feminist blogs in english

What I wanted to talk about today is employment. I am currently unemployed, and have known very few trans people offline who weren’t in the same situation. It’s difficult to really get a true sense of the employment situation for trans people, since most studies are small, and few if any actually separate the sexes (which would give us a much clearer picture of who in our community is unemployed). But here’s what we can say for sure: compared to the general population, it’s really bloody awful.

A survey on the subject was recently released by New York trans group Make the Road. There were a few key findings in that report, but the most shocking one was that 49% of their 82 transgender respondents had never been offered a job while living openly as a transgender person. Never. A 2006 report from the Transgender Law Center of 194 trans people found a 35% unemployment rate in San Francisco, at a time when the official rate for the area was at 4.7%. Over 60% made less than $15 000.

What is more damning is the role of the law in this–or rather, its absence. New York has had a trans-inclusive ENDA style law for employment since 2002, and San Francisco since 1994. At yet, the situation in both remains fairly well dire in both locales. Something to keep in mind for when a trans-inclusive ENDA eventually passes, the battle will still be just beginning nationwide.

I’m generally skeptical about statistics, but I don’t think that these are tremendously misleading. Maybe the scope of the problem is only half that for the whole trans population of the United States. Maybe only 25% of trans people have never been employed post-transition, maybe only 17% were unemployed in 2006 before the bubble burst. Maybe we’re only 3 times as more unemployed as the overall rate rather than 7. But those would still be devastating statistics, no?

We clearly need more and better information on this. And moreover, we need these statistics broken down by sex, and gender ID too. My suspicion is that trans women are far more likely to be unemployed than trans men, but that’s only based on anecdotal evidence.

Cis researchers have researched transness exhaustively. Medical doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists, anthropologists, sociologists, literary theorists, feminists writers and queer theorists have studied us, yet by and large they have concentrated only on cis-centred questions – why do trans people exist? What does it mean, for us, for the binary? How do they feel about their bodies? What do they do with them? Is it subversive or retrogressive? etc etc ad nauseum puke. And yet, the fundamental institutional elements of cissexism have barely even been noticed, let alone queried. For those of you who are academics or writers, who do research on transness or know those who do: think on this. Our needs as a community have been thoroughly ignored by your objectifying research. We don’t even know the entire shape of the problem, and this is equally true for the other endemic problems facing trans people – homelessness, imprisonment, rape, HIV infection and violence. People are slowly starting to do research on these things, but clearly there a great need for more.

For those of you who don’t do research, but may be in the position of interviewing a trans person for a job, think on these statistics, and think about how much more your trans applicant may need that job than the rest of the field, how few opportunities they may have had since starting transition. Cheers.

So far, I have avoided writing about trans subjects. Though that’s what I’m best known for here in Internet Land, it’s far from my only (or even dominant) interest in politics. I have layers, you know, like an onion or a parfait. Still, I have something that probably needs to be said. It’s basic, but so many cis people don’t even realise its necessity.

This one’s for those cis readers who have progressed past Trans 101, who might know and love the trans people in their lives. Sometimes cis people quite innocently out the trans people they know, or sometimes they mention them so as to demonstrate their allyness or even to make themselves more interesting (cos you know, all trans people simply must be fascinating by sheer virtue of existing).

When I out myself, or am outed, I never know what the reaction will be. Before hormones, and early transition, my transness was noticed quite frequently. Now, I have to be outed—by my documents most often, or by my friends, family and acquaintances. Which is where y’all come in. So here’s the deal: if you out us, you can do more damage than you can possibly imagine.

You can expose trans people to violence. You could get them fired. You could make it impossible for them to find work–word of mouth travels quickly in small towns or closeknit industries. They could be harassed so much they need to quit their job, or to need to move, or all kinds of things. You don’t know, because you’ve never had to live with the consequences. Just because you know and trust someone, doesn’t mean that I can. It doesn’t mean that they won’t be hateful to me, and it certainly doesn’t mean that they will be respectful of my confidentiality.

