Trigger Warning for Transphobia

This article made me gasp in horror, fear, and revulsion. (Synopsis, a Texas firefighter died on the job, his parents are suing to stop his widow from getting any benefits because she is trans).


Some things that made me rather sick:
The article/picture captions seem to LOVE qualifying "wife" with "born a man" and "transgendered."
The bigotry of the lawyer for the mother saying that his wife is "attempting to make a huge money grab" when to any person with any sense of fairness in this world would acknowledge that the parents are the ones making a money grab, since you know, they SUED to stop their daughter-in-law from receiving any benefits.
Texas law.
and of course the comments. Don't read the comments.

I really don't know what to say about this, it's just so heartbreaking that at this most vulnerable time for her his parents are trying to cut her off from the help she could get. She's having to spend her time in court being told that she wasn't his wife for the past years (and obviously being told she isn't a woman), all to make his parents richer. Shame. Shame on them. It's days like this that make me despair for myself and the world.

Words Matter, So Use Them Correctly

I've got a pet peeve folks.

Well, to be honest I've probably got a lot of them, but this one in particular is making me cranky today. I'm sure other people have written extensively about it (though cursory googling does not produce any results).

It's this: Don't use "GLBT" or "LGBT" (which are the two most common iterations of that particular acronym) if you don't actually mean Gay. Lesbian. Bisexual. and Transgender. Each. Specifically.

I'm frankly pretty sick of the label being used when really it should be "white cis gay men, and maybe a few lesbians."

Things that are not *actually* GLBT friendly: the Human Rights Campaign (when the only trans person on your board quits in protest of how thoroughly you fuck over the trans community, you are NOT an organization focusing on the GLBT community, you are, at best focusing on the GLB community), the Advocate (when only 1 of the past 21 covers you put out have a picture of a lesbian on them, and none have pictures of anyone identified as trans, or even bisexual... this is not a magazine for anyone other than the G in GLBT, let's not delude ourselves here), "LGBT panels" (that are invariously described as being about writing "gay" characters, that focus on slutty evil bisexual male characters, and that have no mention of lesbians or, wait!, this seems to be a theme!, trans people... OK, sure sounds REALLY LGBT friendly, uh huh, do you happen to have any bridges?, I'm especially interested in purchasing the Brooklyn one I've heard it's pretty), you get the idea.

Apparently some time a while ago, after Gay orgs got called out for being exclusionary, they decided that calling themselves GLBT (or LGBT) would do to fix that particular problem. And it probably helped for about 5 minutes. Trans and Bisexual folks would walk in the door and be struck by the fact that it had an acronym that included them. Yay!

These days, I think it does a whole hell of a lot more harm than good, because like Gender Bending fiction that doesn't actually depict our lives, it gives the veneer of respect and inclusion. It tells allies (or potential allies) who don't yet know about the issues going on, that "this" (whatever "this" it is, which is almost invariably a more powerful organization, and thus less likely to actually be engaged with the more marginalized of our populations) is what is trans-friendly, or bisexual inclusive looks like. So that people working on a project about the trans community use statistics from an organization that had their only trans board member quit in protest of their transphobia.

So please. If you are a safe space for gay men, fine, call yourself that. If you are a safe space for gays and lesbians, say that. But if you tack on an extra letter, MEAN IT. Don't insult us by using our letters to pad your inclusive cred.

Compare and Contrast: A Study in Two Blogs

Oh blog reading folkz, I'm rather pissed right now. The other night I noticed that a queer/gay blog I usually like had posted yet another post about Tiwonge Chimbalanga that said she was a man.
So, being pissed at the time, I wrote a comment on slap upside the head saying as much (and explaining that it was angering to have her misgendered and having the struggle of trans* people coopted and erased by queer/gay people).
The comment was in moderation (it was technically in a "guestbook" area since the blog doesn't have commenting enabled), so I went to bed.
I check my email last night and get:

Hi there!

