and compelling cinematic experience.

5. Budgetary Ballet: Maximizing Impact, Minimizing Costs

One of the unique skills of film production services is the ability to perform a budgetary ballet. They juggle financial constraints without compromising the quality of the final product. Every dollar spent is a strategic decision, ensuring maximum impact on the screen while keeping a watchful eye on the bottom line.

6. Problem Solvers Extraordinaire

In the unpredictable world of filmmaking, challenges are as inevitable as the credits that roll at the end. Film production services are the problem solvers extraordinaire, adept at navigating unforeseen obstacles with creativity and finesse. Whether it's adverse weather conditions, unexpected script changes, or technical glitches, these services are the guardians of seamless production.

Conclusion

Film production services company are the conductors orchestrating the symphony of cinema. Their uniqueness lies not only in their technical prowess but in their adaptability, creativity, and unwavering dedication to transforming dreams into visual realities. Beyond the glimmering lights of award ceremonies, these services are the backbone of an industry that thrives on storytelling, imagination, and the seamless marriage of art and technology. In the ever-evolving landscape of cinema, film production services stand tall as the architects of dreams, crafting narratives that resonate across cultures and generations.

Original Source: Film production services UAE

[arifreko]

Re -exploring Maestro’s work: Denny Ja Re -Painting Edgar Duas Painting with Ai Help

In the world of art, commemorating the works of maestro that has exceeded his time is something very important. That is why Denny JA, an artist and art fan, has chosen to re -paint one of the famous paintings by Edgar Dheas using the help of artificial intelligence (AI). In this extraordinary collaborative project, Denny JA re -explores the wonders of Dhegian art and presents it in a new and fresh way.    Denny JA, who has a strong artistic background and experience in painting, sees unlimited potential in the use of AI in painting. He has used the latest technology to change the way the classic paintings are reproduced and updated. In his latest project, he chose the famous Duas painting, “The Star” (Dancer on Stage), as the main subject. The painting of Dhegs described a ballet dancer on the stage, with amazing elegance of motion and light.    However, in re -painting this painting, Denny Ja not only maintains its original beauty, but also gives his personal touch. He used AI algorithms that were developed specifically to produce extraordinary details in describing the movements and expressions of the ballet dancer. Denny Ja pays attention to every corner and detail in the original painting, as well as describing the emotions and life behind every sweep of the degree brush.    This process involves the use of sophisticated AI technology that allows Denny Ja to experiment with various styles, textures, and colors. With the help of AI, Denny Ja can explore various options and translate his ideas into unique works of art. This technology helps Denny Ja in expanding his creativity and creates something new in painting.    During the painting process, Denny Ja also pays attention to the historical value and culture of the original painting of Dheas. He explored deep knowledge about Dheas’s techniques and style, while combining his own modern touches. Denny Ja succeeded in creating a harmony between the sophistication of AI technology and sincere appreciation of Maestro’s works.    The final result of this innovative project is a stunning painting, which provides new experiences for the audience and artists themselves. Denny Ja’s re -painting revived the majesty and smoothness brought by the original Painting of Dheas, while giving a new adorable nuance. This work proves that AI can be a strong tool for artists to realize their vision in an unexpected way.    By combining art and AI expertise, Denny Ja has proven that art is an unlimited source of inspiration. This project teaches us that, through new technology and discoveries, we can continue to exceed the limits of creativity and explore the works of maestro that existed before us. Re -exploring the wonders of art through artificial intelligence is not just about re -painting, but about paying respect for the invaluable legacy from great artists.    Denny Ja has opened the door for new possibilities in art by involving AI in the painting process. He has dared to take risks and present maestro works into the modern world in an unexpected way. Denny Ja inspired other artists to explore the potential of AI in their own artwork, because of the unlimited opportunities and abilities offered by this technology.

Check more: Digging Maestro’s work: Denny Ja Re -painting Edgar Dheg’s painting with the help of AI

[klassbook0]

Gaining Confidence and Mastery: Enroll in a Life-Changing Public Speaking Course in Singapore

In the bustling city-state of Singapore, where communication skills are highly valued, the demand for effective public speaking has never been more pressing. Recognizing the need to empower individuals with the art of articulation, many have turned to a pivotal resource — the public speaking course in Singapore.

Public speaking is more than just the act of standing in front of an audience and delivering a speech. It is a skill that transcends professions and personal pursuits, impacting one's ability to convey ideas with clarity, conviction, and charisma. The public speaking courses in Singapore cater to a diverse range of individuals, from corporate professionals looking to enhance their presentation skills to students preparing for academic presentations and entrepreneurs aiming to pitch their ideas persuasively.

Understanding the Essence of Public Speaking

The allure of a public speaking course in Singapore lies in its holistic approach to skill development. Beyond merely honing verbal communication, these courses delve into the psychology of effective communication, exploring how body language, tone, and even the structure of a speech contribute to its impact. Participants embark on a journey to uncover their unique speaking style, fostering authenticity that resonates with their audience.

One of the key benefits of enrolling in a public speaking course in Singapore is the nurturing of confidence. Public speaking can be a daunting task for many, triggering anxiety and self-doubt. These courses, however, provide a supportive environment for individuals to overcome their fears, enabling them to speak with assurance and poise.

Tailored for Success: Public Speaking Courses in Singapore

What sets public speaking courses in Singapore apart is their adaptability to the diverse needs of learners. Whether you are a seasoned professional seeking to refine your executive presence or a novice looking to conquer the fear of public speaking, there's a course designed to meet your specific objectives.

Participants in these courses engage in practical exercises, simulated scenarios, and constructive feedback sessions. This hands-on approach ensures that the theoretical knowledge gained is immediately applicable, facilitating a seamless transition from the classroom to real-world speaking engagements.

Navigating the Landscape: Public Speaking Course in Singapore

In the heart of this vibrant city-state, individuals are exposed to a wealth of opportunities to enhance their public speaking prowess. From renowned institutions offering comprehensive courses to specialized workshops focusing on niche aspects of public speaking, Singapore's educational landscape is rich with options.

Furthermore, the diverse cultural fabric of Singapore adds an extra layer of depth to public speaking courses. Participants learn to navigate and appreciate the nuances of communication in a multicultural setting, a valuable skill in today's globalized world.

Conclusion: Elevating Communication Skills in the Lion City

In the midst of Singapore's dynamic landscape, the public speaking course emerges as a transformative catalyst for personal and professional growth. It's not just about conquering the fear of public speaking; it's about mastering the art of communication in a way that captivates, inspires, and leaves a lasting impression.

For More Info:-

ballet schools in singapore

[hireseo12]

The Doorway To Success: Level Up Your Business With A Skilled Seo Expert

In An Ever-Changing Digital Landscape, Where Algorithms Dance And Search Engines Rule, One Truth Remains Unrevealed: A Well-Respected Online Presence Is The Pivot To Business Success. As An Entrepreneur Looking To Carve Out Your Niche, You Understand The Importance Of Mastering The Intricate Art Of Seo. And If You Are Located Amidst The Bustling Vibrancy Of Seo Adelaide Now Is The Time To Set Sail And Catch The Digital Winds With An Astute Seo Expert By Your Side.

Decoding The Seo Riddle

Imagine Seo As A Labyrinthine Puzzle, Each Piece An Algorithmic Whim That Contributes To The Grand Narrative Of Digital Supremacy. It Is A Symphony Where Technical Finesse And Creative Intuition Are Intertwined In An Intricate Dance, Conducted By People Who Understand Its Complexity.

Adelaide Advantage: Seo Adelaide Unveiled

In The Cosmopolitan Tapestry Of South Australia, Adelaide Exudes Its Unique Essence – A City That Thrives On Both Tradition And Innovation. Here, Enlisting The Expertise Of An Seo Expert Familiar With The Specifics Of Adelaide Provides A Competitive Edge. By Synergizing Local Insights With Global Strategies, These Experts Create An Experience That Resonates Deeply With City Dwellers.

Keyword Discovery: Navigating The Digital Maze

In The Realm Of Seo, Keywords Reign Supreme – A Treasure Map That Leads Digital Wanderers To Your Virtual Doorstep. Still, The Journey Is Not Straight; It's A Dip Into The Collective Subconscious Of Your Target Audience. Engage An Seo Expert With A Quiver Of Cutting-Edge Tools To Uncover Those Elusive Gems And Weave Them Seamlessly Into Your Content Tapestry.

Content Alchemy: Mixing Logic With Lyrically

Think Of Seo Content As A Literary Alchemy Where Words Are Much More Than Just Symbols; They Are The Catalyst Of Connection. It's A Delicate Ballet That Seo Experts Masterfully Master - The Balance Of Semantic Richness And Algorithmic Precision. They Create Prose That Captivates, Resonates, And Most Importantly, Ranks High On The Search Engine's Radar.

Cracking The Code: Navigating The Technical Terrain

Beyond The Scope Of Prose And Keywords Lies The Technical Framework Of Your Digital Domain. The Seo Specialist, A Type Of Digital Architect, Delves Deep Into The Metrics. They Optimize Loading Times, Enhance Mobile Responsiveness, And Ensure That The Code Sings Harmoniously To The Tune Of The Algorithms, Thus Inviting The Favor Of Search Engines.

Backlinks: The Web Of Digital Influence

Think Of Your Website As A Tapestry And Backlinks As The Threads In Its Weave. These Digital Threads, When Skillfully Woven, Enhance The Authenticity And Credibility Of Your Website. Still, It's A Subtle Symphony, Where Quality Trumps Quantity. The Seasoned Seo Specialist Is A Master Of Connections, Creating A Digital Network That Resonates With Authority.

Deciphering Data: The Language Of Insight

Data Is More Than Numbers; It Is A Mirror Reflecting The Digital Soul Of Your Enterprise. The Seo Specialist Doesn't Just Look At The Surface; They Dive Deep Into The Analytics Ocean. This Data-Driven Approach Fuels Sophisticated Strategies – As Trends Change, Users Evolve, And The Digital Tide Turns, Your Business Elevates.

Staying Afloat: Navigating The Algorithmic Currents

In The Field Of Seo, The Only Constant Is Change. Algorithms Evolve Like Living Organisms, Shaping The Digital Ecosystem. The Seo Expert, A Navigator Through This Ever-Changing Sea, Anticipates And Optimizes. Whether It's Seismic Algorithm Changes Or Nuanced Updates, They Are The Guiding Stars Steering Your Ship Through Turbulent Waters.

Ace Of Adelaide: Elevating Your Digital Efforts

Amidst Adelaide's Urban Canvas, Where Commerce And Culture Are Intertwined, Opportunities Come To Those Who Have The Courage To Seize Them. With An  Seo Adelaide Expert With You, You Are Not Just Hiring A Professional; You Are Investing In The Journey Towards Digital Excellence. As You Embark On This Journey, Remember That A Tailored Touch—Tailored To The Specifics Of Adelaide—Can Turn Your Business Story Into A Spectacular Pinnacle Of Success.

[iridessence]

I’m really curious to see the evolution of people who guide the culture of aesthetic naming/tagging in a few years, and if some eventually begin to lean deeper into fashion history and study what came before/ how it is the reason these aesthetics exist today.

Calling everything princesscore or cottagecore or dark academia or coquette, it has its benefits, it’s succinct, there’s community around that, sure. I used some of those tags myself, but I also try to get specific with my inspirations, beyond evoking a “mood.”

 I often look at the images tagged under the popular terms and see centuries of fashion and art history and several different movements or moments in history that create the aesthetic. Like cottagecore having some very 80s influences, inspired by the 40s, inspired by the late Victorian era, inspired by 18th century ballet and peasant costumes, inspired by shepherdesses or medieval chemises, so on and so forth. Even the names of specific garments beyond “corset” and “dress/gown.”

that specificity, it’s led to a further study and appreciation. I fear the umbrella terms for popular aesthetics may not inspire someone to dig deeper and find the rich in contributions that make the aesthetic possible.

