I spent last night working on this in lieu of a new comic, since I’m not at home. Yes, it is true! You can finally buy my zine on coming out as non-binary in the Riot Nrrd store! Print copies are here, pdf copy is here!
The zine is 44 pages long and includes some poems, a lot of talking about questions non-binary people get, some drawings, and more. You can read a five page preview right now! I also posted the table of contents on my tumblr, and could also post them here, if anyone’s interested.
Let me know if you have any questions about it! I am nervous about making and selling something that is Saying Something very directly, so I hope you like it!
Image of a black and white zine, open to a page that ends in a simple illustration of three androgynous people - one with a wide face, long dark hair and glasses, one with a somewhat heart-shaped face funky hairstyle that is long on top and shaved on the sides, and one with a prominent chin, a short hair style and an earring in their right ear.
Text reads, "zines and e-zines have just arrived in the store! see the blog post for a free 5-page preview!"
Super cool. I’m glad to have an opportunity to support your work. I’m gonna be making a zine in the next couple of months that explores a lot of my thoughts on being trans and language and stuff. So, it’s interesting to see how other people approach this.
“Just because one is OFTEN and the other is SOMETIMES, doesn’t mean that one is NORMAL and the other is ABNORMAL.”
Isn’t that *exactly* what it means? Normal ::= common, average, mean?
I just wish that instead of viewing it as making the world – unnecessarily, annoyingly – more complicated, people would realize that learning a lot of hocus pocus etiquette for two made up genders instead just one set – “for human beings” – is what makes things unnecessarily complicated.
Azundris – I think “normal” in particular carries a heavier social connotation than “common” or “average”, which is why I put it that way. Another way to put it is that common does not mean default, and uncommon does not mean deviation. Like I say at another point in the zine, left-handed people have an uncommon but perfectly normal way of being – they are not just “defective” right-handed people.
I’m pretty sure we want the same thing. I was trying to say that while, statistically, one *is* “deviant”, the problem is not that one is deviant, a minority, abnormal, it’s the value-judgment that comes with these observations, which is why I tried to suggest an alternative view (e.g.going from two carved in stone gender to just human beings as a simplification, rather than considering it “even more groups that I’ll all have to learn a special etiquette for”, etc.). I know I’m totally nitpicking here, but it *is* an article about vocabulary, after all. 🙂
I really like that preview! Very clear and understandable. I’d like to get the zine, just need to discuss it with my partner…
Super cool. I’m glad to have an opportunity to support your work. I’m gonna be making a zine in the next couple of months that explores a lot of my thoughts on being trans and language and stuff. So, it’s interesting to see how other people approach this.
“Just because one is OFTEN and the other is SOMETIMES, doesn’t mean that one is NORMAL and the other is ABNORMAL.”
Isn’t that *exactly* what it means? Normal ::= common, average, mean?
I just wish that instead of viewing it as making the world – unnecessarily, annoyingly – more complicated, people would realize that learning a lot of hocus pocus etiquette for two made up genders instead just one set – “for human beings” – is what makes things unnecessarily complicated.
Azundris – I think “normal” in particular carries a heavier social connotation than “common” or “average”, which is why I put it that way. Another way to put it is that common does not mean default, and uncommon does not mean deviation. Like I say at another point in the zine, left-handed people have an uncommon but perfectly normal way of being – they are not just “defective” right-handed people.
I’m pretty sure we want the same thing. I was trying to say that while, statistically, one *is* “deviant”, the problem is not that one is deviant, a minority, abnormal, it’s the value-judgment that comes with these observations, which is why I tried to suggest an alternative view (e.g.going from two carved in stone gender to just human beings as a simplification, rather than considering it “even more groups that I’ll all have to learn a special etiquette for”, etc.). I know I’m totally nitpicking here, but it *is* an article about vocabulary, after all. 🙂