Hello 
I'm Siobhan Curran/Kisa Naumova, and this is my weblog. I tend to write about stuff like crossdressing, Macs, code, cats, wine and Second Life, but in general it's just an ongoing conversation about all sorts of stuff. If you'd like to know a little bit more about what this all is, I recommend starting on this page which has a little bit of info on who I am, and what I'm trying to do — or you could dive into my five years worth of archives if you like.
Otherwise, feel free to close this box and explore...
Hypothetically, Of Course
So I was thinking earlier — for no reason whatsoever — about the time I went out dressed in New York.
I'd never been out before, and as nervous as I was, I spent most of the day reading The Tranny Bible that I'd bought in Barnes and Noble a few hours before. One of the sections in it was general advice about transvestites that were approached to be on television — you know, "Come be on Trisha — it'll be great and you won't get mocked" kinda things.
From what I can recall (which is shit really, considering the book is up on the shelf behind me, and if I was a real blogger then I'd quote passages out of it verbatim), the general advice was "Don'tfuckingdothis".
Transvestites — on the whole — get exploited on television. Paraded as freak shows and invariably set-upon by that awful woman who quotes Bible passages at them.
(OK, so I've seen her on telly twice. And it was years ago. But it was the same woman on two different TV shows within a week of each other. She is not my favourite person)
In all honesty, I've kinda always believed that we — as vunerable freak-show contenders — shouldn't stick our mushes on the box. We inevitably get reduced to tears by braying mobs with pitchforks and suchlike. In fact, I felt quite strongly once that sometimes some of us don't always put ourselves across in the best light when we 'bare all' on telly.
So hypothetically, imagine that one day, within the usual gumpf of your .INBOX — "Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Yes I do know that im h0t. Is that your penis? Yes. Wow, someone else commented on The Dalek Dances. Yes." — within the crud, comes a cordial email from a film director who wants to ask you some questions about your lifestyle as "research".
And, hypothetically, you agree to this, and spend a good chunk of the afternoon having a delightful conversation with someone who's interested in what you have to say about it all.
Then, hypothetically, you get asked if you'd be prepared to repeat the interview process on camera.
Now, hypothetically, presume that you're a mid-thirties transvestite who's generally open about things to all and sundry — but not out to her parents. Presume also, hypothetically, that even though your parents are very unlikely to actually watch a high-brow documentary on a non-terrestrial television channel with the number "4" in its name, and even though you've researched the director a bit and found that her films are sensitive explorations into people's lives, and even though you're sure that the whole thing will be no form of threat to your general status quo on "who knows and who doesn't"...
...even though the whole thing seems like a wonderful opportunity, and even though you're certain you could talk in a lucid and non-hysterical way, and even though it wasn't something purely about transvestism, rather an exploration into how people relate to clothing and costume...
(You get the picture: it's A Good Thing™ and Not A Scam™)
...even though all that, you're a teensy bit nervous.
Hypothetically, what would you do?
Why not hon?
I suppose initially I am only out to two people. My wife and my sister. Everyone else who only knows D has no idea about Joanna and I don't really want to come out to them yet. I guess there's the fear that someone will watch it, recognise me, and so the secret is out.
If I was more open with family and friends, and many already knew, then I may be more willing to appear on national telly.
Then there is the worry about how you may be portrayed. The researchers and the editors may be sympathetic, but the end product is very much out of your hands.
But as you've said above — you're a little more open, and have got a good feel for the show they are trying to do.. and as long as its not Trisha, or Jerry, or Jeremy Kyle then maybe it will be a good thing.
The size of the audiences involved means that good ‘ambassadors’ can do a great deal of good in raising awareness, but on the other hand bad ‘ambassadors’ can do a lot of harm. I enjoy your honest attitude — I think its refreshing — so I’m sure that you’d have some interesting things to say. The point about editing and what gets shown would worry me a little though.
I’ve had not less that four offers to be on telly (I’m a TS woman) but have always turned them down. My feeling is that I am being a good ambassador by just being out there and getting on with it. Well that and I look ropey on camera 
Cay
The point about editing and what gets shown would worry me a little though.