Idk if what I’m saying makes sense, but basically I get that these terms are fun, and useful for shopping or inspo but they also sometimes feel pretty flat. It’s like the tip of the (mostly) benevolent iceberg but the people interacting with it just focus on the tip. But I also know that these aesthetics, this snowballed culture of named “core” and “academia” aesthetics that’s arisen in the last however many years is very much filled with mostly young people, and I am curious to see if self discovery and maturing lead to a more nuanced study of what makes an aesthetic possible in the first place.

[dancelawyer]

SUNDAY IN THE PIT

DAVID H. KOCH THEATER

[walkingshcdow-a]

🔥 gimme the salt on poto

Satly Saturday | Buckle Up. | Accepting!

Do you want ALL THE SALT or just some of it? Because i feel like I could write a dissertation on everything wrong with PotO and, more specifically, the Phandom and be only a diploma shy from my doctorate. 

One of the things I’m incredibly angry about is that it is still an “unpopular opinion” that Meg Giry is anything but blonde and white. In the novel, she is described as “swarthy” with dark hair and eyes, but even if that were not the case, who does it harm to headcanon her as a WoC? I think it is much more damaging to ascribe white traits and white traits only to her, not only because in the Leroux text, she is not white, but because other interpretations of PotO, whether they be the stage show or a roleplay portrayal, should be more open to diversity in general. The world is diverse. And the world was diverse in the 19th century. Historians, novelists, and filmmakers tend to whitewash history and create a false monolith of Europe and the Americas, except when it furthers a particular narrative (typically revolving around the American South, even when the American South has no bearing on a story, like PotO, which takes place in a different country altogether). It’s disgusting. 

The thing that gets me, though, is that the Phandom largely just accepts that Meg Giry is white and blonde. That’s the way it is in the stage show and since stage shows (and their subsequent film adaptations) are visual mediums, whereas novels rely on imagination, it’s “easier” to use images from the show to make aesthetics, fan art, etc. about Meg. It’s pure laziness most of the time; ignorance in other instances. This, to me, is dangerous in a different way than adamantly demanding Meg Be White for thinly veiled reasons tied up in racism. We know the latter is wrong. We take people to task on the latter. We demand more and better from our fandoms than casual, but intentional, racism. When it’s unintentional… or when it’s intentional because 99 percent of media including Meg Giry whitewashes her, we still hit that like button or that reblog button, instead of demanding better from our fandoms. I’m not calling for people to spam content creators with vitriol over their blonde, cherubic Meg Girys. I am calling for people to create more black Meg Girys, more Asian Meg Girys, more Jewish Meg Girys, more Latina Meg Girys, more Middle Eastern Meg Girys. Take what precious little Leroux gave us about her and expand your interpretation. Be kind to interpretations that are racially/ethnically different than the norm, or even than your own. The headcanons someone is posting about a Romani Meg Giry might be their way of connecting their own heritage to the text, of seeking representation that was hinted at in the book and destroyed in later interpretations. The fan art of a black Meg Giry might be a young woman’s way of seeing herself or her friends or her sisters in an art form (ballet) that has traditionally been unkind to WoC. Meg as a woman of color is so important - especially when you dare to mash up Leroux with ALW because the traits they each give her, when put together, create a complex and nuanced young woman that anyone might be happy to identify with. Whitewashing her takes that opportunity away from fans, especially young fans, who do not otherwise see themselves reflected in this beautiful melodrama. Ad who wants to be the gate keeper to a world of fun and joy? The ones we should be taking to task are the casting directors of PotO productions - especially in the US and UK, since those shows are most widely seen and publicized. Not just the ALW show (although I do hold the ALW show responsible for whitewashing Meg in the first place), but future productions of PotO by other creators. 

I also think that for people who aren’t fans of Meg, who don’t pay her much mind, don’t understand why this is such a contentious issue for those of us who love her, whether we love her from Leroux, Webber, or another iteration. For me, the version I take issue with is the ALW version… largely because I believe ALW Meg to be a composite of Meg Giry, La Sorelli, and Cecile Jammes from the Leroux novel. You see traits of each woman reflected in ALW Meg. She’s aged up, perhaps not prima ballerina, but a principal dancer. She’s superstitious, but level-headed. Kind, almost maternal, but bubbly and fun. She’s bold and fascinated by the strange goings-on around her. If ALW had wanted to give her the blonde, blue-eyed good looks of a Barbie Doll, he would have done better to name her after Jammes, who has a peaches and cream complexion in the novel. He could have even named her after Sorelli, though this move would have been more difficult, since Sorelli was a principal dancer and not the daughter of one of Erik’s employees. No. He chose to name her after Meg Giry and elevate her to secondary character status. The least he could have done was make her look the part. It would not have been the first time a principal cast member in an ALW was a PoC. Ben Vereen played Judas in the Broadway debut of JCS. So, why so scared to cast a black woman (or, really, any WoC) as Meg Giry? Come on, ALW. Would it have been so hard? It could have started the conversation about race in period dramas or the conversation about racism in the fine arts (especially ballet) twenty or thirty years earlier. And even if it didn’t, PotO would still be the beautiful leviathan it is today. 

Of course, I know that in a post-LND world, a lot of people have bigger complaints about Meg Giry’s treatment in modern stagings. I agree with them - the characterization of Meg Giry in LND is painful to watch. It’s inconsistent with what we know of her in the original show; it certainly is divorced from the novel in all ways. The flaws with Meg’s character in LND have nothing to do with the fact that she’s made into a sex worker (although that choice is questionable from a narrative standpoint, not a moral one. What does it add to Meg’s arc that she sold herself to help buy Phantasma? The implication that we’re meant to see her as lesser than Christine for it is the real moral quandary, But I digress). Rather, the flaws with Meg’s character stem from her being inconsistent with all previous and recognizable versions of her character and with the anti-feminist need to pit two women, who were previously the best of friends, against each other over a man… Not even a man who treats one or both of them right… like… it pits two best friends against each other over an abusive narcissist. It does no characters any favors, least of all poor Meg, who is made out to be needy, jealous, emotionally unstable… It does a poor job getting from Point A to Point B. 

This bastardization of Meg’s character would probably seem like a great bullet to dodge, insofar as representation goes. I think it would be absolutely disgusting to cast a black woman as LND Meg, due to all the negative stereotyping that would end up clouding even the best performance. However, LND was not the commercial or critical success ALW hoped it would be. Not even close. It underwent a lot of rewritings, still was not highly successful, and (by and large) disappoints both fans of the original story and newcomers to the PotO story. It is nowhere near the cultural phenomenon that PotO is. And so, then, again I ask - why have we not seen a WoC in the role of Meg? It’s only very recently that we’ve seen PoC in the roles of Christine, the Phantom, and Raoul. Meg is still depicted as white. I’m hoping that the trend of diversifying Broadway is more than a trend, but instead a cultural shift in how Broadway appeals to the masses. I hope to see a WoC play Meg (and Madame Giry, who I’ve neglected to mention until now, woops) within my lifetime. 

Honestly, I think that I only really started thinking about this critically two years ago when my Salt Squad and I got talking about representation in the Phandom, particularly in the RPC. I was rereading Leroux at the time and meditating on Kay (as one does) in my spare time and it occurred to me that if I wanted to see some change in the Phandom, I had to be a part of the side I wanted to see prevail. I had to be some of the change I wanted to see in the Phandom. So I took up Meg as a muse. I’m starting to see more and more racially diverse Megs in the Phandom and that thrills me. I want to @fillescharmxnt because her Meg is what I aspired for mine to be in so many ways. There are plenty of other fanartists, fic writers, and aesthetic makers who are doing such great things with recontextualizing Meg Giry for the 21st century.

I do want to include this disclaimer, though: just because someone is roleplaying, writing, drawing, headcanoning Meg as white, doesn’t mean that their ideas are without merit. There are plenty of very talented artists, writers, and bloggers who depict Meg as white. My goal is not to shame them - a lot of them do great work, both from a technical and emotional standpoint - but rather to invite them to the conversation about Meg Giry, race, and representation. I urge these fans to challenge their notions about Meg Giry and to be open to accepting ideas that are different from theirs. Even those of us who HC Meg as a WoC enjoy and support content with blonde Meg (like… can we talk about the Brazilian actress with the freckles?!). All I ask is that fans of white Meg Giry enjoy and support content with black/Asian/Jewish/Romani/Latina/Middle Eastern/Other Meg Giry in return. 

Fans can question the media they consume. Fans can challenge the media they consume. But at the end of the day, it is the media that we create and ask to be created that make the most difference. The only way media gets created is if there is a demand for. Be willing to demand a more inclusive, more historically accurate depiction of Meg Giry and you will be rewarded with a creative explosion of fan created content. 

[armeniaitn]

Komitas: Divine Liturgy Album Celebrates the Musical Mastery of an Armenian National Treasure

New Post has been published on https://armenia.in-the.news/culture/komitas-divine-liturgy-album-celebrates-the-musical-mastery-of-an-armenian-national-treasure-36829-15-07-2020/

Komitas: Divine Liturgy Album Celebrates the Musical Mastery of an Armenian National Treasure

By, Christine Aghakhanian

Three years ago, Ambassador Tigran Mkrtchyan embarked on a journey to pay homage to the father of Armenian classical music, Komitas Vardapet, resulting in a rich musical album titled Komitas: Divine Liturgy, released by DELOS records on July 10.

After years of planning and collaboration led by the Ambassador, the 150th anniversary concert honoring Komitas Vardapet and his Divine Liturgy by the Latvian Radio Choir, under the artistic direction of composer Sigvards Klava, was held at St. John’s Church in Riga, Latvia. The three-day concert in September of last year, was recorded, giving birth to the newly released album with the musical arrangement of composer Vache Sharafyan, featuring Komitas’ final works just before his deportation during the Genocide.

The Latvian Radio Choir, the first non-Armenian speaking mixed choir to perform Komitas’ liturgies, is accompanied by award-wining soloist Deacon Hovhanness Nersesyan (bass) of the Araratian Pontifical Diocese and tenor Armen Badalyan, both of whom are graduates of the Komitas State Conservatory in Yerevan, soloists at the Armenian National Academic Theatre of Opera and Ballet and vocalists at the Etchmiadzin Cathedral.

Ambassador Tigran Mkrtchyan

Ambassador Mkrtchyan explains that the inception of the project was initiated when he asked the Latvian Radio Choir to perform a few of Komitas’ pieces during their concerts. The performances were such a success, that he was convinced the choir could masterfully perform an entire concert of Komitas’ works. That is when conductor Sigvards Klava decided to travel to Armenia and stay at the Holy See of Etchmiadzin for inspiration, along with the collaboration of famed Armenian composer Vache Sharafyan.

“He [Klava] wanted, he needed to feel closer to the Armenian religious life, spiritual music and Komitas,“ said Ambassador Mkrtchyan. “So, a few days spent in Etchmiadzin and Yerevan, meetings with Komitas scholars, visits to religious sites in Armenia were of immense importance to bring Mr. Klava closer to Armenian culture. Later we invited from Paris, Mkrtich Mkrtchyan, a musician and Komitas scholar, to work with the choir, to present the Armenian musical traditions and Komitas. The singers also visited the Armenian Apostolic Church in Riga and had a meeting with Ter Khosrov Stepanyan, who presented them the Armenian religious traditions and spiritual music. Thus, it took three long years to mature this project, and then it was time to prepare for the recording itself,” he added.

In 1892, Komitas began working on the Divine Liturgy, his final work with ten versions, all of which were created for male choirs. The final version, presented on the album, dates from 1914-1915, just before Komitas’ deportation from Constantinople to a prison camp in Cankin.

Vache Sharafyan

Composer Vache Sharafyan believes that the original male version was written to be sang during church liturgies while the mixed choir version of the musical score he transliterated to Latin is more suitable for stage performances.

“The male choir and mixed choir have very different types of the musicality, timbres, colors etc.,” Sharafyan explains. “It was important to create a version of Komitas’ Liturgy based on his male choir version that could be sang by the mixed choirs, because there are more mixed choirs in the world. Meanwhile it was also very important to keep the music as close to the original male version of Komitas’ idea as possible and also to use the richness of the vocal beauty of the female and male voice combinations and to create a complete mixed choir version. I am sure that if Komitas had a chance to work after 1915, he would have definitely created such a version himself. But unfortunately, after the 1915 Armenian Genocide in Ottoman Turkey and until the end of his life in 1935, Komitas was in the hospital for mental illnesses in Paris and never wrote another note,” he added.