For most people, “trans” erases the bit that comes after. This is why you never ever see a headline that says “transsexual woman” [blah blah blah]. No, it just says “transsexual” and is used as a noun rather than the adjective it is. It conjures the ever present “really a man” transphobic trope (quick mental test: see if you can describe a trans person without using it). For women like me, living our lives as a woman is constituted as untruthful. When most cis people become aware that I’m trans, they start treating me different. I can see the change immediately – when pronoun “slips” start “accidentally” happening, when I stop being counted with the right group. Because it’s ingrained, isn’t it? In a cissexist culture, only cissexuality (or a trans person’s ability to appear cissexual) is truly real, and any hint of anything else invalidates the whole.

One time, I inadvertently outed myself to a group of students. I’d been teaching a tremendously interesting media studies class to first years; that is, mostly 17 and 18 year olds. The first three weeks went pretty well. We talked video games and violence, Hollywood, what they actually did with media. The discussions were engaged, it was all going fine. Then, a month in, I came down with a cold. My voice suddenly dropped an octave, because I couldn’t vocalise at my usual pitch. And like that, you could see the lights go on in their eyes. They’d realised I was trans.

Now, as these things go, it wasn’t truly awful (how low my expectations have become on that score). The next week, we did adbuster style cut-ups to jam dominant media messages and several groups turned in transphobic assignments, giggling their arses off. They were laughing at me. Another student spent the lesson interrupting me, telling the class how everything I was saying was stupid. And of course, a number of students stopped attending my classes altogether, trying to get into classes in the same unit run by other teachers. I was losing control of my classes.. and I was still bloody sick.

The point is, the mere fact of their knowing that I am trans meant that they, 17 and 18 year olds with scant knowledge of the subject they were taking, suddenly felt entitled to talk over me, to mock me openly when previously they had been respectful. Of itself, being subjected to ungendering takes its toll, especially if it’s something you experience frequently.

But that’s not the worst case scenario by a long shot. In April this year, a trans man teaching at CSU Long Beach was attacked in the toilet on campus, and had “it” carved on his chest. The victim didn’t recognise his assailant, and yet his attacker knew him by name, asking his name, and then attacking him. In other words, the attacker knew the name of a trans person, and then sought him out to attack him with a knife. Luckily, he survived.

So you see, what might seem like incidental detail to a cis person can be a matter of safety to a trans person. So, I ask you, dear cis readers of Feministe, please respect the confidentiality of the trans people you know. They might want to be out, and they might not. But either way, the risks are not yours to assume. Only a trans person can make that call.

Two new fronts on the immigration fight in the US:

In Nebraska, a small town called Fremont just passed a referendum today that will require tenants who are not US citizens to get an “occupancy license” from the city council in order to rent housing. Even residents of nursing homes will be required to get the license. Further, employers found to have employed “illegal” immigrants will be open to local sanctions as well as the pre-existing sanctions.

And in Nevada, new Arizona-style immigration laws are being considered. However, a coalition of the ACLU, Democrats and businessmen have filed a lawsuit attempting to block the law from going to the Legislature or voters.

What both moves suggest is the depressing fact that a good portion of the country looked at Arizona and didn’t think oh no here comes fascism, but rather, how can we can get some of that over here? I hope that Fremont is not a sign of further new ground being staked out in the move to purge certain areas of undocumented immigrants, though I’m frankly pessimistic about that. These types of laws effectively criminalise the entire Latin@ community, as well as having secondary affects of other groups whose legal status may be murky (ie trans people whose legal sex on their documents may be mismatched with their gender presentation).

Let us all hope that the Nevada lawsuit prevails, as well as the Federal government’s lawsuit against Arizona. Because the spread of these laws must be stopped.

Your WTF of the day, on so many levels.

REHOBOTH BEACH, Del. (AP) — Rehoboth Beach in Delaware isn’t a topless beach — but a few transgender women caused a stir by treating it like one.

Police say passers-by complained after they removed their tops and revealed their surgically enhanced breasts over Memorial Day weekend. A lifeguard asked them to put their tops back on. They initially refused, but covered up before police arrived.

Even if they hadn’t, though, Police Chief Keith Banks notes they were doing nothing illegal. Since they have male genitalia, they can’t be charged with indecent exposure for showing their breasts. Banks says there’s no need for a specific law to address the issue.

Rehoboth Beach commissioner Kathy McGuiness isn’t so sure. She says the matter will be discussed at a town hall meeting next week.

