im always bothered when someone suggests a book/movie/form of media to me with one of the reasons for recommendation being “it has a trans character with a good reason for being trans.” i find the negative form to be more honest, “this trans character has no reason to be trans” (suggesting that this is a bad thing).

to be generous, i think in many cases this should be translated as “this trans character is poorly handled/written” and to that, yeah, i feel you. a lot of popular media mishandles trans stories. and if you say the former and mean the latter, i implore you to change your wording.

fictional characters don’t exist in a vacuum and have a push/pull with reality. we look to fictional representations for understanding, for inspiration, and as role models. stories codify/reinforce cultural understanding and ethics. i don’t like the implication that minorities need a reason to exist. instead of asking, “why?” when faced with a minority character, i believe the default reaction should be “why not?”

@rowan absolutely to both of your points. I'm continually baffled by people who write off fiction as being immaterial or not relevant to our lives. Fiction is a projection of reality, and the process of consuming fiction involves interacting with characters as if they were real. Your mind does not make a distinction between parasocial and social.

@rowan

yeah, i agree completely. We need more trans people just existing in our stories.

one of the books I’m working on has a trans MC and it starts after her transition and then fact that she’s trans is entirely irrelevant to the story - other than the fact that dealing with bigots really hurt her self esteem before the story even started.

Honestly, the only reason she’s trans is her name is obviously chosen, & i wanted to learn more about her. 🤷‍♀️