Ambassador Mkrtchyan discussed some of the challenges of having a non-Armenian speaking choir conduct the liturgies and attributes this phenomenon to the fact that the liturgy is written in Armenian for an all-male choir. He also explained how those obstacles were overcome with a lot of hard work and determination.

“Komitas Vardapet has left us one of the most beautiful liturgies in the history of music,” revealed Ambassador Mkrtchyan. “Soloists simply have to be Armenian or be fluent in Armenian as the parts for the tenor and bass can be performed only by such persons. But during our long and painstaking preparations, we managed to address all of these issues, I hope, successfully. First, Mr. Mkrtchyan worked with the choir, also on their Armenian, presented them nuances of Armenian spiritual music. Then a Latvian scholar of Armenian studies, Valda Salmina, worked with them on their Armenian. And eventually Vache Sharafyan worked with the singers both before the concert and during the recording. Therefore, I dare say, the choir sounds like an Armenian choir,” he added.

Composer Sharafyan talked about his experience working on the album: “I had great time working with the Latvian Radio Choir and its choirmaster Sigvards Klava. The Latvian Radio Choir consists of wonderful musicians and has a unique rich timbre and ability to open and express the very hidden spirituality and nuances in the music. It was also very important to have the Armenian wonderful soloists Armen Badalyan and Hovhannes Nersesyan … They helped a lot to keep the Armenianness of the whole sound.”

Komitas

Komitas collected, transcribed and researched more than 3000 pieces of Armenian folk music. Most of it has disappeared and only about 1200 pieces are in existence today. He arranged authentic folk songs of rural peasants turning simple material into beautifully sophisticated polyphony. It is said that Komitas did for Armenia what Bartók did for Hungary. He had a voracious appetite for songs, and his transcriptions reflect a remarkable ear, seamlessly interweaving threads of music, movement, and complex social relationships.

Ambassador Mkrchyan believes it is vital for the next generation to preserve Komitas’ legacy: “I think, the Armenian youth especially needs to know more about Komitas Vardapet’s contributions to the Armenian culture and arts, because Komitas is one of the strongest pillars on which Armenian cultural identity is based,” he said. “Thanks to him, we have several hundreds of unique sacred and spiritual songs, which he spared no effort to collect from around the Western Armenia. At the same time, Komitas having studied in Europe, knew very well what the uniqueness of Armenian culture was in the context of western civilization and how best to present it to international audience. I would say that the more we know his music, the more we know of him, the closer we are to our roots,” he added.

The album itself is accompanied by a booklet featuring the entire text of the liturgy in Armenian translated to English with Latin transliteration, allowing the listener of the recordings to sing along with the album. Also included is Komitas’ autobiography translated to English along with written sections about the life and music of Komitas by Vache Sharafyan and Vache Barsoumian.

“Komitas summarizes the collective consciousness of the Armenian nation, our aspirations and pain,” said Ambassador Mkrtchyan. “As we know all of his music was created before April 1915, before life stopped in the biggest part of the historical fatherland of Armenians, as the horrors of the Armenian Genocide which he witnessed were too much for a human being to tolerate. I hope Komitas gets a much wider and better recognition worldwide,” he added.

Composer Sharafyan also believes Komitas’ work should be better known around the world. He states that the music of Bach, Mozart and Beethoven is widely known because those men were from European countries where they had the opportunity to create art that was performed for audiences all over the world.

Komitas with his Gusan Choir, May 12, 1913 Constantinople

“Komitas was born in a country where there wasn’t real art life,” said Sharafyan. “There was poverty, occupation, invasion, genocide, war, there was the question of the existence of the Armenian nation and no real art life was possible in such a situation. Komitas studied in Berlin and found and established an absolutely new approach to the music based on the national value and discovered another sense of harmony, polyphony, melody. Throughout history we know many examples when music of the great composers are rediscovered later and I am sure Komitas is the one whose art is deserving to be discovered by the world,” he added.

[embedded content]

According to Ambassador Mkrtchyan, future cultural events and concerts in Estonia featuring the Liturgy of Komitas and Tigran Mansuran’s Requiem in Kaunas with Grammy Award winning choirs have been postponed due the to the COVID-19 pandemic. “From amongst the supporters I would like to thank specifically the Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sport of Armenia for acknowledging the significance of this project and stepping in with its considerable support,” said Ambassador Mkrtchyan. “Sigvards Klava was hosted in the Holy See of Etchmiadzin by the invitation of His Holiness Catholicos Karekin II, the supreme head of the Armenian Apostolic Church. The Armenian Apostolic Church in Riga and Ter Khosrov Stepanyan did an amazing job in presenting the Latvian Radio Choir with Armenian spiritual music traditions and I would like to thank Ter Khosrov for that. I would like to thank also OrganiQ company, and especially Ovik Mkrtchyan and Mkhitar Mkhitaryan for their generous support without which this idea would not be realized. Aram Arutyunyan was of great support as well. And also I would like to thank our sponsors from Armenia, the Balasanyan Family Foundation whose contribution to the Armenian musicians’ participation in this concert has been vital.

For more information on Komitas: Divine Liturgy, visit: https://delosmusic.com

Read original article here.

[if-this-is-a-woman]

The Radical Copyeditor’s Style Guide for Writing About Transgender People

The Radical Copyeditor’s Style Guide for Writing About Transgender People

By Alex Kapitan, radicalcopyeditor.com

View Original

August 31st, 2017

Introduction (Read This First)

A style guide for writing about transgender people is practically an oxymoron. Style guides are designed to create absolutes—bringing rules and order to a meandering and contradictory patchwork quilt of a language. Yet there are no absolutes when it comes to gender. That’s why this is a radical copyeditor’s style guide. Radical copyediting isn’t about absolutes; it’s about context and care.

There are profound reasons for why the language that trans people use to describe ourselves and our communities changes and evolves so quickly. In Western culture, non-trans people have for centuries created the language that describes us, and this language has long labeled us as deviant, criminal, pathological, unwell, and/or unreal.

As trans people have fought for survival, we have also fought for the right to describe ourselves in our own language and to reject language that criminalizes, pathologizes, or invisibilizes us. Just as there is no monolithic transgender community, there is also no one “correct” way to speak or write about trans people.

How to use this guide:

Treat it as general guidance, not concrete rules.

Focus on how to practice care toward people whose experience of gender is different from yours.

Consider context. Language choices completely depend on context: medical environments versus online dating, young children versus elders, USA versus Australia, and so on. Recognize, in particular, that the language used within trans cultural contexts can be far more nuanced than the language outsiders use to describe trans people and trans experiences.

How not to use this guide:

Do not use this guide to harshly police or shame others’ language choices.

Do not use this guide to tell trans people that they are using incorrect language, regardless of whether you yourself are trans or not. A general best practice should never supersede a trans person’s right to use whatever language feels best to them.

Do not care more about words than you do about people.

The purpose of this guide is to help people of all gender identities and experiences practice more care toward those on the margins. Trans people must be understood as the authorities on ourselves and the language used to describe us. Not only does this mean that cisgender (non-trans) people need to practice humility and care toward trans people, but it also means that trans people—particularly those with educational, financial, and/or racial privilege—need to practice humility and care toward other trans people—particularly those who are folks of color, low-income, less educated, and/or elders.

If you are trans, I highly recommend inoculating yourself against the temptation to police other trans people’s language by reading “words don’t kill people, people kill words” and the glossary introduction “there is no perfect word,” both by Julia Serano, as well as “I Was Recently Informed I’m Not a Transsexual,” by Riki Wilchins.

Note: Like all style guides, what follows is about language usage, not definitions; for a comprehensive glossary of transgender-related terminology, check out this one from Julia Serano.

Also note: This guide was written in a U.S. context. Although the general guidance in it is broadly applicable, the specifics may differ in other countries.

Transgender Style GuideSection 1. Correct/current usage of transgender-related language  

1.1. Transgender is an adjective.

Use: transgender people; a transgender person

Avoid: transgenders; transgendered

1.2. Transgender is not a sexual orientation.

Correct terms in a transgender context: gender; gender identity and expression

Incorrect terms in a transgender context: sexual identity; sexuality Avoid: Are you straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender (pick one)?

1.3. Transition is the correct word for the social and/or medical process of publicly living into one’s true gender.

Use: Chris transitioned at age 32; the transition process

Avoid: Chris is transgendering; Chris had a sex change; Chris had “the surgery”; Chris became a woman

1.4. Transgender does not refer only to binary-identified trans women and men. Many trans people (35%) are non-binary.*

Use: transgender people; people of all genders

Avoid (in reference to all trans people): transgender women and men

In popular culture, transgender is often exclusively used to refer to binary-identified trans women and men (those who were assigned male at birth and identify as female, or vice versa). Yet transgender actually refers to all those whose gender identities do not align, according to societal expectations, with their birth-assigned sex. This includes non-binary people—those who do not identify (exclusively or at all) as women or men.

Out of respect for the fact that the word transgender is so often used in ways that (incorrectly) do not include non-binary people, it is currently considered a best practice to say transgender and non-binary people when referring to all those whose gender identities are different than what might be expected based on their birth-assigned sex. Yet the word transgender should never be assumed to only refer to binary-identified trans people.

⇒ A note on trans, trans*, and trans+: All three of these terms are used as abbreviations of transgender and/or as ways to more explicitly communicate inclusion of the full breadth of people whose gender identities are something other than was expected of them at birth. Trans* came about in the 1990s and had a huge but relatively brief spurt of popularity in the early 2010s. Trans+ is a more recent variant that plays on the trend of adding a plus sign to terms like LGBTQ to denote greater inclusion.

In an international context, according to UK-based oatc: “trans is equally used as an abbreviation of transsexual, transgressive, transexuale, transexuelle, travestie, etc., and to encompass all those, and the thousands of other, equally valid, and often much valued, terms used used across the world’s cultures, where transgender can sometimes be a culturally imperialist term.”

1.5. The terms gender nonconforming and non-binary are not synonyms.

Gender nonconforming refers to a person whose gender expression (by way of dress, mannerisms, roles, career, and/or lots of other things) does not conform to stereotypical gender expectations for someone of their gender. Examples of gender nonconforming people might include masculine women, effeminate men, women pilots, male ballet dancers, and young girls with short hair.

Non-binary, or gender non-binary, refers to a person whose internal sense of self is not exclusively woman/female or man/male. Some non-binary people identify as both woman and man (e.g., bigender people), some identify as a different gender entirely (e.g., genderqueer people), and some do not identify with any gender (e.g., agender people).

Many people are non-binary in terms of identity and also gender nonconforming in terms of expression, but plenty of other people are only one or the other. It’s important not to use these terms interchangeably.

⇒ A note on gender variant, gender expansive, gender creative, gender diverse, gender fabulous, etc.: Many terms have sprung up over the years to refer to the full spectrum of those who are both gender nonconforming and/or non-binary. Best practices include avoiding terms that carry a negative connotation (e.g., gender deviant), and also avoiding using terms inaccurately (e.g., diverse does not mean “different from the norm,” it just means “varied”—therefore, gender diverse should refer to a group of people with varied genders, not a single person or a group of people whose gender is different from the norm).

1.6. Transgender is a descriptive term, not (usually) a gender and not always an identity.

Use: transgender people; transgender history or identity

Avoid: people who identify as transgender; man, woman, or transgender (pick one)

Transgender means having a gender identity that does not align, according to societal expectations, with one’s birth-assigned sex. Cisgender means having a gender identity that does align with one’s birth-assigned sex. Just as cisgender is a descriptive term, not a gender itself, so too is transgender a descriptive term. Some genders include woman, man, genderqueer, two spirit, agender, and bigender, for example. Transgenderis not, for the vast majority of people, a gender, and while some people identify as trans, or as trans women or trans men, others do not consider being trans a part of their identity, and identify solely as genderqueer, or women, or men, for example. Some people describe themselves as a “woman of transsexual experience” or a “man with a history of gender transition,” as additional examples.