This kind of thing makes me glad to live in a place where toplessness is equal-opportunity and not illegal. But that aside, the whole story is weird. I always thought that the problem with female toplessness was OMG BOOBS! But here we have female toplessness and boobs, but it’s not illegal because there’s no vagina involved? (As an aside, how does anyone even know what’s in the pants of the topless trans women?). Of course it’s a good thing that the trans women weren’t arrested, but it’s kind of cold comfort when the reason behind it is, basically, “You aren’t really women.” Wouldn’t this be easier if we just stopped freaking out about boobs and bodies, and if we all just agreed that if some people can have their chests on display in public, everyone can?

I’m sure the upcoming town hall meeting on this incident will be a real treat.

via The Frisky.

UPDATE: A commenter says that the individuals in the story are mis-gendered, and that they’re actually transmasculine/genderqueer. Also, it is a good idea to contact Rehoboth to make sure that trans people are treated fairly.

OK, I actually know the folks who are the topic of this story. The truth of the matter is much worse than it seems, because the media has gotten the details COMPLETELY wrong. These people are actually transmasculine/genderqueer, NOT transwomen! Which does mean that they were technically breaking the law, but the egregious failure of the news media to write a story without -sensational “chicks with dicks” viewpoint bothers me far more than anything else. My friends (who are trying their damnedest to stay anonymous in all this) are shocked at the scale this story has taken on, especially at the aspect leading to a potential new transphobic law being created in Rehoboth! Please contact news organizations and Rehoboth gov’t people to help clear this up and get trans-positive voices heard!

Today is the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia. I’ve had a pretty intense day, so I hope you will excuse the lack of a substantial post, but I thought it was better marked this way than not at all! You can read about IDAHO at the site, where you can find information on the history of the day, events around the world and lots more. I’d love to hear what some of you are doing to mark the day, readers.

You may have heard of the recent murder of Amanda González-Andújar. A man has been taken into custody in connection with her murder, which is undoubtedly good news, but González-Andújar is still gone, and hers is sadly yet another name to add to this year’s Transgender Day of Remembrance list of the dead.

This Saturday, April 24, there will be both a memorial and vigil in NYC to honor and remember her.

For those who can’t read the flyer, it’s transcribed below the jump.

Vigil for Amanda González-Andújar
Saturday April 24, 2010

4:00pm – 5:00pm at
69-30 62nd Street
Queens, NY 11385
Take the M Train to Fresh Pond

On March 30, Amanda González-Andújar was brutally murdered, strangled to death in her Glendale Queens home. Come show your solidarity in remembrance of Amanda González-Andújar and celebrate the temporary victory of the capture of her murderer. Let us show that her memory will not be forgotten and that the impact of her death has been felt far and wide; that we will not rest until due justice has been done. There is still allot (sic) to do to keep our communities safe from violence and intolerance. We must defend our rights to live and express our gender identities to the fullest extent! Come join members of the GLBTSTGNCQ community and allies, her friends and family as we remember her beautiful life.

A religious vigil will be held in Amanda’s memory prior to the vigil at MCCNY Church (446 w 36th St between 9th and 10th aves) at 2:00pm, for members of the community who were unable to attender her funeral two weeks ago.

Go to the Facebook page for the event for more information.

Thanks to Robin for the head’s up.

Post has been edited to include the updated flyer.

This guest post is a part of the Feministe series on Sexual Assault Awareness Month. C. L. Minou is a blogger and writer inhabiting a Great American Metropolis. In addition to her work at the Second Awakening, she has written for Shakesville, the Guardian’s Comment Is Free, and is a co-blogger at Tiger Beatdown.

She is also, in no particular order, a redhead, a trans woman, an anarcho-syndicalist, a player of RPGs, a reader of science fiction, and a consistently poor speaker of foreign languages.

Trigger Warning

So here’s the thing. I want to talk quite seriously about the whole issue of sexual assault and trans women, bring in all kinds of good scholarship, talk quite soberly and calmly about the facts, weighing each one with all due rational consideration. In fact, as I type this my browser has a forest of tabs open to anti-violence centers, studies on the incidences of violence in the LGBT community, articles, policy papers, and citations to more of the same.

But I really can’t be scholarly and rational, I fear. I really can’t sit back and give you the statistics that will horrify for a moment, break up your day with some hideous imagery for however long it stays in your memory. I can’t do this because for one thing, the studies are practically non-existent–not too many people have bothered to investigate the prevalence of sexual assault in the trans community (and, as we’ll see, there’s probably a lot of underreporting anyway.) That’s one reason.