Well, yes. Agreed — and this and a couple of things are forming the main bulk of my reseverations at the moment:
My parents: As I continuously mention, they don't know about any of this. I've always said that they don't need to know, and that's still the case. I think it's highly unlikely that they would catch this — and I think it's just as unlikely that someone they know would see it and mention it to them, partly because it's not in their sphere of reference, and partly because I've been that seperated from Life Back Home™ that I doubt anyone would recognise me without being told who I was.
That notion of "ambassador": I do often think that some people go on television or generally get featured in the media with all the good intentions of showing their community in a good light. But I think that a lot of the time that backfires, and it only reinforces stereotypes that may already exist.
The lack of control: Having a weblog is great — you get to control everything that goes on on it. I could (if I wanted to) go back and change things in the past and alter people's comments so that I come out of it all like a beaming ray of sunshine.
(I don't BTW — I'd lose all credibility in a shot
)The very real acknowledgement that whilst my head is externally thinking "Aha, a chance to Do Good™", somewhere there's still a little voice going "Wheeeeeeee! Telly!" — and I need to get rid of that voice before I do actually make a decision.
I think, that if it was a "Tranny Documentary", then I would run a mile — but from what I've read and the conversations I've had, it's not. I think I'd just be another point of view on a subject.
It may be impossible (due to both the "Aha, a chance to Do Good" and the "Wheeeeeee! Telly!" aspects), but just be yourself... hypothetically.
If you feel comfortable enough to do it, and you feel happy with the director, then do it. As you said "The Other Week™" (I'm paraphrasing slightly here) I have the right to change my mind. 
I think this slightly ties in with you post about "The Joys Of Being Wrong".
Will there be any ambassadorial gifts?
You clearly care about your parents not finding out about this aspect of your personality. Hypothetically, just say somehow they did find out as a direct result of the show… you being on TV talking about it is a hell of a way to have the news broken. Worth the risk? I’m just thinking about how my parents would have reacted finding out in that way.
Cay
What is the documentary actually about?
It's specifically about clothes and costumes, how they make you feel about your identity, and the transformations of 'self' that happen depending on what you're wearing. So it's not just a tranny-thing — I can think of several types of people that would refer to.
being on TV talking about it is a hell of a way to have the news broken. Worth the risk?
Exactly my concern. And I'm not sure it's worth the risk at all. The other reticances I have, I reckon I can talk myself in (or out) of them — but that's the Big One™
Speaking entirely unhypothetically — I participated in a TV documentary series last year, and overall, I don't regret it. Granted, the subject matter was different (it was specifically about TS people) — but the driving factor for me was the "do good, present this in a positive light" kind of thing. If you have Discovery Home and Health, it'll likely turn up in the near future — it's seemingly on permanent rotation.
I had many of the same questions and reservations as you express — but, since I'm completely out, I wasn't concerned about family members or others "finding out". There was one aspect of the episode I was in that didn't go as was agreed — let's just say that if you saw the programme the very first day it aired, you saw a slightly different version than the one that has aired on every subsequent occasion.
I'm glad I took part — but, I decided not to take part in the follow-up (three or four programmes that revisit some of the 30 original contributors). I feel like I "did my bit" — but I've no particular desire to do any more (not on the subject of TS and transition, at least).
Bottom line — if you've any doubts, any at all, don't do it. If you decide to do it, assume that anything you say could be used in the worst possible context — and, if you could still deal with it if that happened, then sure, why not do it?
Well, it sounds interesting anyway! It's just a shame that I only get terrestrial tv
Tilt-Shift Clouds
Know what's really annoying me at the moment? Expedia.co.uk
Not because I've had some unfortunate experience with a holiday (yeah, like I ever get to go abroad...), but because of their current advertising.
It's not that there seems to be some kind of bandwagon-jumping thing going on with the visual aesthetics of the ad itself (has anyone else spotted the tilt-shift effect?), it's the way it wanders into Dada World™ within fifteen seconds.
Lemme explain: Ad starts with analogy of a cloud being like a travellar. Yep, I can get that — free, unfettered by gravity, flying around without a care in the world.
Cool.
But then, we're treated to the idea that a cloud is like an Expedia customer because they like to "narrow down their choices and seek inspiration".
Way to crow-bar a metaphor there guys.
Sorry, it just really annoys me. So much so that I find myself unable to rant about it wittily
Siobhan's Newbie Guide To Flickr
Or, if you like, an iFAQ¹
What are "tags"?
Tags are like little labels. They help you search through your photos at a later date. They are also places to make hilarious bon mots
What's wth all the cats?