Section 2. Bias-free and respectful language in reference to transgender people

2.1. Avoid language that reduces people to their birth-assigned sex or their (assumed) biology.

Use: assigned female at birth; assigned male at birth

Avoid: born a woman; born a man; biologically female; biologically male; genetically female; genetically male; pre-op; post-op

2.2. Avoid treating transgender people as though we have “a condition.”

Use: Monique is transgender; being transgender is not a crime Use: gender dysphoria

Avoid: Monique has transgenderism; transsexualism/transsexuality is a sin Avoid: gender disordered; gender identity disorder (outdated)

Note that throughout history, in order to gain access to medical interventions such as gender-affirming hormones and surgery, many trans people have been forced to prove they have a psychiatric and/or medical condition that requires treatment, which has often meant using the language of the medical field regardless of whether that language feels authentic. Language around diagnoses, pathologization, and access to health care is complex and differs from country to country.

2.3. Avoid language that puts more value on being or appearing cisgender (not trans), or that carries judgments or biases around how public a person is about being trans.

Use: openly transgender; not openly transgender

Avoid: passes; stealth; you’d never be able to tell

Although some transgender people use the terms stealth and passing, it’s not appropriate for non-trans people to use this language unless they are explicitly asked to by a trans person. As Janet Mock has eloquently spoken to, terms like these imply that trans people who are perceived as cisgender (or not trans) are engaging in deception simply by being themselves.

⇒ A note on out and closeted: Coming out is the process of becoming aware of your authentic identity and/or sharing that identity with others. A trans man who has transitioned is fully out as a man; whether or not he chooses to share his gender history with others is irrelevant. Being closeted means denying one’s identity to oneself and/or others, but if one’s identity is man and one is living life fully as a man, one is out. When a person shares that they have a history of gender transition, that is a disclosure, not an act of coming out.

2.4. Names, pronouns, and prefixes

2.4.1. Always use a person’s correct name, pronouns (or lack thereof), and prefix (if any). Always.

Use: Avery dyed zir hair; Lynn loves their grandson; Monica is her own best advocate; Marcus drove gher car with care; Xander tied hir shoes; Sam ate Sam’s lunch at Sam’s apartment

The first and foremost way to respect and honor a transgender person’s personhood is to respect the language they use to refer to themself. Transgender people have been forced to forge new paths in language in order to carve out space for our very existence. Because there are more than two, three, four, or five genders in the world, there are more than two, three, four, or five pronouns, and all are equally valid—including some people’s choice to be referred to using no pronouns at all.

2.4.2. Using a transgender person’s birth name or former pronouns without permission (even when talking about them in the past) is a form of violence.

Use: Bridget knew from the age of 3 that she was a girl.

Avoid: At the age of 3, Bob announced that he was a girl. After transitioning, Bob—now Bridget—threw out her old clothes.

Some transgender people do use a different name and/or pronouns to talk about themselves prior to transition, but this is rare. Unless you are told differently, only use a person’s true/current name and pronouns, even when writing about them in the past.

2.4.3. Pronouns are simply pronouns. They aren’t “preferred” and they aren’t inherently tied to gender identity or biology.

Use: pronouns; personal pronouns; she/her/hers; he/him/his; they/them/theirs; ze/zir/zirs; Sam/Sam/Sam (and any other pronoun or combination)

Avoid: preferred pronouns; masculine pronouns; feminine pronouns; male pronouns; female pronouns

As J. Mase III once succinctly put it, “my pronouns aren’t preferred; they’re required.” A person’s correct pronouns are not a preference; neither are pronouns inherently masculine, feminine, male, or female: for example, a masculine person could use she/her/hers pronouns and a female person could use they/them/theirs pronouns.

2.4.4. Respect singular they as a personal pronoun and use it appropriately.

Use: Elizabeth loves their cat; they are a big cat lover; they did something nice for themself yesterday

They/them/theirs has shot up in popularity in recent years as a personal pronoun for non-binary people. Despite what your third-grade English teacher might have told you, there is nothing incorrect about using theysingularly. In fact, they is taking off in a way that ze or per or co or any of the hundreds of other invented pronouns never did precisely because of its existing “off-label” use as a singular pronoun (see 3.1).

Many dictionaries have addressed and/or endorsed this use already, including Merriam-Webster, the Oxford English Dictionary, and the American Heritage Dictionary; the American Dialect Society voted singular they 2015 Word of the Year; and in March 2017 AP style got on board as well.

When using singular they, verb conjugations follow the same rules as those for singular you: they did, they are, themself / you did, you are, yourself.

Note that although many non-binary people go by they/them/theirs, many others go by different pronouns (see 2.4.1). If a non-binary person goes by ze/zir/zirs, for example, referring to zir using they/them/theirs is still an act of mispronouning. Note also that binary people’s potential discomfort with new word usage must not take priority over the pain non-binary people experience when we are mispronouned and/or misgendered. See Grammarly for more.

2.5. Respect the diversity of language that people use to describe themselves.

It is a human tendency to try to make sense of the world by categorizing things, including people—but gender, in its true diversity, defies categorization. Biology is incredibly varied, and the meaning we draw from it is even more so. As noted in the introduction to this guide, transgender people must be understood as the ultimate authorities on ourselves and the language used to describe us, even when doing so goes against things like style guides (this one or any other). When writing or talking about an individual person, this means finding out what language that person uses to describe themself and never assuming what language is correct or best without asking. Something as seemingly small as the difference between trans man and transman can have enormous significance to a person.

2.6. Practice particular sensitivity around culture-specific language related to gender identity and expression.

Gender is culturally constructed, which means that there isn’t a set, finite number of gendered experiences that transcend language; rather, cultural context is everything when it comes to gender. For example, two spirit is a beautifully complex term that doesn’t entirely translate outside of North American Indigenous cultures; just as terms like hijra, māhū, fa’afafine, and many others aren’t fully translatable outside their cultural contexts. Similarly, terms like stud and aggressive are terms that are specific to Black culture.

Historical context is also important. For example, it’s undeniable that Joan of Arc did not conform to the gender norms of her day, but describing her as transgender isn’t accurate, because today’s cultural understanding of what transgender means can’t be applied to people from a different era without knowing how they understood themselves in their own context.

2.7. Practice particular sensitivity around bodies and anatomy.

Avoid: female-bodied; male-bodied

Some trans and non-binary people refer to themselves as being female-bodied or male-bodied, but this is never appropriate language for cisgender people to use. Trans folks employ all sorts of wonderfully creative language to refer to our body parts, and it is important that others—particularly our loved ones and medical providers—respect and mirror that language.

This isn’t just about respect. For people with gender dysphoria, referring to our anatomy—particularly reproductive anatomy—using language that we don’t associate ourselves with can be deeply triggering and traumatic.

So, when referring to trans and non-binary people, if you are someone (like a medical provider) who needs to refer to our anatomy, find out what language we use and/or use generic and broad terminology (e.g., genitals, reproductive organs, and chest) instead of gender-loaded words (e.g., vagina, penis, and breasts). See 3.4 for more on sensitivity around anatomy-related language.

If you are a medical provider, check out these ten tips and standards of care from RAD Remedy for more.

Section 3. Sensitive and inclusive broader language

3.1. Recognize that there are more than two genders. Use singular theyin a generic sense and avoid the language of gender opposites.

Use: Honor each person’s truth about their identity; everyone; people of all genders; siblings; kindred

Avoid: Honor each person’s truth about his or her identity; men and women; the opposite sex; both genders; brothers and sisters

Using they/them/theirs to refer to a person whose gender is unknown has a long and fairly consistent history in the English language, and manydifferent people have documented how using they in both singular and plural fashion is grammatically correct, just as you can be used in both singular and plural fashion. Doing so is an essential way to create linguistic space for the existence of non-binary people.

3.2. Do not use LGBTQ or its many variants (LGBT, LGBTQIA+, etc.) as a synonym for gay.

Use: LGBTQ people versus non-LGBTQ people

Avoid: LGBTQ people versus straight people

If you’re using an acronym that includes transgender people, it’s important to actually include trans people in the context of what you are writing about. For example, if you’re only writing about people in same-sex relationships, or if you’re trying to refer to everyone with a marginalized sexuality, don’t use LGBTQ. Some transgender people (15%) identify as straight.* LGBTQ and straight/heterosexual are not, therefore, opposites, and should never be treated as such.

3.3. Recognize queer as a valid sexual orientation.

More transgender people identify as queer (21%) than any other sexual orientation.* Although mainstream style guides and dictionaries have refused to recognize the evolution of this word, writing sensitively about transgender people requires honoring the language we use to describe not only our genders but also our sexualities. Queer is a complex word with many different definitions, and in the context of transgender communities, it must be recognized as a valid identity term.

3.4.   Decouple anatomy from identity in your language.

Contrary to popular belief, anatomy is not inherently female or male. First, intersex people exist, and the Intersex Society of North America once estimated that as many as 1 in 100 bodies differ biologically from what is considered standard for females and males. Second, because of the existence of trans people, there are plenty of men who can get pregnant and plenty of women who need prostate exams (as just two examples).

What this means is that words like women and men do not speak to universal truths about bodies or experiences. Using “women” as shorthand for all people who can menstruate or get pregnant, or “MSM” (“men who have sex with men”) as a population at risk for many sexually transmitted infections, as two examples, is neither accurate nor inclusive of trans and non-binary people.

When language inextricably links anatomy and identity, it does harm to those whose anatomy doesn’t align with norms and assumptions. In the examples above, promoting prenatal care exclusively to women keeps pregnant men and non-binary people from accessing care, and lumping trans women into the “MSM” category (and keeping trans men out of it) creates a barrier for vital trans-inclusive HIV research, prevention, and services.

Being mindful about not linking identity and anatomy doesn’t mean stripping identity from our language entirely. It just means keeping trans and non-binary people in mind when considering who you are actually talking about and how to refer to them. Context is everything, and determines whether you should say “trans and cis women,” “women and trans people,” or “pregnant people,” for example.

3.5. Embrace the fact that language can evolve quickly.

The language of gender identity and expression is evolving at lightning speed. This can easily feel overwhelming to some people and results in every sort of reaction, from knuckling down and resisting language changes to throwing up one’s hands in despair to becoming judgmental or dismissive of new (or old) words and the people who use them.

There’s another way. Choose to celebrate this rapid evolution of language because of what it means: that people who have been marginalized for centuries are finding ways of reclaiming agency and legitimacy; that those of us who have been written out of existence are finding ways to rewrite reality to make room for our true selves. The purpose of language is to communicate, not to regulate.

A final note

A style guide can never serve as a replacement for being in relationship with the real people you are writing about. If you are writing about transgender people—whether you yourself are trans or not—always do so from a place of relationship. Don’t assume; ask. Always bring in additional trans perspectives on what you’ve written—across lines of gender, age, race, class, ability, and sexuality. Never fall for the trap of thinking that a single trans person can represent or speak for the breathtaking diversity of all of those who are encompassed by the word transgender. If you do nothing else, this one thing will always steer you right.

[ievani-e]

I’m Genderqueer, I Guess!?

(AKA, My Experiences Accepting  — and Then Rejecting  — Womanhood)

Over three weeks ago now, on February 4th, I started out wanting to write a random little opinion piece about Disney’s Mulan. I had experienced a personal epiphany, and I wanted to revisit some of the ideas I had had about Mulan in the past, and contrast that with how I felt about it now. But, I realised, there was something else I had to write before I could. I had to write this random thing first, because this post informs that one.

So what this post is going to be about is this: I am genderqueer.

This is not a recent thing. I have not suddenly changed as a person. On the contrary, I’m exactly the same person I have always been. The only thing that has changed is the label itself: a label which, for reasons explained below, I have decided to don.

In order to properly tell you about where I am now, I have to tell you a bit about my past and give you an overview about my experiences growing up. I have to tell you how I first got to this place for my decision to come out as genderqueer/gender non-binary to make sense.

Some backstory, then: While I never directly suffered as a result of my gender identity the same way some others have, I did still struggle with gender dysphoria. I recognise that many trans and queer people have (or have had) it way worse than me, and that I am extremely fortunate to have avoided being bullied or ostracised due to my gender identity, having firmed up and sussed out what it even was only now. But, nevertheless, it was there the whole time.