The other is that for trans women especially, sexual assault rarely stops there. In a depressing number of cases, the assault isn’t even mentioned. Because the victim is dead.

For many trans women, any sex is potentially deadly. The two most publicized murders of trans women in recent years–Gwen Arujo and Angie Zapata–both involved women killed by consensual sexual partners who discovered (or at least claimed to have discovered, in Zapata’s case) their biological history. What’s depressing about public reaction to these cases isn’t the ordinary panoply of responses any woman’s assault summons up–the slut shaming of Gwen Arujo, the “she should have known better” tut-tutting of Angie Zapata–or even the usual dehumanization of the two women–the transphobe’s weapon of choice, using “it” as a pronoun for a person. No–it’s the most common and persistent accusation leveled against trans people of all stripes, the one that underlies both the bathroom libel and the exclusion from the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival–the charge that trans people are committing deceit, and that we must advertise at all times, but most especially in sexual encounters, the intimate details of our past.

All trans women know how fraught finding a sexual partner can be. We are caught in the Catch-23: be open about our background and accept that many potential sex partners will simply lose interest, or not disclose and run the risk of being assaulted or even murdered by our partners. (This situation makes the old idea that trans women transition so that they can have sex with men a rather bitterly hollow joke.) Given how complicated, how perilous, simply having consensual sex can be for trans women, is it any surprise that so many of us end up the victims of sexual crimes? Or sexual assault that leads to murder? It almost goes without saying that trans women in dangerous situations–sex workers, prison inmates–suffer an absurdly high amount of abuse; one study showed that 59% of transgendered prison inmates were sexually assaulted while incarcerated.

Being the victim of sexual assault is as difficult for trans women as it is for any other woman, but transness adds to that many tarry layers of confidence-shaking horror: the awful feeling of having been violated because your attacker didn’t consider you a woman, the necessity–especially for women who have not had genital surgery–of outing yourself to a large group of people, including the police, and the horrid feeling of being alone–because all too often, the response of rape assistance services leaves much to be desired:

Meanwhile, the police had been notified. Perez says that from the minute the cops showed up—first a group of uniformed men and later two detectives—they began belittling her version of the attack. “They kept saying, `Come on, admit it, you weren’t raped. Someone just roughed you up.”‘ Faced with a room full of doubting officers, Perez says she broke down. “I started crying. I was hysterical and could barely talk.” One of the detectives asked her for identification, at which point Perez handed over two ID cards issued by Street Works, a nonprofit for homeless kids. One identifies her as Joey Perez and the other as Josephine Perez.

“The detective looked at both of them, and then stared at me like he was confused. I said, `I’m a transgender woman,’ and he made a face like he didn’t know what that was.” Then, according to Perez, the detective—who, she says, gave her his name and badge number—bent over and took a long look up her skirt. As he straightened, she claims, he mumbled that “anyone with a penis can’t be raped.”

I wish I could stop here and say that this kind of…let’s be charitable and call it lack of sympathy only comes from men. But as the Kimberly Nixon case showed, even woman-positive organizations can be no haven for trans women, since those groups can, in Canada at least, refuse to hire a qualified rape counselor simply because she looked like a man in their eyes. Presumably they would do the same thing to a trans woman who had been the victim of rape or sexual assault (or domestic violence, as Nixon herself had been.) Even though a trans woman, like many other women who have been assaulted, might long for an all-female environment to aid her recovery, there is no guarantee that she’ll be accepted there. And often no guarantee that anyone else will have her. Even in large cities, finding a trans-positive or even trans-accepting victim center is likely to be impossible. There is nowhere to turn for many trans victims of rape or assault, which is why the sexual assault numbers for trans women–high though they may be–are almost certainly drastically underreported.

Of course, the lack of services available isn’t all that big a deal for far too many trans victims of sexual assault. Dead women need no assistance.

But we are the dead too, the rest of us, the ones asking for it by existing, the scrambled creatures. We are the dead, when we go looking for help where none exists. We are the dead, every time the homophobe’s hate surges because we walk down the street, every time someone marks one of us as their special victim because she hides no longer. We are our dead. We are Gwen and Angie and LaTeisha and Tyl’ia and Amanda. Until the world changes. Or we share their fate.