Aw, give me the benefit of the doubt before you chew into me, alright? :)

I do trans* stories whenever I see them, and certainly would have
mentioned that Tiwonge isn't a man if I had known. As it stands, I've read
multiple mainstream news stories about the couple, but your angry letter is
the first I've heard of this, so I think it's unfair to say that I'm
"misgendering" or "falling into the erasure" of anyone. I haven't met the
two, after all. :)

I'll look a lot more into this tonight; having the mainstream media
misidentify Steven and Tiwonge's relationship is a story in itself!

So I wrote back in INCREDIBLY even tones. I didn't call him on the tone argument, or the "but be nice to the 'allies' or else we can't possibly be allies,"-ing or the fact that the story isn't that the "mainstream" media is reporting badly, but that ALL MEDIA (other than explicitly trans* friendly media, and frankly including lots of "GLB, supposedly T" media) has been doing this, OR the fact that maybe he needs to learn to read trans* friendly blogs to learn true information about trans* people (dude, if you want to be an ally, GO TO WHERE THE OPPRESSED ARE).
Nope, I recommended a blog post that would clear up his misconceptions and then wrote:

It's great that you're interested in doing perhaps a post about misgendering by the mainstream media (and just about all the activist orgs that publicized this in the first place).

However, you did misgender Tiwonge (since you said she was a man, and she isn't), and you did contribute to the erasure of trans* identities/people (since she's a trans woman and you implied she was a cis man), even if you didn't intend to. It sucks (I'm sure you're not someone who likes to think you're contributing to oppression), but it happened, and saying it was unfair of me to point it out doesn't make it better, and ignores that truth.

I will say that my tone last night was angry. It was angry because yours is one of the few explicitly queer/gay blogs I read with any regularity, (since I generally enjoy it, and generally don't enjoy many others for their explicit and implicit transphobia), and it was a big frustration for me to realize after seeing this "gay marriage" narrative played up in Every Single media report on the topic of Tiwonge that you were doing it too, and that all the gay media seemed to also be doing it. So I suppose you could see it as unfair that *your* particular blog became the "straw that broke the camel's back" but I see it as far more unfair that even on a blog that I normally feel comfortable on, I (and presumably any other trans* person who knew about the truth of the story) was made to feel unwelcome.

In other words: you stepped on my metaphorical foot (and quite a few others), it's great that you didn't mean to, but that doesn't make it stop hurting.

Thanks for listening,
The Deviant E

This morning I awake to this piece of flaming pile of nonpology crap:

Hey there,

Factual errors happen now and then on the site; particularly ones like this which are present in multiple, reputable news sources.

Blogging is not terrifically rewarding for the amount of work involved, especially when it involves original full-colour illustrations, paid hosting, etc. I admit there was an error, but the accusitory language is unfair.

I do welcome all factual corrections, and unfortunately there will be opportunities for more, but please be friendly about them and give me the benefit of the doubt. (At least until I prove otherwise. ;)

AND I go to check the website and find that
A) my initial comment was not approved from moderation, so no one knows that he was called out on this
B) he has posted another post about Tiwonge, this time burying her gender till the end to make a dramatic reveal about "mainstream media"
C) he has not posted an apology or acknowledged that this was information he could have had weeks ago, had he *looked*
D) he has said that "word has gotten out" that Tiwonge identifies as a woman, without mentioning where possibly such word could have come from (it's like magic "word" that appears on it's own)!

Contrast that my friends with something from Shakesville:
On a blog post about a study finding that children raised by lesbian couples are more well adjusted then their peers raised by straight couples, someone wrote something talking about how fundies would hate it because there needs to be "penis owning person" in the house.

I wrote a comment reminding people that penises and xy chromosomes do not a man make (and lack of penises and xx chromosomes do not a woman make). It was published.
The response?

TheDeviantE:Thanks,for the privilege check,comment fixed now.-;-@ a rose to say sorry.