Growing up, I couldn’t shake the feeling that something was medically wrong with me: that the doctors must have made some kind of a mistake, and everyone around me treating me as a girl ever since was simply the result of carrying the error forward. I must have had a higher dosage of androgens in my system, or maybe an extra chromosome or something. I must have secretly been intersex and just hadn’t been diagnosed. Surely, something had to have been wrong. I couldn’t have been a girl, because any definition of or expectation for a “girl” I ever heard was something so different from what I was.

As a child, I grew up with a very narrow definition of what it meant to be a girl and what girls could and couldn’t be, because that was what had been spoon-fed to me by the media and the social norms I saw around me. These norms were perpetuated at school, by members of my family, and on TV — with TV standing in as a representative for the world at large. What I saw around me was: girls liked shopping and jewellery. Girls liked fashion and beauty. Girls liked horse-riding and ballet. Girls were vain. Girls were stupid. Girls only cared about wearing pretty pink dresses and chatting about boys. Girls were… <insert other extremely limited, restrictive, two-dimensional female stereotype here>. Those were the conclusions I had come to, based on what the world was showing me and teaching me.

And I wasn’t like that. I wasn’t like those girls. I was nuanced, I was complicated; I was intelligent and smart and not at all interested in love and romance, and I much preferred to hang out with boys like I was one of them than try to date any of them. I liked video games and horror films and reading thrillers and action adventures. I was no girly-girl: I was a tomboy, and proud of it.

Nothing I had heard about girls applied to me or appealed to me in any way. (I mean no offense if you are more feminine than I was and you do like that sort of stuff: it’s totally okay to be that way, too! It’s just that I, in particular, wasn’t).

I, the little weirdo that I felt like at the time, had never fit into the picture of the archetypal girl. So, I reasoned, the only logical conclusion was that I must not have been a girl. I must have been a boy. At least, I fit much more comfortably into the definition of a “boy” than I did the definition of a “girl”.

The problem there is, it’s easy to decide that certain characteristics associated with a certain group aren’t compatible with you when the characteristics given to you are so limited in the first place. There was a very specific mental image I had in my head of what a girl should be like, and there didn’t seem to be very much room for discussion. For boys, on the other hand, it seemed like they could be anything except that. That has a whole host of issues all its own — ones I won’t be getting into in depth now — where boys are discouraged from displaying feminine characteristics or emotionality, and this is just as harmful to boys as it is to discourage girls from displaying masculine characteristics. Double-standards do exist, and they are not okay.

But, putting aside that can of worms for now, boys generally had a lot more options than girls did. Of course I would be able to see more similarities between myself and boys when there was a wider range of options to choose from from the start.

Please permit me to be an optimist for a moment and say that I believe that, in an ideal world, all positive characteristics would be embraced and encouraged in children, regardless of whether they were typically “feminine” or “masculine”. We would love unconditionally, and judge each person for their own individual merits and demerits, rather than holding them up to some perceived notion of being “girl” enough or “boy” enough. Doing so is incredibly detrimental to us all because, when we start holding personhood up to some arbitrary standard, it becomes very easy to fall short. And that does not feel good for the many of us who don’t measure up.

But the real world and the ideal world are worlds apart, and social norms did, and do, exist. In any case, I certainly didn’t fit the cookie-cutter mould of what it “meant” to be a “girl”. And that felt like a failure on my part. I felt like I wasn’t enough; like I wasn’t good enough, just the way I was.

I grew up empathising and relating to men in a variety of ways, because in our culture and in our media it is predominantly male characters and male role models that we see. Female role models… Not so much. Female characters in books, video games and TV were few and far between to begin with, and those that did exist tended to be depicted as homemakers, love interests, sex objects and… nope, that’s about it. As a result, I didn’t know that there were more ways to be than just those.

That’s not to say that shows featuring more positive role models didn’t exist — it’s not even to say I didn’t happen across a few of them myself. Rather, it is that those positive influences weren’t numerous enough or prevalent enough for me, as a child, to notice; or to start to change my mind about women as a whole because of them. There weren’t enough positive portrayals of women for those portrayals of women to form part of a larger pattern; certainly not enough to challenge the already-existing patterns of behaviour that were being perpetuated far more prominently and pervasively. There were exceptions, but that’s just it: complex, interesting, autonomous female characters — women such as Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Xena: Warrior Princess — were exceptions; not the rule. (And I’ve never actually even seen Xena: Warrior Princess myself, so…)

One such example that comes to my own mind is that of Elizabeth Bennet, from Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice; which isn’t actually about pride and prejudice anywhere near as much as you might think. That, I read when I was 13? 14? 15? as part of my high school’s English Literature course, and Elizabeth Bennet was probably the closest thing I had to a positive female role model in literature at that time. Even then, Elizabeth, too, was posited as the exception, not the rule: even within the book’s own canon. You see, Elizabeth was exceptionally skilled, witty and intelligent; she was particularly sensible, reasonable (even if not open-minded…) and capable of critical thought. Unfortunately, the logical continuation of such a premise leads to the (incorrect) implication that other girls… usually… weren’t. So in the book, we see that Elizabeth wasn’t like other girls. Elizabeth was different.

So while I saw myself, to a certain extent, in Elizabeth, I also saw the same demonization of —  and the desire to distance oneself from — other women which I experienced first-hand, along with the desperation to distinguish oneself from the gender norms as if they were true; not as if they weren’t. The mistake Elizabeth and I both made was that, by thinking of ourselves as “special little snowflakes” and elevating our own status to that of the exception, not the rule, it came at the cost of failing to appreciate the basic humanity and the complexity of other women: women who may, in actuality, have had a lot more in common with us than we first gave them credit for.

Meanwhile, it seemed that (cis) men were allowed to be human, and experience (almost) the full range of thoughts and feelings and ways of life attached to that, in a way that women just weren’t. But, the issue of gender and representation in media is in fact another beast entirely. What is relevant to me throughout all of this is that this all culminated in the fact that I was someone who accepted men exactly the way they were, and could relate to men in a multitude of ways; but, before discovering feminism, despised anything even remotely “female” or “feminine” and discriminated against it, dismissing it or distancing myself from it for one reason or another, despite being female myself. What. The. Fuck.

Now I’m an adult and I know better, I know that the majority of my discomfort with “the feminine” stemmed primarily from good old-fashioned sexism, both internalised and otherwise. I know now that those beliefs — both the ones I had impressed upon me, and the ones I in turn applied to others — are inherently inaccurate and deeply flawed.

Problem solved, then: it’s not that my gender identity or expression was wrong. It’s not that I wasn’t woman enough, despite not feeling like I fit in all my life. It’s that sexism exists, and sexism is the cause for all of my dysphoria, hurray(!)

Or so I thought.

Sexism does still play a part, however, and that’s what has made coming to grips with my gender identity all the more difficult for me. Before I could discern what was really true about myself, first I had to disentangle what was really true about “what it means to be a female/ a woman/ feminine” from all the fallacies, generalisations and mistruths. When I came across feminism several years ago as a young tween and learnt about what it was, it opened a lot of doors for me in terms of coming to a greater understanding of myself and the world around me. Feminism has been a very positive influence in and on my life, and is responsible for a lot of personal growth. But also, in this particular instance, confused me even further. And that’s because, I started to think that… maybe the reason why I didn’t associate myself with the concept of “girlhood” or “womanhood” when I was younger was only because the concept I had in my head had been so completely wrong all along.

Before feminism, all that internalised sexism really did go a long way towards meaning I related more to men than I did to women; or at least, thought I did, because really, I never gave women much of a chance. I had to unlearn a lot of the preconceived notions I had grown up with, and learn everything all over again from the ground up.

The more I learned, the more I came to understand; but even so, the feeling of me being different or not quite fitting in anywhere didn’t go away. It’s just that I started to think that maybe it wasn’t me who was wrong: maybe it was the gender norms themselves that were wrong. It was the idea that “women are like X and men are like Y” — and that this is universally true for all women and all men — that was wrong.

What I had to learn was that women could be anything. And I mean; I already knew that about men — but women, too?! So women can think and act for themselves, and be incredibly intelligent and have their own thoughts and opinions and expertise on a subject, and have a vast array of interests?! It sounds stupid now, especially if you already know it to be true; but it was a much-needed life lesson for the twenty-year-old me. I was already fully accepting of a wide range of personalities and occupations for men, because I saw such a wide range of men and male characters/personalities in the media. It was already a given to me that men could be anything. And yes, there is that whole “…except be feminine” thing I mentioned before, and it is an issue; but I never personally bought into that. I had my fair share of male role models with a sensitive side or more typically feminine character traits as well. What was shocking to me is that I had to learn that the same thing I had always believed to be true of men was true of women, too.

What I had to learn, absurdly for the first time as an adult, was that not every woman had to like the same thing or have the same hobbies or interests. Not all women had to look or dress or behave the same way, or any way in particular at all. Not every woman had the same likes and interests as me: but — and here was the key difference — they could have done. There was, in reality, no logical reason why they couldn’t. I realised that girls can be tomboys and gamers and total nerds and still be girls.

If that was the case, then maybe my own experience and my own expression of self — despite being so far removed from that limited childhood notion of “girl” = “pretty, vain and vapid” — was nevertheless still valid within the wider, broader and more inclusive interpretation of “womanhood”. Maybe, even with my own complete and total lack of femininity and associating myself with more typically-masculine traits and behaviours, maybe I still was a woman: just that the category for womanhood was far broader than I had been led to believe. Perhaps I wasn’t a woman who had fit into those narrow definitions I had held as true in the past; but a woman nonetheless, who could still meet the definition of a woman if only I broadened those definitions up.

No two women are the same; and as such, it makes no sense to think that there is such thing as a universal expression of that womanhood. Every single woman is a unique individual, with her own skills and experiences and her own story to tell. Just because my own experience didn’t have much in common with the experiences of those around me, that didn’t necessarily mean that I wasn’t a woman, or couldn’t have been a woman, or that I was some abhorrent anomaly. I might have been three standard deviations away from the mean; but that doesn’t mean that I was not, nevertheless, a valid data point.

So I got confused.

The feminist within me wanted me to think of myself as, and identify as, a woman. After all, I had just truly come to understand and to appreciate that being a woman was okay. I had just come to understand that “femininity” existed on a wide spectrum, and even oddballs like me could be included within that. Besides, if I was a feminist and believed in women’s rights (as a targeted approach to believing in equal rights in general), then wasn’t I supposed to be proud to be a woman? Wasn’t I meant to further the cause and #represent? If being a woman was no inferior to being a man, and if women came in all shapes and shades and were allowed to claim and celebrate their own individuality as they saw fit, regardless of the norms, then why would I need to be anything else? Was “woman” not sufficient? How could I be a feminist and yet still feel a reluctance and general disdain towards identifying as a woman?

That was one side of the confusion.

The other side of it was: well, if I wasn’t a woman, what else would I be? As a child, I had felt I fit in more with boys; but I had no all-consuming desire to be a boy or to be thought of as one myself. What I wanted was simply to be myself. I didn’t think of myself as a boy, hanging out with other boys. I thought of myself as myself, hanging out with other boys. As an adult, I feel no more and no less an affinity for one gender than the other. There is no affinity for either; and likewise, no antipathy for either. I feel empathy for everyone; a general relation towards all individuals, regardless of their gender. I don’t come down on one side or the other.

It was around the same time that I started batting around the idea of being genderfluid; but ultimately decided against exploring it any further or even acknowledging it in any real way, because it “didn’t matter, really”. I don’t know why nothing came of that back then. I guess I didn’t have the courage to pursue it, nor was there the same motivation to do so as now. I thought private thoughts: I often joked/ seriously heartfully felt that I was a gay man trapped in a woman’s body; but I also felt like a gay woman trapped in a woman’s body. And, because I felt like both a gay man and a gay woman, I reasoned that, maybe, if I looked at it a certain way, that was almost like having elements of both a straight man and a straight woman instead. Either way, I was bisexual! (Which I am, by the way.)

