Posted on

A Queer Sunday

Reading John Waters’ article about Tennesee Williams – and in The New York Times Book Review, no less! – was a treat. I love them both, for being queer, for their art, for their humor and sarcasm and truth.

These are my people, and always have been.

But it made me think about the books I had to “steal” as a kid, or read secretly. For me, it was Joe Orton’s biography, Prick Up Your Ears, first and foremost. I heard about him reading interviews with Adam Ant, who simultaneously introduced me to Marc Bolan, the erotic art of Allen Jones, Derek Jarman, and Tom of Finland. Around the same time I discovered Soft Cell and Marc Almond, who in turn turned my head toward the likes of Jacques Brel and Jean Genet. (And I wonder why I turned out the way I am, reading about rough trade and anonymous bathroom sex when I was 15.)

They were all great “bad” influences, their books and art I hid from my mother. They told me there was another world out there, just as Tennesee Williams told John Waters there was.

So who were yours?

Posted on

Stephen King, Barbarian

From yesterday’s New York Times Book Review:

At the National Book Foundation ceremony, the bard of Bangor made sure his audience knew he stood outside the tribe: “The only person who understands how much this award means to me is my wife, Tabitha,” he said in his acceptance speech. “She also understands why I was in those early days so often bitterly angry at writers who were considered ‘literary.’ I knew I didn’t have quite enough talent or polish to be one of them, so there was an element of jealousy, but I was also infuriated by how these writers always seemed to have the inside track in my view at that time. Even a note in the acknowledgments page of a novel thanking this or that foundation for its generous assistance was enough to set me off.”

This year, King was granted the privilege of a Paris Review interview. On the ticklish subject of his literary worth, he said, “I’m shy talking about this, because I’m afraid people will laugh and say, Look at that barbarian trying to pretend he belongs in the palace.”

How I wish I could say I can’t relate at all. But I can. Betty sent me the link precisely because she listens to me grind my teeth about stuff like this. It’s nice to know that despite having made the kind of money he has from his writing that this kind of literary snobbery still gets to him. In some ways, it makes me feel better, and in another, worse.

Posted on

& Still More…

“Thoughtful, sharp, and provocative, this book delves into one of the most terrifying and universal elements of a relationship: change. Helen Boyd’s courage and insight are remarkable, and we have much to learn from her about redefining gender roles, marriage, and commitment in this century.”
—Tristan Taormino, author and Village Voice columnist

It’s an embarassment of riches, at this point.

Posted on

More Good Words for She’s Not the Man I Married

“The (im)perfect modern love story, She’s Not the Man I Married tackles the big questions—the meanings of gender, why we love the people we love, how we love the people we love—honestly, articulately, and with tremendous eloquence. The brave and personal nature of Helen’s story offers deep insights into true love, romance, commitment, and how to handle it when the other woman is your husband.”—Josey Vogels, sex columnist and author of Bedside Manners: Sex Etiquette Made Easy

Posted on

What It Is

Two threads from a week or so ago got me thinking about what you might call The Big Picture. First, there was one about whether or not the mHB message boards have become a little cheerleader-y when it comes to people transitioning, and the other was Donna’s sad report of an altercation with her son.

I didn’t want to write this at the time, but wanted to give Donna – & the others reading – some time to feel a little better.

But in one particular post, our resident poster buddha pointed out that so many threads are more about the slippery slope than avoiding it, per se. In a few private emails, others pointed out the same thing, & one person in particular said she found the way the boards have changed quite in keeping with what I wrote in My Husband Betty, in (of course) Chapter 5, the Slippery Slope? chapter. When I think about the people who first came to the boards, it doesn’t take long to name quite a lot who used to identify as crossdressers who have recently transitioned, are transitioning or who are about to transition.

Most of those people have also seen their relationships fail, which is where Donna’s thread about her son comes in, because I found myself wanting to say something along the lines of this is exactly what I’m always going on about. We hate it. We don’t know why it’s hard, nearly impossible, to accept a gender change in our loved ones, but we do. And in talking about it with Betty I realized that as much as transness is impossible to understand for someone who isn’t (me included), I think it’s equally impossible for a trans person to understand why it’s so hard to accept a change of gender in someone they love, whether that person is a parent, friend, sibling, child, or partner. We want you to be happy if you change gender, but I think plenty of us who love you never quite are, or maybe, just maybe, it takes much longer for us not to be angry about it, still.