And what do you know, but the comment has been changed (to indicate cis-male manly man man-ness as opposed to "penis having"ness) but the person very explicitly put in there a tag saying "Edited for gender-essentialist language"

There was no foot stamping, no "but we're on the same side, [smiley that feels really insincere because I'm rejecting your points]". The comment *went through*, it was fixed! and in a way that acknowledged the fuck up in the first place.

It's almost like... on this *other* blog, people are actually allies and respond accordingly when called out.

So, what to do folks?
I've already posted in public some of the private correspondence (not that the email address of his is secret or anything), which some might deem a breach of ettiqutte. I do so because slap upside the head won't acknowledge his own culpability in his blog either by posting my original comment or by acknowleding it in a post of his (oh, in my comment I asked him to please post a *retraction*, you know, something that acknowledges information was wrong by saying "we done screwed up"?). So I really feel like any ettiquette breach is a tiny little piss beside his ocean of othering.
So question time: Do I continue trying to dialogue being OH SO FUCKING REASONABLE? Do I remain silent and stop reading his blog, since I doubt he'll acknowledge my reasons if I give them? Do I tell him off in an email, getting angry again and telling him I'll not be reading his blog (and a whole other set of things), in the hopes of giving him a parting shot of information and a reminder that it isn't all just peachy? Do I juggle elephants?

You tell me.

Tiwonge Chimbalanga Is A Woman

Ok folks, I'm a little tired, a little behind on schoolwork (ok, a lot behind on school work), needing to have laid my head down on the pillow hours ago, and more than a lot pissed.

Because: Tiwonge Chimbalanga is a woman and she has been for years.
Say it with me folks! Tiwonge Chimbalanga, the (sole) female partner in a couple who were recently convicted of "homosexuality" in Malawi is a woman. Her nickname is "Aunt Tiwo." Notice the "aunt" in "Aunt Tiwo?" Tiwonge Chimbalanga is a woman.

FUCK. I mean, how many times do I need to repeat this until it sinks in in the mainstream, (and more importantly damnit, gay) media? I'm so sick of this cooptation of the struggles of trans* people (and let's be honest with ourselves, it's actually mostly the struggles of trans* women that are being coopted, and it's mostly trans* women of color who are at greatest risk of physical violence).

10 times? 100 times? I'll do it! You won't like it but I will. Because Tiwonge Chimbalanga deserves to not have one more slight thrust upon her. It was wrong of the Malawi government to attempt to jail her and her partner Steven, and it would *also* be wrong for the government to have done that if she was man. But she isn't. She's a woman. Tiwonge Chimbalanga is a woman.

Should I write a fucking song about it? I'm afraid it's pretty boring, I haven't really worked out the chord structure, melody line, or the verses, so far it's just aproximately 20 choruses of "Tiwonge is a woman" (3 times each chorus) and then at the end when performing you're required to get really angry and throw a vase full of flowers against the wall on the last line. The flowers represent humanity's attempts to pretty up bigotry. Ok, so it's mostly a performance piece. It'll be opening in NY in a month, along with my other piece "ARRRRRGGGGHHHHH: A Musing on Things that Piss Me Off"

A partial rundown of what I'm talking about: Questioning Transphobia quotes numerous articles that totally misgender Tiwonge Slap upside the head continues to repeatedly post about "gay" couple in Malawi that Tiwonge is part of (which is what set off this particular tirade), and now a random list of blogs that are queer/gay identified that just popped up when I ran a quick search that all either report on the "gay" couple without explaining the truth, or actively call Tiwonge a man.

Why yes. I am angry I just searched and found not a single LGBT (a lot of them say they are fucking LGBT on them!) blog that even mentioned preferred pronouns or the fact that "gay" is the wrong way to describe a straight relationship between Tiwonge Chimbalanga (who is a woman) and Steven Monjeza.

Casual Transphobia: NCIS Los Angeles

Episode "Chinatown"

Upon finding a size 15 magenta (shiny, quite impressive looking) multi-inch high high-heel, one character says "that's a lot of woman" and another says "maybe".

Thanks NCIS for shaming trans women, gender non-normative people with male coded bodies*, or cross-dressing male-identified individuals.