Cats are to Flickr as transvestites are to the Web — ubiquitous
Isn't it spelt "Currently"?
*slap*
I don't get the point of X, Y, or Z
Good, then go away.
I want to change my alias, can I do that?
No! You fool! That would break the internets!
No-one's looking at/commenting on my photographs. How come?
Well, perhaps they're not very good?
I've got 300 views on a picture! How cool is that?!
*pah* I have just short of thirteen thousand on one.
How do I post a picture in a discussion?
Well, just ask that very same question in a discussion, without doing a search, and I'll cut-n-paste the same answer I tell everyone. Until I get fed up of doing it.
Why do guys add me as a contact, but have no photos online?
It's called "masturbation" hon.
¹ inFrequently Asked Questions
What's wth all the cats?
I think this might need a Venn diagram
If you don't have at least one picture of a cat in your flickr stream you just haven't arrived.
Personally I'd rather saw my head off with a broken bottle than go on telly again. No-one that you hope will see you, will do so, and the strangest people in the universe will suddenly think a) you're their bestest friend, and b) you can get them on t'box.
That's what happened after Crimewatch, anyway.
But don't let me put you off.
For the documentary:
1) Can you get a really cute actress to play your part for you?
2) Do you get any clothes out of it?
If not, I'd be hesitant too
Does that help?
Oh, Oh! Yikes. So I've now got to go out and get a picture of a cat?? I'll need to work on that one. LOL!
I dont own a cat.. will a hamster do?
and yes, there is nothing worse than a tranny posting in a group about how few comments she gets... Will make a point to never comment on their pics, out of spite.
Cats, although not essential, are an advantage. I'm going to release a photograph of Tish under a GPL license, so that everyone can feel happy and belong
Oh, and Claudia...
Can you get a really cute actress to play your part for you?
I don't need to — I have me
Oh hell. I've got no cats. I guess I just haven't arrived.
Gah I always get round to commenting on your blog when you have a page full. :-/
In my experience of myself and friends being asked to go on telly, I'd say "proceed with great caution".
I nearly did the Trisha thing (yeah I know) but bottled out at the last moment. I watched the show I was supposed to be on and was SO glad I didn't. The nearest I've come to being on telly is being interviewed by a researcher for that Grayson Perry doc a couple of years ago.
A friend of mine who DID go on that programme was more or less mauled by Perry, who disagreed with her particular take on TGism. She came across as muddled and weak, partly because it was edited by Perry to make him look good and make the point he wanted to make.
That's the danger of being a TG on TV. We make great pains to display whenever possible the exact image we pant to. With TV documentaries all the control is wrested out of our hands.
Look at it this way: I get upset when I see half a dozen unflattering pictures of me taken by someone else on a night out and stuck on Flickr. A TV show takes 25 pictures a second. That's a lot to get upset about.
But, on the other hand, it does sound like an interesting documentary.
I've been on American telly! I was interviewed by the local news channel about a new anti drugs law that was brought in while I was at high school there. I said my piece to the news team which was my usual liberal try and see both sides stuff. When I appeared on telly that evening it had been edited to make me sound rabidly republican.
Don't do it, it's not worth the risk.
Hypotheticly
Run screaming for the hills — physically (unless you can get absolute control / veto over how your words are edited) [extremely serious-faced icon goes here].
And as for the 'parental units'; some 'well-meaning' soul (read: interfering, shit-stirring ) with a video is almost bound to think, "Hey, isn't that...?" Closely followed by, "I wonder if his folks remembered to tape it? I know: I'll send them my copy, just in case..." [Cue sound of shit hitting fan].
dont just run, sprint for the hills, I used to be involved in making documentries a while ago. They are dodgy exercises by egotistical people who sound lovely but have the morals of a Russian guard dog. editorial control of material means they can make it look like anything and what you said will be mangled beyond recogniton and which can be made to suit any message or 'doctrine'.
Also the fith law of tranny dynamics states that the only TV programme you ever appear in will be seen by your parents while visiting a friends house and everyone will stare at the screen in quiet unspoken shocked silence, their mouths opening and closing in shock and awe. sorry about late comments, been on holiday.
Anna choos
Run a mile.
I had some lovely long chats with the researchers on the Grayson Perry thing the other year. But there was still no way I would go in front of the camera