& I don’t know why. I don’t have any huge conclusions, here, except to say that I find myself feeling more precariously lucky when I look at the growing list of transitioned former crossdressers who are no longer with the women they were married to when they first crossed my path.

Sometimes, honestly, I don’t want to do the math. I don’t want to know what kind of statistic I’m up against. I worry that the only reason Betty and I have managed so far is because she hasn’t transitioned, and I still fear she will, and I fear, even more, that a year and a half after she does, or ten years after she does, I will say the same kinds of things Donna’s son said in a fit of anger.

For good reason, that worries me sometimes, sometimes way more than I want it to.

Posted on

Getting Ready

I’m somewhat anxiously but also excitedly getting ready to get on a train Wednesday in order to speak at a couple of colleges. Packing, getting books/work ready, all of that. & It’s a nutty process for someone who is somewhat of a homebody, and I can’t even begin to think about how much I’ll miss the cats.

& Yes, Betty too – of course I’m going to miss Betty – the difference is that I can tell Betty where I’m going and when I’ll be back (& that she’ll be flying to meet me in about five days) and the kittoi can’t know that.

So, back to list-making so I don’t forget anything when I start packing.

Posted on

Regarding Transgender Tapestry #110

I received my copy of Transgender Tapestry #110 the other day, and so turned immediately to the Book Review section, as I’d been asked to write a review of Richard/Alice Novic’s Alice in Genderland quite a while back.

I had also been told, by Richard Novic and by then-editor Dallas Denny, that Richard Novic didn’t like my review, and had requested TT run a more favorable review instead. Ms. Denny opted to run both reviews, side by side, and told me as much. I was okay with her decision, even though I found Novic’s request somewhat odd, as I wrote what was at worst a mixed review, but by no means a bad one. (I even used the phrase, “highly recommended” which is generally not found in a bad review.)

That was as much as I knew until I received my copy in the mail the other day. It was quite a surprise to see, in addition to my review and the requested 2nd review, a note by Richard Novic effectively rebutting my own review and plainly stating “I was hoping that as a reviewer, she might rise above the way my book affected her personally. . .” In addition, she mentioned how “surprised” she was that TT had chosen me to review her “life story.”

For the record, then, a few corrections.

(1) Richard Novic specifically requested, by email, that I review Alice in Genderland for TT. Suffice it to say the new editor of TT, Denise LeClair, and the old editor of TT, Dallas Denny, both have a copy of said email.

(2) The review I did submit had been re-written several times after I let Richard Novic read it and before I sent it to TT. She was not happy with my original draft(s), so I softened a good deal of my criticism of it.

(3) I sent Richard Novic my review of her book beforehand only as a personal favor, and in fact re-wrote the piece some only because we had become somewhat friendly over time. He had written to me on previous occasions, having read my book, to ask advice about publishing houses & the like, and I gave her what information I could about the advantage of publishing with a house as opposed to independently. I do not and did not harbor any personal animosity toward Richard Novic, but I have learned my lesson: I will not let someone read a review I’ve written before submitting it for publication again.

(4) Dallas Denny was not responsible for the inclusion of Alice Novic’s “note” about my review, having resigned her post as editor between the time she submitted the two reviews and the actual publication of TT #110. She has said she found the publication of such a rebuttal in TT an embarrassment both to Richard Novic and to TT.

(5) Generally speaking, authors do not rebut their reviews. It’s considered bad form. They may occasionally factually correct a reviewer, if anything.

(6) The announcement in the same issue of TT that Richard Novic is to be one of TT’s regular columnists makes the publication of that note even more unprofessional and smacks of favoritism.

Finally, I want to state that I stand by my review. The idea that my “personal feelings” overwhelmed my professional considerations is laughable; after all, half of what I do professionally is advocate for partners! More than anything, however, I wanted people – crossdressers especially – to understand how rare and highly individual Dr. Novic’s situation is, so that they would not make the tragic mistake of expecting their own wives to accept their having boyfriends on the side. As it is, so many wives are already stretched to the limit in terms of accepting and honoring their husbands’ crossdressing. I will also reiterate that I found Richard Novic’s honesty about his own bisexualism and his journey toward self-acceptance laudable and useful.