(Oh wow, and then I got to the part where the dead guy is SURPRISE! gay and when they search his boyfriend's apartment they find *him* dead too and automatically assume it's just "a gay guys killing themselves/each other free for all"...whee!!! homophobia!)


Casually tossed in transphobia, and Othering of people who are non-normative is dangerous because it is just so casual. Few people watching the show who weren't trans* identified, a cross dresser, or otherwise gender non-normative (or their allies) would have noticed the little dig. But it's there. It's like when there was that ad with "DemocRATS" in it. Only it actually works.

Likewise, yet another "tragic queers/gay men are killers" meme is the same. It's fucking EVERYWHERE. Maybe if I moved to an island without internet, and with no access to television (including news) and movies, I might be able to escape it. And the idea that queer people are "killers" puts us all at risk, because it makes it that much easier to demonize us and attack us.



*I am a guy (mostly), so my body is a male body by default. I don't like how "male bodied" or "female bodied" imply that my body isn't mine to gender. As such, I use "coded as male bodied" or "coded as female bodied" to refer to the fact that the presence or absence of breats, an adams apple, a penis, testicles, and a whole slew of things, are the ways that the wider society assigns sex to people, without saying that that assignment is correct.

Why I Don't Like "Gender Bending" in Fiction

It's always nice to see portrayals of ourselves in the media we consume. Some groups of people get to see those (accurate, positive) portrayals more often than others (for instance, white, straight, currently abled, cis men...). So for those of use who don't, our few opportunities are often seized upon with relish. Which is what makes it so disheartening when they turn out to be crap. Or, in the case with "gender bending fiction," when it turns out that the experience they are peddling has little to nothing to do with the population that it seemingly deals with, and because of that makes our lives invisible, and transphobia/cisgenderism all the more prevalent.

But, since "gender bending" story lines in comics and fiction can be so common (depending on the medium), and are so often thought of as being "our" type of story ("hey, you're a guy who has a girl's body, it's totally the same!"), I thought I'd offer some of my objections with the genre/trope.

I'm going to use examples from the comic Misfile, because it's pretty typical insofar as this particular trope goes.

We'll start off with some similarities between a "gender bender" character and a real live trans person:

In Misfile, Ash (the main character) awakens one day to find that he is now female bodied. Which sucks, because he still thinks of himself as a guy. He seems really pissed about having this body that's just so wrong. Which, I get. I think many a trans person SUPER gets that. It's sort of the main thing that everyone talks about when they talk about the trans experience. It's sort of the only thing.
So, similarity #1: he doesn't like how his body is now, and everyone assumes him to be a gender that he is not

Likewise, in the comic, Ash is interested in Emily, who seems to also be interested in him. However, she struggles with thinking of him as a guy despite his body, she struggles with herself and her assumption of her own heterosexuality, she struggles with what it would mean to be attracted to him despite homophobia (she gets called a lesbian because of the time they spend together), etc. Which is sort of related to how things work in the real world. Many couples struggle a lot if one of them comes out as a different gender than previously assumed.
This happens in the lesbian community where one half of a couple may feel a lot of sadness and confusion about whether she stills belongs to the community now that she is dating a guy, frustration at having her internal identity tweaked with, a sinking feeling knowing that random people on the street see a straight couple as they walk past, and sometimes, a lot of anxiety around whether or not she really respects the masculine identity of her partner (or potential partner -- this happens with prospective couples sometimes).
So, similarity #2: Emily has to deal with a lot of confusion based on her attraction to someone who looks like a girl but doesn't identify as one.

Lastly, and related to the first similarity, is the fact that Ash is often forced into uncomfortable situations because of others' perceptions of his gender. His mom makes him model a dress for her clothing line! He's constantly dealing with heterosexual guys hitting on him! Sexism sucks! (ok, that's not exactly related, but it does suck).
So, similarity #3: other people are constantly forcing Ash to conform to their ideas of his gender, regardless of his obvious discomfort with that.