I tried to use my own sexuality against me; I tried to twist it around, and pressured myself to act more like a “straight woman”, or how I thought a straight woman should be. And, no, there does not seem to be much logic to that train of thought: it was just me oppressing myself, trying to knock myself back down into a more “acceptable” way of being, even if that meant flattening myself in the process. It’s weird to see how, in this way, I was still equating “straight” with “normal”, even though I was bisexual myself. This is why queer representation is so important!!

That particular mental interpretation was lacking, for many reasons. And something I didn’t think about at the time was that either way, I wasn’t cis. Either way, there was that overlap of masculinity and femininity in me: I had elements of both, but neither were quite the way convention might have you expect. I felt like I approached femininity from a male perspective: I was “feminine”, but in the same way that (some, not all) gay men are “feminine” without being women. Likewise, I approached masculinity from a female perspective: I was “masculine”, but in the same way (some, not all) lesbians are “masculine” without being men. I had traits of both within me, but even then, they were crossed over; associating my inner “male self” with the “feminine” and my inner “female self” with the “masculine”.

So maybe now, as I write this, it’s more obvious why I didn’t fit in. Everyone else around me associated “male” with “macho” and “female” with “femme”. Such extreme interpretations were at direct odds with mine, and left no room for the many variants of gender identity and gender expression in between. It was, society said, one or the other. And I wasn’t either.

Unfortunately, that wasn’t something I came to understand until much more recently, or else I might have been able to place myself sooner.

But even those past times I did question my gender, those thoughts stayed only thoughts. And in any case, because I didn’t feel like I most definitely, most assuredly wanted to be/become a man, I thought that meant that I had to be a woman by default.

So, I thought, if I can’t commit to not being a woman, I guess I will just remain a “woman”. I guess I will just stand and be counted as one of the many women who do not fit the cookie-cutter mould dictated to us by gender norms, as many women don’t. I will be just one of the many examples of why the mould is rubbish: of why putting men and women in boxes does not work, because we do not all fit in neatly. I will hold my head up as a woman and say, “I do not follow the rules, but I am not the exception. It’s the rules themselves that are jank.”

And the feminist in me was appeased. After all, this way, simply by being myself I could prove patriarchy was wrong, or something to that effect. I was proof the norms were not catch-all, be-all and end-all. I could live with being a woman; just one that defies typical social norms. And those norms ought to be questioned and defied, anyway — so I comforted myself into thinking I was doing someone some good, maybe, somehow, by acknowledging the expectations for my gender but then subverting them; and that, in so doing, it might contribute towards shattering the preconceptions themselves.

I still didn’t feel comfortable in and of myself, but I shrugged it off. I was like, “okay, maybe this is fine.” In the wise, wise words of Lindsay Ellis: “This is fine. This is fine. This is fine, guys. This is fine.”

Of course, there were still times when I felt the incongruence more keenly than at others; my wedding and the times when I get compared to my sisters were particularly triggering experiences for me. But when it was just my husband and me, together and alone, there was no incongruence. There was no discomfort. We accepted each other, and loved each other, exactly the way we were. When it was just the two of us, we could just be the two of us. When we knew each other as well as we did, on that close and personal basis, then there was no need for labels.

And so, I had privately settled the dispute of my own gender. I had mentally filed it away under “agree not to agree; it doesn’t really matter, anyway. Putting a name to it doesn’t actively change who I am.” I had told myself that that was good enough; and I had kept on living my life, continuing with things just the way they were.

I had accepted womanhood, and resigned myself to it.

And that was that.

 Cue hbomberguy’s “Donkey Kong Nightmare Stream”.

 For those who missed it and the surrounding controversy involving TV writer Graham Linehan (#thanksgraham), hbomberguy (real name Harry Brewis) is a YouTuber who makes sensible — okay, maybe not “sensible” —, well-thought out videos addressing a variety of topics in modern media: usually video games, film or television series, but he also commentates on social trends and ideologies, as well.

Link to hbomberguy’s channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClt01z1wHHT7c5lKcU8pxRQ

My husband first knew him from his LetsPlays, and I became a fan too because of his game, film and television analyses. (Someone who overthinks and overanalyses works of fiction for all possible meanings and real-life takeaways?? Here’s a man after my own heart!)

So when he announced he was going to do a livestream of the classic Nintendo 64 game Donkey Kong 64 in order to raise money for the organisation Mermaids — a charity offering support groups, education, and crisis hotlines for transgender individuals and their families, as well as training for corporations to raise trans awareness — we were very interested in watching it.

Link to Mermaids’ website here: https://www.mermaidsuk.org.uk/

Unfortunately, my husband and I weren’t able to watch the stream as it went up live; but we did watch through the archived footage after the fact. And boy, did it hit hard. So many feels were had. So many feels.

My husband isn’t as informed on social justice issues as I am, so a lot of the overarching context that was old-hat to me was brand-new to him. But bless him, he is learning. I, on the other hand, thought going in that I was just going to be watching a stream of a dude we liked from YouTube playing a game, and raising some money for a good cause while he was at it. What I wasn’t expecting was that some of what I heard would hit me so hard in the heart.

To pick out just a few key moments from what was truly an epic event the whole way through, Susie Green, the CEO of Mermaids herself, appeared in the stream — and, let me just say, she is so effing awesome. I have an aunt called Susie Green, too, who is also one of the most kick-ass ladies I know, so awesomeness must come with the territory or something.

Anyway, among other things, Susie Green (the CEO, not my aunt) was saying (and I paraphrase) that one of the best ways to support trans people is just to let them know that they can be safe around you.

And that broke my fucking heart, because fuck. Because LGBTQ+ people could be safe around me: but if I myself wasn’t out and proud — if I myself wasn’t visible, or open about my own situation — how the fuck would they know that?

That idea (built upon by CaseyExplosion when she said just to be a friend to trans people you know) deeply resonated with me because of past personal conversations I have had with some members of the gaming group I’m a part of. In private messages, there were people I spoke to at length about gender and about sexuality. The thing is, I was never the one initiating these conversations. Due to my own experiences and empathy, whenever they brought up that they were struggling, I would listen and I would relate and I would tell them a bit about my own experiences, too. And something that came up in one of those conversations was how difficult it was to know who you can talk to about gender and sexuality stuff, because you don’t know how people will respond or who you can trust.

One of my dear friends talked to me about his struggle with sexuality and being gay, and I could understand and empathise and listen to him without judgment because, although it isn’t exactly the same, I am bi and have my own experiences with making the personal journey of coming to understand and accept your own sexual identity, and the struggles along the way. Another friend confided in me she was having confusing feelings for another woman, and she didn’t know what to do. Again, I shared with her that I could understand because I was bi, and we talked for a long time about how she was feeling. She said later I was one of the few people she could trust to talk to about this, because she knew I wouldn’t judge her.

I know people who struggle with their own experiences, and I also know people who are so far removed from those struggles in their own personal lives that they can come across a little insensitive and non-inclusive in their speech or actions; not due to malice, but sincere lack of experience, lack of information, and lack of awareness. One such friend of mine gets very confused over what is “sex” and what is “gender” and frequently conflates the two, and tends to be very dismissive of the social issues going on around him or the community’s attempts to address those issues. And again, this is not because he is an uncaring or unkind person, because he is usually exceptionally caring and kind. But in these particular instances, because he is young and uninformed and he is not part of those circles himself (nor knows others who are immediately affected), there is no reason why he would know more about it. There is no reason why he would understand.

Still, he recognises that he doesn’t understand, and he does try to learn more and keep himself open to learning more. Thus, I unofficially took it upon myself to educate him, to try and foster that understanding; and I talked to him a lot about my own gender identity, too, to kind of serve as my own example for him of what the gender spectrum was. I told him a lot about my own experiences, eventually summarising my situation as, “I don’t agree with the gender norms and I don’t fit into them myself, but I don’t really know what I what I would fit into. I’m not comfortable being a woman, but I don’t know what I would consider myself as instead, so… … …”

On each of these occasions, and many more besides, I was fortunate enough to have these incredibly deep and meaningful conversations with real people all over the world; some of whom were struggling to find understanding and acceptance at a time when they really didn’t know who they could turn to. I’m so incredibly lucky to have them in my life, and that I could learn from all of them and know their unwavering love and support. Our friendship has enriched my life, and I have been exposed to so much love and positivity and really grown as a person because of it. I’m so grateful and glad that they found me, and that I could likewise be a positive figure for them in their time of need.

But that’s just it: they found me. They took a leap of faith, not knowing the outcome, because they needed someone to talk to and they didn’t know for sure if I would be accepting or understanding: it was just that, based on our group conversations, I seemed like the kind of person who might be. They demonstrated an incredible amount of trust and faith in me, and I am extremely grateful for that. But it’s something that they should not have had to do. They should have known that they were safe from the get-go; I should have made them feel safe. I should have been more open, more inclusive; more forthcoming with my own experiences and beliefs, so that they knew they would find a kindred spirit in me, without needing to take that risk. And that is a failing on my part.

Remember how I said about how it even came up in one of those conversations that it’s difficult to know who you can talk to about gender and sexuality, because you don’t know how people will respond or who you can trust? Well, back then, my response to that was something along the lines of: “I would hate it if someone was struggling with this stuff and they felt like they couldn’t talk to me about it, just because they didn’t know that I was queer too.”

And yet…

To my shame and my dismay, although I did share my own experiences with others one-on-one once they had already started talking about it with me, I was never the first to say, “hey, I’m LGBTQ+, and if you’re LGBTQ+ too, that’s A-okay!” I was never the first to bring it up; and in so doing, I’m worried that I might have inadvertently created an atmosphere within our gaming group where LGBTQ+ members feel like they might not have been welcomed or represented.

Because our gaming group is online, everyone is totally anonymous, and no-one has to reveal more about themselves than they want to: including their appearance, their sexuality, or their gender. Still, I wonder if maybe there are some members, new or old, who are LGBTQ+ or who are internally struggling with their own self-identity, who look around and do not seem to see anyone like them. The atmosphere in our group, as is the case with society as a whole, is one where it’s assumed cis/hetero-normative by default. Topics of gender and sexuality rarely come up in the group chat; the more in-depth ones take place in private messaging instead, where they are invisible to the others.

So, by all appearances, straight and cis is the norm… even when it isn’t.

(Update: I am very happy to announce that, since I began writing this, this has now changed! Although it was my intention to come out to my gaming group after posting this, I ended up outing myself to the group early, which initiated exactly the kind of conversations about gender, sexuality, and inclusivity we should have been having all along. Our gaming group has now officially adopted “other” as a third gender option when we are asking members to introduce themselves, along with asking for preferred pronouns! I hope this change, minor though it may seem, goes a long way to helping every member feel more comfortable when disclosing their gender and their pronouns, should they choose to disclose at all.)

Getting back to the point, Susie Green saying that something you can do is to simply help trans people feel safe… That really struck a chord with me. If even people like me who do struggle with their gender and sexuality don’t say that they do, how would anybody else know? What chance do we have of finding each other? What choice is there but to feel different and alone, even if you actually aren’t?

And in my case especially, it is very, very easy to assume I am cis and straight, even though I’m not. I’m very obviously female (thanks, big boobs), and I’m married to my husband — so that makes us a straight couple, man and wife. Luckily, my sexuality was much easier (relatively) to come to terms with for me, and I have been proud to say that I am bi the few times it does come up, as I have known that about myself in that particular regard since I was 13. Even so, because it is so easy for everyone else to assume that, because I married a man, I therefore must be straight, it doesn’t come up that often.

(Even my husband sometimes forgets. We often joke around with each other about the things we say, deliberately taking innocuous things out of context and saying, “That’s racist!” or “That’s homophobic!” One time, we were joking about something — I can’t even remember what — and I teased him about something he had said by exclaiming in mock-indignation, “Hey! That’s homophobic!” His response? “Well, can you really be homophobic against someone who’s heterosexual?” And I’m just like “…”)

It’s easy to assume a woman who is married to a man is straight. It’s easy to assume everyone is cis by default, because most people are. But that shouldn’t be the default. It shouldn’t be the norm to think, “Well, I’m just going to assume everyone is cis unless they specifically say otherwise.” All that does is create the idea that everyone really is cis, because after all, not many people (dare to) say otherwise; which in turn stunts efforts to spread awareness as many people who might have identified as trans if they had had the resources to know more about it don’t have those resources in the first place. And sticking to that as the norm creates the expectation to conform. It creates the idea that people, even those who aren’t cis, need to be cis, or at least pretend to be; because that is the norm and such thinking inherently comes with pressure to adhere to it.