This is a guest post by gudbuytjane.

(Note: This essay is not about Lady Gaga, and I will not discuss the telephone video or any of the commentary surrounding it. If you want to discuss the video, there’s an entire internet to do that in. This essay is about derailing, so as such I’ll probably be on guard for that in the comments.)

Despite being a mostly-unknown trans activist and blogger whose target audience is usually quite small, I recently found myself at the centre of some internet drama over a piece I wrote at my blog critiquing Lady Gaga’s “Telephone” video for what I perceived as transmisogynist content. My arguments were initially picked up and discussed on a few feminist blogs, Twitter, and the typical places I was used to seeing these kinds of ideas debated. A few days after I put up the post, though, it was cross-posted in its entirety to Oh No They Didn’t, a pop culture community on Livejournal. Almost immediately, my page hits increased by orders of magnitude. With the shift from academic/queer/Feminist/oppression politics sites to a mainstream audience came a nearly complete disintegration of argument, and my inbox and comment queue began to fill with hate mail. In almost every letter the author concluded with an accusation like “And maybe you ****ing trannies would get somewhere if you weren’t so ****ing angry!”

I get the irony.

The Angry Tranny trope is a variation of the classic tone argument aimed specifically at trans women (it is used against trans men too, but as I suggest later I see the implication is specifically to de-gender trans women as angry men), a derail which suggests people would listen to you, if only you were nicer. This is never attainable, however, as the dominant groups retains the right to decide what is and isn’t acceptable tone, and dissenting ideas are inevitably considered impolite, rude, or angry. Angry Tranny takes this one step further, and beyond merely classifying arguments as angry trans women themselves are framed as threatening.

While they can be applied to any dissenting voice, tone arguments contain deeply transmisogynist implications when used against trans women. They imply that trans women aren’t just angry, but dangerous, feeding cissexual fears of trans women being threatening. In a number of comments cis commenters expressed fear for expressing their thoughts on the subject. This fear of trans women expressing themselves, especially in feminist spaces, is based on seeing trans women as men, and then applying to them the cis person’s expectations (while denying the lived experience of the trans woman). To suggest that trans women are in a position of social privilege which can silence cis voices is ridiculous on its face, as it is to suggest I had – as an unknown trans activist and blogger – privilege over the literally thousands of cis voices disagreeing with me. Like most derails in oppression politics tone arguments are riddled with doublespeak and knee-jerk accusations of the same behavior being pointed out in the first place. The anger against threatening cis dominance is projected back on those trans people speaking up.

Having been around discussions of trans inclusion politics for some time, especially those conversations which have happened in queer and feminist spaces, I feel I have a deep familiarity with Angry Tranny. Its consistency of use has shaped my own activism, pushing it to a more radical stance – although I am sure some cis people might gasp and point fingers at this assertion, arguing they’re being silenced, but honestly when it comes to trans inclusivity and rights activism I do not care what cis people think. That is not to say that cis people are not a part of my politics and are often close allies in the actions I take part in, or that some cis people have strongly influenced my ideas about fighting oppression, but the average cis person on the street, or even an average commenter on a progressive blog? Nope. Cultural investment in the dominance of cis voices over trans does not imply good faith in discussions, so with cis people I approach with caution.

The ultimate aim of tone arguments against trans women is to present our voices as unreasonable and thus remove us from discourse. This is so deeply woven into our culture it is nearly impossible to not be influenced by that bias without doing any work to identify and acknowledge it – work the vast majority of people just haven’t done. Until I know people have done that work I don’t expect them to have their own ideas or voice in discussing cis/trans issues, instead I expect them to repeat the silencing and erasing arguments they’ve learned from their cissexist culture. And they do.

While it is clear in the instantaneously angry dismissals in a place like ONTD, trans-focused tone arguments happen in any environment dominated by cis people. Academic and intellectual discussion takes on a more polite language, but the implication of anger or being unreasonable is still common. While it might not be flat-out assertions of anger (That still happens, mind you, the amount of anger people read into my comments at a place like Feministe might not seem apparent to a cis audience but I imagine those used to arguing marginalized positions are familiar with the behaviours) there is the tendency to frame dissenting trans voices as unreasonable or external to discourse. I think of this as taking away the middle ground.