Now that we've established some of the similarities between the "gender bender comic" Misfile's characters and experiences of trans people, it's important to get to the overwhelming differences.

Being trans is not something that gradually goes away with time. Dr. Zucker's (my loathing for this man knows few bounds) opinions withstanding, trans people don't (generally) wake up one day in full on panic and anxiety about our gender and then gradually over the course of the years of our lives learn to live with it and just sort of mosey along. Which is basically what happens with these types of narratives. In them the main character is suddenly confronted with the wrongness of zir body, and then over the course of zir quest/adventure/what have you, to fix it, ze gradually just sort of la-dee-da falls into acting like a girl, and feeling sort of girlish and whatever. These narratives give this type of lip service to the fact that the characters want to get back to their normal body, but in general they seem to acclimate like WOAH.
In contrast, my initial realizations of my gender were slow coming and mild. However over the years of having people constantly misgendering me, I have become more and more despondent, more strident in my conviction of my gender, more upset at each messed pronoun, experienced more pain and frustration at the body I have grown into. My partner and I estimate that maybe 5 people in this world really and truly believe that I am a boy. None of the people on this list are family members (I consider my partner and I a family, but you get what I mean?). I walk through the world knowing that the people who are supposed to be closest to me, at their core, just don't believe I am who I am. That strangers and acquaintances, that no one besides my partner, my ex-partner, and maybe 3 of my best friends, really understand and agree with me that I am a guy. I am aware of other's perception of my gender every hour of every day. I can't really say this strongly or often enough: my life every day is an exercise in pain because of this. Every Day. Every day that a well-meaning classmate messes up my pronouns and I say "it's ok, it happens," I die a little inside. Every day that a waitperson, check-out clerk, business owner, pamphleteer calls out "miss" or "ladies," my life feels a little more like a hell. I Hate living in a world that can't conceive of me as a boy. That doesn't go away. It grows and grows and grows. This isn't a footnote to my story, I don't forget about this because I'm busy racing cars or fighting ghosts or something. This is the ever present "fuck you" of my day.

Am I being clear? Can you (a presumably cis* person) even conceptualize the pain and frustration and anger and agony I experience over this?
So, difference #1: in "gender bender" fiction, characters seem to acclimate more and more to their bodies and the misrepresentation of their gender by others.

Next, there's the fact that characters in "gender bender" narratives seem to mostly reify gendered expectations of the world around them. Suddenly, after "becoming a girl," these characters start liking chocolate, they become more emotional, and less logical. Or, alternately, the way we know they are "really" boys is because they are sexually attracted to their new bodies (as we see in the comic at the side), because they cling to their sexist versions of chivalry, and because they are disgusted by the idea of men being attracted to them. Which totally ignores the fact that lots of boys are um... gay?
And I don't think I know a single trans guy that is as homophobic as Ash is.
I can't think of a *single* trans guy that finds his body sexaaaay like characters in these stories do. In fact, many trans guys I know hate seeing their bodies naked. At least some guys get sores because of constant wear of binders in an attempt to hide, disguise, emotionally and mentally get rid of our breasts. I like girls, I like female bodies, and looking at my body in the mirror makes me feel like crap.
And, while some (trans) guys are misogynistic creeps, I'd like to think I'm not, and my friends aren't. I don't need to set myself up in opposition to women by living by "chivalrous" rules. I don't have to hate women to not be one (which these narratives imply).
So, differences #2, #3, and #4: characters in "gender bending" story lines are often homophobic to prove their manliness, they are often sexually attracted to the bodies they are forced into, and they often use misogyny and sexism to set themselves apart from the women they are assumed to be.

Lastly, for this analysis, is the fact that not only do characters of "gender bender" stories acclimate to their bodies, they learn to take advantage of the "privileges" conferred on women in our society. Let's get this out of the way: "feminine wiles" are the most bullshit idea of "power" I've ever heard of. We live in a culture rife with rape, misogyny, and example after example of the oppressed status of those who are perceived to be women. If you don't understand this, we just don't have anything further to talk about until you get your head out of your ass. Ok.