Assuming cis by default makes it that much harder for trans people to say anything to the contrary, because they don’t see very many people who have the same experiences they do and may not necessarily know if it is safe to talk about it. If everyone assumes that everyone else is cis unless they make a big fuss about it, trans people may very understandably not want to make a big fuss. Maybe they’ll feel, like I did, that the only thing they can do is quietly fade into the background; to try and hide, and try not to draw too much attention to themselves, or out themselves as anything other than “the norm”.

What we all need to do is be more welcoming and inclusive, right off the bat; not because we know for certain that there are LGBTQ+ individuals in our midst, but because we recognise the possibility that there could be. Because we, as a society, recognise that there are many different expressions of gender and sexuality, and all are legitimate and valid.

I don’t want to fade quietly into the background. I don’t want to not be seen, not even by other LGBTQ+ people — those who should be my fellows. That sounds incredibly egotistical, but what I really mean is that I don’t want other LGBTQ+ people to look out at the world and not see themselves reflected in it and think that they are alone; the way I did before the charity stream began.

You are not alone. We are here. We are queer. And we should be proud of it.

For me, Susie Green’s line about simply letting trans people know that they are safe around you resonated with me deeply. For me, it was a call to action. I couldn’t hide any longer, privately satisfied with my own answer that I guess I just won’t bother defining who I am. That approach didn’t sit right with me after that. I want to be known; not for my own sake, because I’m an asocial fuck who couldn’t care less what other people think of me. But hopefully to be recognised; for someone else to see themselves in me and think, “Hey, maybe that person could relate to me. Maybe they know a thing or two about gender dysphoria and would be willing to listen to me. Maybe that’s a person I could talk to.”

That was what motivated me to come out. But I’m writing about my decision to come out as if it was a very simple process. It wasn’t. I make it sound as if I was just getting on with my life; then I happened to see the charity stream; and that inspired me to come out, and so, I did. In reality, gender issues have been interwoven with my psyche my whole life. Videos and discussions on social justice, representation and important issues within marginalised communities are something I actively seek out. And even when I felt like I really wanted to come out — to show others that they would be safe with me, and that I would welcome them and refrain from judgment — there were still things getting in the way there, too. And it was difficult.

The first time I heard Susie Green’s story on the stream, about her and her daughter and how things could be made better for today’s youth, I cried a lot. I thought about it a lot. I watched nothing but Donkey Kong for days on end, and dreamt about it too: not necessarily about the game itself (but also about the game itself), but the people, and their voices and their thoughts and their stories. I was trying to make sense of it all. For over a whole month now — ever since my husband and I started watching the stream — my head has been filled with thoughts on gender. It has overtaken my entire life ever since, and that’s because I want to do more, be more — and even this first step of simply coming out of the closet myself has taken a lot of preparation. Far more than I thought it would, actually.

For over a month, I have lived, breathed and dreamed gender non-stop. And thinking non-stop about such emotionally heavy, difficult issues does take its toll; especially when you include the multiple conversations I had about coming out with multiple people, multiple times.

But those difficulties I experienced with coming out weren’t what was getting in the way of coming out. The real difficulty there was giving myself permission to be anything but “woman” in the first place.

Remember feminism? Remember that feeling I had that, if I were truly a feminist, I would be proud to be a woman — not actively wishing womanhood away. I had unlearnt and relearnt a great many things about what it truly meant to be a woman; and ultimately, what it meant was to be human, just the same way as men were human. But even so, I did not know where matters of discrimination based on sex ended, and matters of individuality began. When it came to how I felt about myself, how much of it was to do with my sex? How much of that, in turn, was due to sexism? How exactly did I feel about myself, on the individual level, if, hypothetically, sex and sexism had (and had had) no part to play in it?

I didn’t exactly know.

Fortunately, my subconscious had the answer, even when my conscious mind did not. Some of the dreams I had about the Donkey Kong stream were mindless, repetitive, and nonsensical; just as the Donkey Kong 64 game itself is mindless, repetitive, and nonsensical. I dreamt only of hbomberguy getting endlessly stuck on puzzles and wandering around in circles — not so different from the real stream, then(!) When he cleared one level, he was faced with another, and another, and another; the game stretching endlessly on, in the way that dreams do. But the final dream I had about the stream was far more emotionally significant.

In that dream, I dreamt not about the game, but the stream itself. I dreamt about the chat, and the Discord channel for other YouTubers and allies that had been set up there. In my dream, for whatever reason, I had been accepted to join the mic call. I was able to talk directly to Harry himself and the guest stars; I was able to be a part of the stream as it went out live over the internet. I was able to talk to them all first-hand. I wept at the opportunity, and I thanked them all so much for doing this; I wanted them to know how much it meant, for them to be so open and so brave and for standing up for what was right. I told them how wonderful it was to hear them talk about their own experiences and their identities, because I was still struggling with mine. I told them about my dysphoria and my disillusionment with being “a woman”; but how I lacked the certainty and the conviction to do anything about it. I also told them about the guilt I felt as a feminist; that pursuing an identity as anything other than “woman” felt like it would be very un-feminist of me.

At that, I could very clearly imagine Harry’s face and hear his voice as he gave a bewildered, “What?!” And, to be honest, it’s probably the same reaction I would have had as well, if someone else had told me the same thing. And that’s because, as Dream Harry went on to say, that’s not what feminism is about. Feminism is not about forcing yourself to be a certain way, or about trying to be what you think someone else wants you to be regardless of the personal cost to yourself — so much so that you end up disempowering yourself in the process. Feminism, rather, is about empowerment. It’s about giving a voice to the marginalised and, in the case of trans rights and gay rights, telling them that who they are is real, and that they are worthy, too.

The stream itself is proof of that. It’s an example of the community coming together to support trans rights and recognising that transgender identities are valid identities too. No-one should be forced into a box that does not fit them, but allowed to define themselves for themselves. That included me, too.

And it was weird when I imagined the YouTubers telling me this in the dream, because it made me think about how I would respond if it was somebody else telling me they were trans. And if someone else came to me saying they were trans, I would accept them straight away, exactly as they were. I’d encourage them to be true to themselves and do what feels right for them, whatever form that may take. My own personal beliefs are that trans women are real women; trans men are real men; non-binary people are real people (even though I didn’t know that non-binary identities even existed until recently); and that feminism is about raising everyone up and empowering them, and accepting and embracing everyone as they really are. I would never tell anyone else they were being un-feminist just for being themselves; indeed, I would fight for their right to be themselves. I would regard them with unconditional love, and respect what they were telling me about themselves; accepting it as true without question. I would never tell them that their identity was wrong.

But it took hbomberguy telling me the same thing in a dream for me to actually apply those principles to myself, too.

Until experiencing the stream and hearing the personal accounts of other trans people first-hand, I had still been tied down into thinking that being for women’s rights meant that I was locked into being a woman myself; or that I was doing some kind of disservice to the cause if I were to acknowledge myself as anything else. But, for everyone to be free to be themselves and to be accepted without hate and without prejudice is the cause.

That was a conclusion that maybe I should have been able to come to on my own; but either I couldn’t, or just didn’t. It took hearing all of the wonderful people participating in the Donkey Kong stream talking about their experiences for me to realise that, maybe I was okay the way I was, too.

Discovering feminism and learning that I could be exactly the way I was and still be a woman had been an important step for me. But it was not the end of my journey. I had to go a step beyond that. Knowing that I could identify as a woman, with no degradation to myself, was one thing; but learning that I could also not identify as a woman if I so chose was also an important milestone. There are more options in life than the arbitrary one we get assigned to us at birth; and for me, being so uncomfortable with mine, I saw no reason to try and force it upon myself any longer.

I hadn’t been at all sure at first where the line was between respecting women and recognising that I myself was not a woman. But now, with the help of feminism, the Nightmare Stream and the dream that it inspired, all the amazing people who participated, and even just the knowledge that an amazing charity like Mermaids even exists and is doing great work in the world… I think I’ve disentangled myself and disavowed myself from enough sexist notions that I know that it’s not that I don’t believe in being a woman. It’s that I do believe in being an individual. And as an individual, speaking on the personal level, not only do I not follow the stereotypes and/or the mandated patterns of behaviour prescribed for my sex; I don’t want to, either. There is still something to be said for how maybe those stereotypes ought not to exist in the first place, and maybe then I wouldn’t mind so much what my sex was or what my gender was. But they do, and so I do, and I know the path that has been laid out for me is not the one I want to walk down.

And I also know that, if I hadn’t’ve been motivated to come out now, even after hearing all those brave and courageous voices; even after hearing all those incredible stories of personal tragedy, triumph, and strength; even after experiencing something which, even though I was only an onlooker, nevertheless felt made me feel like there was a space for me after all, and made me feel like I was home… then I was probably never going to come out. Ever. If even that experience, which moved me so much, could not bring me to accept myself, then it would probably have never happened.

What Mermaids and the Donkey Kong Nightmare Stream gave me was something invaluable: they gave me permission to give myself permission to be who I was all along. It taught me that I was allowed to be who I was; and that who I was was okay. That’s why the work Mermaids does is so valuable: so that no child has to go through this all alone, navigating complex topics without the words to properly explain it. Mermaids gives love and support and important information and resources, so that each child can come to terms with themselves and accept themselves the way they are. And that’s much more preferable than being a grown-ass adult trying to get your shit together when you have no clue what you’re doing; scrambling to put the broken pieces back together when really, you were never broken at all.

 So, that leads me to writing this declaration:

 I know what it’s like to feel uncomfortable with the gender norms thrust upon you because of your sex.

I know what it’s like when your internal experiences of yourself are incongruent with said norms and other external expectations.

I know what it’s like to feel like you are wrong just for being yourself, and like an outsider in your own skin.

I know what it’s like when you are forced to acknowledge your assigned gender and a piece of you dies because that’s not who you are, and it starts to feel like you never can be who you really are as long as the world keeps reminding you otherwise.

I know what it’s like when even simple things, such as which box to tick on a form, can be a deeply divisive topic rife with internal conflict and strife. And I know and I loathe how, in my case, I have to opt for “woman” anyway, on account of my being female and there being no better option.

And I also know how I have struggled to come up with a satisfying answer about what a better option would have been, though I have found my answer now. (Although, going back to speaking more generally, simply including the simple and unassuming option “other” would be a start!)

 I don’t know what the fuck I am. But I know I’m not a cis woman.

Thankfully, there’s a catch-all term for that, and that’s genderqueer. That’s why I wanted to write this post: to come to terms with myself as my new identity, and re-introduce myself as genderqueer.

 And actually, the above line about not knowing what I am is no longer true, and that’s because I can get more specific than that now. Unlike when I first started writing this, I can now say that I do know what I am. Three weeks down the line, I can now say that recognising myself as genderqueer was the start of something beautiful. Through the process of writing this post — and having many, many private conversations and coming out many, many different times to many different people — I have been learning more and more about genderqueerness all the time; and, in doing so, myself.

Through those conversations and through watching and listening to the YouTube channels of other trans and non-binary individuals, I’m becoming more and more sure of myself. I’ve realised that I am very happy to identify as non-binary; and that non-binary suits me and my own situation very well. So now, it’s not that I don’t know what I am other than “not cis” and am relying on a catch-all umbrella term to cover me anyway; it’s that I know myself to be non-binary. It’s a far more accurate of a term for how I feel myself to be than “woman” ever was.

So, while I may at first have picked up the genderqueer umbrella due solely to its all-encompassing nature, only knowing at that time that I was “not cis”, it has nevertheless led to a journey of self-discovery where I’ve realised that, hey, I actually really fucking love this umbrella. And it’s a much more comfortable umbrella for me to fit under than the “woman” umbrella had been for me. It’s so much roomier under here!!