Taking away the middle ground suggests unreasonableness by focusing only on the extremes of one’s position. One of the common responses to my critique of Lady Gaga was the sense I was comparing her video to violent transphobes. By willfully ignoring degrees of transphobic and transmisogynist behaviours this allows any criticism by trans people to be waved away as unrealistic or unreasonable. In a similar vein, one LGBT blog reported on my piece alongside a homophobic FOX News segment, and this was picked up on a few sites. The implication there was clear, dissenting trans voice = right wing homophobes. The well was poisoned, and although I hadn’t explicitly been called angry (well, the commenters did, but that always happens) the blog succeeded in making trans people seem unreasonable by association.

Dissenting ideas will provoke anger before they provoke discussion, so if they provoke anger in dominant groups you can’t expect much more than that. When I see discussion happen in the wake of that anger I’m glad, because that is where change happens, but I certainly don’t expect to see it immediately. Instead I’m used to hate mail and being shouted down, because I know the most we can hope for is to get ideas into the mainstream culture. In a culture which so violently enforces gender norms being trans is a revolutionary act whether we want it to be or not, and the act of silencing is just one of the ways we’re erased. The greater the challenge to dominance all the louder we’ll be shouted down. The Angry Tranny response will exist as long as cis dominance exists.

____________________________
gudbuytjane is the feminism, trans politics, and glam rock blog of Canadian social justice activist A. Hamilton. When she’s not busy being an angry trans woman online, A. keeps meaning to write about pop culture at I Fry Mine in Butter.

Sady basically said everything there is to say about the Lady Gaga and Beyonce Telephone video, but I wanted to direct Feministe readers to this interview with Heather Cassils, the Lady’s prison-yard make-out partner. She has some interesting things to say not just about Gaga, but about gender and queerness — and her interpretation of the “does Lady Gaga have a dick?” rumors, and Gaga’s response, seem fairly at odds with what we’ve discussed. Her comments about her own body as a tool of subversion, and her thoughts on how to create social change by inserting yourself into the machine, particularly struck me (even if I don’t necessarily agree that the second one is entirely correct).

Check it out, it’s worth a read.

Alisa at PostBourgie writes about a new VH1 show featuring a team of trans women traveling around the United States to make over cis women in need. I hadn’t heard of TRANSform Me before; this is how VH1 describes it:

TRANSform Me is a makeover show in which a team of three transgender women, led by the inimitable Laverne Cox (I Want To Work For Diddy), rescues women from personal style purgatory. Laverne and her ultra-glam partners in crime have undergone the ultimate transformation, so they’re the perfect women for the job.

They’ll travel the country in their tricked out fashion ambulance, siren blaring, and swoop into scenes of fashion disaster. They’ll not only make women look better but feel a whole lot better about themselves. It’s about discovering one’s inner personal style.

Laverne and the girls will cruise from boutiques to beauty salons in search of just the right look. And they won’t pull any punches with their subjects–or each other!

Each episode of TRANSform Me will cover the makeover of one woman who’s written to the show asking for help. The subject expects to be made over for a reality show–but she doesn’t know it’s going to be by three transgender women.

Ah, hmm.

On one hand: It is good to see trans-identified people in the mainstream. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy wasn’t exactly the most politically conscious show in the world, and in a lot of ways it played into some ridiculous stereotypes, but it did bring gay men into households across the United States; same with Will & Grace. Those shows were problematic for a lot of reasons, but in the trajectory of gay rights and acceptance in the United States? I think they pushed things forward. I think they helped to open a door for Ellen Degeneris — whose original show tanked after she came out as a lesbian — to become one of the most popular talk show hosts in the country (and not just on those godforsaken coasts, either). Popular culture matters, and a lot of times it’s going to be ham-fisted in dealing with marginalized groups, but I fall pretty firmly on the side of “it’s better to have marginalized groups imperfectly represented than not represented at all” (the caveat, of course, is that a marginalized group serving as a punchline is not just “imperfect” representation).

Which brings me to that other hand: I haven’t seen TRANSform Me, but I do worry that the trans women will be punchlines or caricatures. I worry that VH1 set it up so that the trans element of the show is a “gotcha!” moment — “You thought you were getting a make-over, but really you’re getting it from transgender chicks OMG!” I worry that “trans” will get a lot more attention than “women.”

But again, I haven’t seen it (is it even on yet?). Anyone have any further intel or thoughts?