So this is the thing, the part up a bit where I talked about how demoralizing and depressing and upsetting it is to have people assume that my gender is "girl"? It doesn't go away when I want to get a good deal on something. But apparently in these stories, as the characters start to acclimate to the unfortunate, (but ultimately not all that upsetting) fact that they are female bodied, they decide it's awesome to play up all the female stereotypes they want so long as it'll help them. Which is blatantly unrealistic if you think about the pain and suffering that trans people go through because of having to constantly deal with the world's bullshit about our genders.

So, difference #5: characters in "gender bending" narratives often decide to go entirely counter to their gender and to "use" their perceived gender to their advantage regardless of the emotional ramifications it would entail if they that strongly identified with their internal gender.

So, why do all these differences matter? They are damaging. When narratives out there that tell stories that are supposed to be sort of like trans people's lives, in fact do so in a way that erases trans people's struggle with a transphobic world? When they do so in a way that implies that trans people buy into normative ideas of gender and use misogyny and homophobia to set ourselves apart from our perceived genders? When they imply that trans people are deceptive and will use whatever we can to get ahead? When they imply that trans women are either "perverts" who find their bodies overly titillating, or that trans men don't really mind having bodies that code us as female (because hey, at least we get to grope boobies whenever we want!)? All of that is totally fucked up. It's fucking lies and they aren't nice ones. You know what a nice lie would be: "all trans people are awesome, there isn't a jerk among us," but we don't get that type of narrative in these "gender bender" stories. Nope, we get: "perverts, deceptive, not that big a deal, they'll get over it."

You know what else is upsetting and damaging in these stories? This isn't about differences, it's just about dangerous and mean and jerkishness. It's this: when the idea of gender reassignment surgery makes the main character yell in defiance. Right there Ash implictly says: "being trans, needing surgery or hormones, that is a BAD THING... people who need surgery or hormones are bad people." And it's this: as the comic progresses, we get more and more ass-shots of Ash, more and more bras and panties. As the comic continues we see Ash becoming a pin-up girl. It just shows how little the artist respects even the idea of Ash as a boy.

The icing on the cake? That this and many other "gender bending" comics and stories are written by people who then commemorate The Transgender Day of Remembrance, the day in November that we are meant to honor trans men and women who have died due to transphobia. When they post their commemorative comics, it serves as a banner proclaiming "we are trans friendly," which means that those who aren't paying attention, due to cis* privilege, who don't know better but are open to becoming allies, they learn that this is what allyship means.

And that? That depresses the hell out of me.

It's Alive! (also known as "Transphobia!")

Oy! So, recently I have been having all these thoughts. Thoughts are good, yes, yes. But then, I think I should put them up on the blog and then I think "no, no, it's been far too long since you posted anything, best to just let the blog die, a natural, slow, and painful death where you think about it once every couple days but don't post." but like Frankenstein, I will play god and create life from nothing (only I won't go spurning it, eventually leading to this blog killing a small child.... what? oh the point seems to have gotten away from me!) and thus I bring you this post.

Which in turn brings me to transphobia. No really.
Well, you see, because Mary Daly died, and I didn't know jack-all about her works (I'd heard the name but only enough to say "that sounds vaguely familiar") until her death, when a few feminist blogs I frequent (and many I don't) a-sploded . What with Daly apparently having written some virulently transphobic works during her life (none of which she publicly recanted), and one of which had a chapter about trans women with a title referring to Frankenstein*. So that's how this blog coming back to life and Transphobia are linked.

But instead of the transphobia of Mary Daly, I want to talk about the most pointlessly (and thus astoundingly) transphobic book I read over my winter break.