If people would like to read more reviews of the book – including some of my more personal feelings about it – do check the thread on our message boards where some of our regular posters chimed in as to their own feelings about the book, too.

Posted on

Why I Stopped Working for Straight Guys

A while back I said I’d tell the story of how I decided not to work for straight guys anymore as a bookkeeper, & now I’m finally getting around to it.
A couple of years ago when I started doing freelance bookkeeping, I put an ad up on Craigs List, like you do, & so I got a bunch of emails from people who needed my help. Some offered to trade me for clothes or salon treatments or massages (tempting): you never know, with Craig’s List. But one guy I met with had started a small business doing interior remodeling after having worked on Wall St. a while. During the first phonecall I make clear upfront that I don’t work a.m. hours (because I write until 5am, though frankly most people don’t ask why), and we talk about what he needs & how far behind he is, etc. It seems like a do-able job so we meet for lunch and that goes well, too. He wants to hire me, but forgot his organizer, he’ll call. When he calls, he asks me to come in at 10am. I tell him again I don’t work in the am. He says okay, and we agree on a day & time. He calls me to cancel a day before that meeting, & we reschedule when he calls to cancel. He asks if I can come in at 10am. I explain again I don’t work morning hours, and ask him outright if he’s going to want to work on the books regularly in the morning. He says no, and we reschedule. So I go to our first meeting, look at his QB (QuickBooks, for the uninitiated) and then we discuss a regular time to come in.
& Yes, you guessed the end of the story: he suggested 10am.What a huge waste of my time.
That, of course, was after nearly 10 years working for Mr. Famous Author Man, who was f***ing his publicist and actually thought I didn’t know. He also decided at some point that I should work full-time for him without a 401k and health insurance (when the reason I worked for him freelance was so I could set my own hours and take time off to travel, which he was well aware of). But I can’t go into the rest of that story too deeply or my head will implode.
Then there was the guy who decided since the company wasn’t making any money the first person he’d get rid of was the admin/bookkeeper. When I first got that job, they were two years behind in billing clients – two years – which is a pretty solid explanation for why there was no money coming in, eh? So I got him up to date, and then I get laid off. I heard from clients of his that as soon as I was gone they’d stopped billing clients regularly again. Smart move there.
So, that’s why. Too many arrogant lunkheads. I thought before I hurt someone I’d try to make a point of specializing in minority clients, instead – specifically women and LGBT folks – and see if that was any better. And you know what? It has been. Way better. Like millions of times better. I don’t rule out straight guys; but I will ask now if they’re comfortable listening to/taking advice from a woman, if they’ve ever had a female boss, etc. Why? Because as a bookkeeper you have to tell people what to do sometimes, and there’s no point in being someone’s bookkeeper if they don’t listen to you. Now when I don’t think it will be a good fit, I often mention upfront that I don’t work morning hours because I write until the wee hours, which always gets them to ask the question: what do you write about? (or, anything I might have read? etc.) Replying, “a book about transvestites” is pretty much a shoo-in that the rest of the conversation will be awkward and they won’t want to hire me, and I can walk away without having to say, “I don’t think you’re ready for a female bookkeeper, so go pay your male accountant way too much to tell you the same things I would have.”

Posted on

Transgender/Transsexual

I was having a private conversation with someone who identifies as transsexual and not as transgender recently, when the thought occurred to me: is that possible? I understand the need to identify as transsexual (the book I’m currently reading, Max Wolf Valerio’s The Testosterone Files, has made that argument quite well) but I really wonder if it’s possible.
I mean can your gender actually stay the same when you change sex? I don’t think so. I think probably a lot of butch lesbians come pretty close when they transition, because their gender is essentially already male. (Not all of them, mind you, but some.)
But gender is so variable. Unless you’re talking about a two-gender system, where the only choices are masculine and feminine, then perhaps a very gender non-conforming person who is trans but pre transition might be gendered the same way before as after transtion. But I can’t imagine that being true for any MTF I’ve met, to be honest; the taboos against males expressing femininity are so drastic, that it’d take one seriously (brave, irreverent) feminine male-bodied person to truly inhabit a feminine gender while living as male.
So my feeling is that being transsexual and transitioning usually implies also being transgender.