 So anyway, that’s what I wanted to say. I am bi; I am genderqueer/gender non-binary; and I am still questioning. I am B and T and Q; and LGBTQ+ folks, you are safe with me.

 fin

 P.S. Thank you, everyone who read it this far. Thank you for tolerating my self-indulgent trite as I waffle on about my own life when, all things considered, I have enjoyed an immense amount of “comfort” — or rather, the avoidance of misfortune — because of being able to pass. I have enjoyed a lot of love and support from the people closest to me and the ones I love the most, and that is why sitting down and definitively defining my gender — when really, it is something so personal to the individual — didn’t seem to make much difference to me as an individual before now. But it might just make all the difference to someone. I’m planning on expanding my thoughts on this (namely, gender identities vs individual identities) in a future piece of writing.

That said, if you are a LGBTQ+ person reading this (or someone who is unsure, or questioning) and you are not currently out, then despite my encouragement to make ourselves seen and our voices heard, please, please, please don’t come out if you feel it is not safe for you to do so. I am only coming out now myself because it is safe for me to do so; it was just inconvenient for me before, and that’s why I didn’t do it until now. Your safety and your well-being is the number one priority, so please, do not do anything you feel uncomfortable with or which you feel might put you at risk.

 P.P.S. To serve as something of a glossary: “Genderqueer” is just an umbrella term meaning “not exclusively masculine or feminine”; which falls within the umbrella term “transgender” meaning “anyone whose gender is different from that of their assigned sex”; which itself falls within the umbrella term “queer” meaning “anyone who is not exclusively heterosexual and cisgender”. There are several layers deep to this, and getting further down is just a matter of specificity.

For example, someone who is gender non-binary is genderqueer, who is trans, who is queer. Someone who is a “trans woman” or a “trans man” (as opposed to “trans” on its own) is someone who identifies as the binary identity woman or man, but were born male or female respectively. Thus, trans women and trans men obviously come under the umbrella of “trans”, but are not “genderqueer”, though they are “queer”. The Q in LGBTQ+ can thus be seen as a kind of tautology, because all LGBT individuals are by definition not heterosexual and/or cisgender, and therefore are all queer. But while all LGBT individuals are queer, not all Q+ individuals are LGBT, as they might identify as something else entirely not covered by its own letter. The Q can also stand for “questioning”. In this way, the Q catches all individuals who are unsure of where they fit in but who do not identify specifically as LGBT, and the + denotes the inclusion of all communities and identities not covered by their own letter (of which intersex, pansexual and aromantic/asexual, to name only a few, are examples).

The website OK2BME has a great page on this. Link here: https://ok2bme.ca/resources/kids-teens/what-does-lgbtq-mean/

 P.P.P.S. Interested in supporting trans rights yourself? To once again paraphrase Susie Green, Mermaids CEO, a good way to support trans rights is to support trans people themselves. Look up your local trans charities, donate or volunteer if you can, call out casual transphobia when you see it, and just generally be a friend. A number of trans individuals have crowdfunding campaigns active to try and help them cover the cost of transitioning, so that is an option as well.

YouTuber and Twitter user Mama Math (link here: https://twitter.com/hellomamamath) made a spreadsheet with links to some of the guests on the Donkey Kong Nightmare Stream who consented to be listed with the details of their websites or where to follow them. The spreadsheet also includes whether or not that person is trans. If you are interested in learning more about trans rights and what it means to be trans, simply listening to the stories of those who are trans and supporting the content they make is a great place to start. Link to the spreadsheet here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sdavyrGPnsrNdTxWBILoulCKxvIvzMkMaJoXPjNQcOI/edit#gid=0

 If you are interested in watching the Donkey Kong Nightmare Steam yourself, here are the links to the parts:

Part 1: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/365966431

Part 2: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/366901309

Part 3: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/367450055

Part 4: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/369226467

 P.P.P.P.S. (Okay, this is getting ridiculous now. This is the last post script, I swear!) In case you’re wondering, as I haven’t actually addressed it at all above, my preferred pronouns are “they/them”, as I consider “they/them” the most neutral and free of assumption. While I am not agender, I nevertheless prefer gender-neutral nouns and pronouns. I consider my own gender to be more fluid, and sometimes, “she/her” or “he/him” will feel right to me; but sometimes, they won’t. For example, if someone refers to me as “he/him” online, I won’t feel compelled to correct them and actually enjoy being referred to as such. I do not have the same euphoric reaction to “she/her”, though I understand that many people will fall into old habits and believe that it is the more “correct” term to use, even though actually it’s my least favoured out of the three. My point is that, sometimes, using “she/her” or “he/him” to refer to me may be acceptable; but using “they/them” is preferable and will always be applicable, so that is what I ask for you to use.

However, I do still have a feminine side to me, and as such, I will still relate with some feminine terminologies; but I am not “a woman”, nor do I relate exclusively to women. In this specific instance, I do ask for you to avoid calling me “a woman” and refer to me as “a person” instead.

I’m considered as something of the “mum” within the online gaming group, with others teasingly and lovingly calling me “mother”, and I love that. A very important person to me calls me “sis” or “sissy”, short for “sister”, and I wouldn’t want to change that, either. To my husband, I am still his “wife”. (I recently discovered I have a major aversion to “princess”, though, so that one’s definitely out…)

I am not truly gender-neutral, which is why I do not identify as agender; but rather, I encompass both masculine and feminine traits, and therefore I will adopt both feminine and masculine terms where they seem applicable. Some days I’ll feel more in touch with my feminine side, and some days I’ll feel more in touch with my masculine side. That doesn’t necessarily mean I want to reject all gendered terms completely, and certainly not all of the time. But I do want to introduce some gender-neutral ones into the mix, so that gender-neutrality is recognised as an option. Again, I am stating a preference, with my preference being for the gender-neutral.

As for my preferred name… well, I go by my online handle “Evani” within most game-related things, and I’m perfectly happy with that. In my mind, I know that the name “Evani” is short for “Evan-Evani”: an original character of mine who has both male and female selves (better known as the Animus and the Anima, à la Jungian psychology). Those selves are named Evan and Evani respectively, and thus they are collectively referred to as both names, even when they present as one whole and not as the two halves. I’m comfortable with my online name and don’t feel the need to change things there.

My “real” name, however… After a lot of thinking about it and batting around about a million different names and variations, I finally settled on one I was happy with: “Ievan”. (Pronounced just the same as “Evan”.)

I had been looking at all kinds of different names; starting with those which were variations on my birth name, to names which looked similar or shared the same letters, to ones which had the same semantic meaning. I couldn’t find any I liked, until a friend asked me what it was that spoke to my soul. At that point, I realised I had been trying to find a name “in keeping” with my birth name, “Stacey”; not for myself but to make the perceived adjustment easier on others around me.

But to be honest, I had never, ever liked the name “Stacey”; and changing how I spelled it to “Stacie” may have made it more tolerable, but even then, I still did not like it. I had been trying to find a new name I liked, based on an old one I didn’t. No wonder I had been having such difficulty!

Recognising that, it made no sense to base my new name for my new identity on my old one. The point of coming out as non-binary was to feel more comfortable with myself and my own identity; and adhering to my past name ran counter to that.

So, with my friend to bounce ideas off of, I took the search away from “Stacey” — the name I had never liked — and back to “Evani” — the name I had already adopted for myself some years prior and had used for myself ever since, albeit only in online settings.

I choose “Ievan” instead of “Evan”, which is perhaps the more obvious choice, because it’s an anagram of “Evani”. It also meant that, by slightly changing my online name from “Evani” to “Ievani”, I could create an amalgamation of both names. “Ievani” included both the names “Ievan” and “Evani” within it, symbolising the dual nature of the masculine and the feminine and the great deal of overlap between the two; just as I experience an overlap and a merging of the masculine and the feminine within myself. I appreciated the symbolism, as well as the fact that “Ievani” captured the same meaning to it as “Evan-Evani” did; only much more elegantly, representing “Ievan-Evani” but with much fewer letters. Having taken to “Ievani” as I did, my choice of name for “Ievan”, as opposed to “Evan”, became an easy one to make.

Plus, by spelling the name as “Ievan” with the extra “i” and not as “Evan” (even though they are both pronounced the same) meant I could have the best of both worlds: I could have a name which sounded masculine, but looked feminine. It was a blend of both, and gave me a lot of versatility and adaptability to play around with as well, owing to the fact that you can draw a lot of different nicknames and short-forms out of it. Some examples: Ieva, Eva, Ev, Evi, Evie, Eve, Iev, Ieve…Now I can basically be called whatever I feel like being called, and friends and those around me can pick out their own personally-preferred nickname for me! It grants a lot of freedom and customisation, which I love. Now, when people call me by my name, I smile instead of cringe.

(As a side-note: yes, this does make me “Ievan Evans”, and you are right, it is repetitive! But I love the peculiarity. It’s been a running gag of mine to have characters in my stories whose surname is a repeat of their first name; the first one being “Evan Evans” — the aforementioned Animus — and another one called “Luca Lucas”, though the latter is technically an assumed identity deliberately made to parallel “Evan Evans”. Now I can be a part of the joke myself, too!)

Realistically speaking, I don’t expect everyone to switch over to “Ievan” straight away. Not everyone is going to read this post, and I’m not going to choose to tell everyone who doesn’t. It’s fairly common within the queer community to not come out to everyone, and not all at once. So I accept that, to certain people, I will still be “Stacie”. And that is fine. As long as I am happy with my own identity and the way I live my own life, I can make my peace with it if I will still be “Stacie” to them.

So, if you still want to call me “Stacie”, that’s fine. I won’t fight you over it. I just might not be fine with it; but even then, it’s fine.

In regards to my writing and my self-published works: my past works were published under the name “Stacie Evans” and, in that particular regard, I think I will keep it that way going forward as well. “Stacie Evans” can be my pseudonym as an author! (Which is ironic, because usually it’s the pen name that’s supposed to be the fictitious one…) While I could legally change my name, it would be a hassle; and right now, I’m happy just adopting it for myself and testing it out.

In short, I’ll be using: Ievan for real life (including Facebook, which is more personal); Evani for games; Ievani for other social media (which I consider a mix of both); and Stacie Evans for works of poetry or fiction, as well as with those who are uncomfortable calling me Ievan.

Feeling confused? Don’t worry. You can always ask to make sure! (Which is a good idea in general, about anything; and you can apply it with pronouns, too! I personally love it when people ask my pronouns, as it confers a sense of understanding, compassion and respect.) All questions are welcome, because I believe there is no such thing as a stupid question. All questions are a chance to learn more. (But please, keep it considerate.)

 Useful resources:

(not an exhaustive list; these are the things I have come across and have found helpful myself, so I am sharing them here too)

 Mermaids, a UK-based charity providing support for transgender children/ young adults and their families, as well as crisis hotlines, online forums and interventions: https://www.mermaidsuk.org.uk/

 The January Donkey Kong Nightmare Stream to raise money for Memaids:

Part 1: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/365966431

Part 2: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/366901309

Part 3: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/367450055

Part 4: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/369226467

 Spreadsheet of the participants in the Donkey Kong Nightmare Steam, with links to their Twitter and YouTube accounts: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sdavyrGPnsrNdTxWBILoulCKxvIvzMkMaJoXPjNQcOI/edit#gid=0

 Let’s Queer Things Up!, a blog about all things queer: https://letsqueerthingsup.com/

 More from LQTU! content creator: https://samdylanfinch.contently.com/

 Specific article linked to on the above about what it means to be genderqueer: https://www.healthline.com/health/transgender/genderqueer

 Specific article linked to on the above about what it means to be gender non-binary: https://www.healthline.com/health/transgender/nonbinary

 Genderqueer Me, a website with featured voices from transgender individuals and their families, as well as online talks about trans issues and information regarding transition: https://genderqueer.me/

 OK2BME, supportive services for the LGBTQ+ community: https://ok2bme.ca/

 Private YouTube playlist I made of videos I have watched, discussing transgender and non-binary experiences and identities, which are of personal relevance to me in some way or which discuss things which are particularly useful or important when it comes to developing an understanding of the transgender spectrum (also not an exhaustive list; I plan to keep adding videos as I find them): https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTv7NUhc6gDOr1AW13CmlZujWAEo2Msyh