It's the third book in Mercedes Lackey's Bardic Voices series (The Eagle and the Nightingales). The book's plot is long and winding, but to sum it up, a Gypsy (Lackey's characterization) Bard is sent by lots of her friends off to a far away city/nation to find out why the High King (king o' all the kings) is letting governance slide and all of the countries under his purview are slowly going to shit. When she gets to this city she quickly becomes a performer at the local hot spot for non-humans, and then begins a romantic relationship with a non-human.
Meanwhile the Church is basically evil and saying that non-humans don't deserve rights, oh, and it's totally trying to destroy all creativity and spirit and fun (in the form of the Free Bards, which are the focus of this series, ps Mercedes, I'm a cranky atheist who gets yelled at for being too "atheist pride" or whatever, and I thought the Church-hatin' was a little ham-handed, just saying). (Keep this theme of "intolerance is bad!" in mind, it makes the transphobia even more of a doozy). So the main character quickly goes about trying to figure out how to fix whatever's ailing the King so that he can govern well and all can be peachy keen again.

But, this is 400+ page book, there is a rather lengthy set up and all where she's traveling and then getting set up in town and little side-plots etc., which is why the transphobia that jumped at me on page 155 was a little surprising. That's almost halfway into the book. And it was done so absolutely pointlessly, making a joke about a character we haven't even met yet, who I believe only actually shows up once in person to be reacted to, and who is only mentioned (tops) 5 times during the story.

Here's the first instance (emphasis mine):

"Well, Lyrebird, you're eating like a bird indeed today - twice your weight in food! You're eating like dear little Violetta!"
He winked at that; most of the staff found Violetta amusing. The name was female, and surely the little misfit dressed like a woman, but there wasn't a person on the staff who was fooled.
No matter. Freehold was full of misfits, and if "Violetta" wanted to dress in fantastic gowns and gossip like one of the serving-wenches, no one here would eve let "her" know they had seen past the disguise.

And then, just as quickly as it came in to ruin my day while reading, all mention of Violetta disappears again. Why, if I didn't know better I'd think this exchange was merely shoe-horned in in order to set us up for later random transphobia!

Oh wait, it was! 4 pages later we get this gem

nothing happened - other than Violetta showing up, as if Derfan's earlier mention of "her" had conjured "her"

'Cause if there's one thing I love it's having trans people's gender identities questioned every time a writer puts scare quotes around their fucking pronouns. Not.

Then we find out on 178 that a generally non-communicative snake-man thinks that Violetta is "exquisite" Why? We don't know since we haven't actually had any character have a single line of dialogue with her. I guess we're supposed to think that if some weirdo snake-man (who unlike other characters can't tell that she isn't "really" a woman) likes Violetta, she must really be a freak, or something.

And then, so far as I noticed, we don't get a single other mention of this Violetta until page 407 where SPOILER, it turns out that she's secretly the killer traitor!

She had seen this "Lord Atrovel" before - but not here.
In Freehold. And "he" had been--
Violetta...

Ok, so wait, what? Now we've decided that Violetta really is a girl? I mean, that's what the scare quotes on "he" mean, right??? I'm confused.
But wait, there's more! Not only is the trans/cross dressing/Merceds-Lackey-just-decided-to-cobble-together-"evil male bodied person in a dress"-stereotypes person the killer traitor, ze's also a PERVERT! (How the main characters gleaned this just by realizing the dual identities is beyond me) See!:

Hunt through his private papers, his suite, and question his servants, and you will probably find a trail of sabotage and evil as vile as the man himself. And you will likely find lace hankerchiefs that match those left by the mysterious gaol-raider. As well as a--" he coughed "--remarkable selection of female garments made in his size"

Oh Main Character! How did you ever restrain yourself from making a joke about how ze probably has lace panties by the gajillion and masturbates every night into them while cackling evilly? I mean, that's what I'd do in your situation. It must be that you are far too genteel to talk about such a thing, even though we've been reading about how as a bird you don't understand human prudery.


So to review: totally pointless introduction of a trans character for the sole purpose of mocking her. Which we learn is in fact vitally important because Mercedes Lackey really wanted to try something new and risky, which is having the trans person actually be a bad guy in disguise. I've never heard of that. Have you?


*(little recognized fact, the monster in Frankenstein is not called Frankenstein, he sadly doesn't have a name... poor widdle monster)