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...
Alternative Route
A sign outside of Harrogate that I happened to find very very funny...
Interdisciplinarity
People often ask me what I do for a living.
"Siobhan," they ask, "what do you do for a living?"
And (depending on my mood), I often reply with the words "I'm an artist".
"That's quite interesting. Are you like a painter or something?"
"Well, no. Not really, although I have been known to pick up a brush now and again..."
...at which point in the conversation I tend to go off on a ramble about ideas surrounding digital media, web-based performance, self-documentation, film-making, photography, interactive pointy-clicky things and whatnot¹, in an attempt to try and explain at least part of what being an 'artist' means to me.
We have, you see, gone well past the time when artists defined themselves by their own particular specialism. Artists are no longer 'sculptors' or 'painters' — they might do a bit of painting or sculpting, but they do a lot of other things as well. They don't pin themselves down to one particular medium, becuase sometimes contexts call for mediums outside of such rigid specialisms.
It would, I feel, be ridiculous for me to think that I'd ever be able to say to someone "I am an artist", and for them to instantly know — without any elaboration on my part — exactly what it was that I did.
So why do some people seem to think it's desirable to be able to do just that with the word "transgender"?
¹ eg. "stripes"
Becky, you have no idea just how many little snarky remarks I've had to hold myself back from posting — most along the lines of "who decides what is and isn't in the definition?", combined with the words "Disney duvets"
Stroker Serpentine's Bed
The lawsuit between Stroker Serpentine and Volkov Catteneo has received its fair share of discussion and linkage (for example), but I thought — carelessly disregarding any form of copyright infringement issues (sorry More4, really I'm sorry, I used to play with one of your newsreaders when I was young if that'll help things ... and his Dad's my brother's Godfather) — I just had to share this bizarroworld report that jumped out of my TV screen at me...
Oh, that old chestnut again.
I feel a blog post coming on.....(because it's too long to put in a comment box)
Hey Kisa, do you mind if I link to this from SLI?
Go for it hon. Like I said, I'm probably not supposed to do this, but I think hope they'll ne OK with the publicity.
SL lawsuit
Kind of makes me glad I've never been involved with the whole malarkey. 
Oh, I always thought that was the main value of the word "transgendered" — it's so vague and general that you can use it as a kind of conversation-stopper precisely when you don't feel like elaborating.
THe thing that narks me about it(possibly) is that it's an attempt to pull-in the weight of a community to validate a 'lifestyle', based on nothing more than a word.
And what really pisses me off about it, is that it gets it the totally wrong way around. I don't do this because I'm 'transgendered' — I'm 'transgendered¹' because I do this
¹ remind me to write something sometime about why I find itreally hard to describe myself as 'transgendered'
I really want to comment about why I, a transvestite, would never dream of describing myself as 'transgendered'; but I'm resisting for fear of opening up another tedious, and ultimately futile, 'labels' debate.
I've had a better idea: nighty-night all.
I thought the definition of an artist being a particular specialty went out in, oh, 1914?
But, it's quite amazing how stereotypes exist, get perpetuated and even morph into something quite unlike the original intent of the meaning. "Transgender", for instance. From what I gather it started as a harmless umbrella-like moniker; it covered groups in a certain way that no one could find offensive. (Except the Fundamentalist Christians, but they can find offense in the cheerful rising of the sun.) Now, it seems to denote a "lifestyle" and an "acceptance" of an entire set of beliefs, standards and other ephemera.
And it wasn't even an insult, like being called "queer"! No similar usurping was needed; "the community" (whomever that is/they are) managed to change the understanding of "transgender" in an entirely unexpected way, all by themselves!
You could tell people you're a "transgendered artist"; they'll be impressed and the rest of us will look it up in the dictionary. 
(Sorry...)
Carolyn Ann
[snip]
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
How do you make links on here?
http://www.theregister.com/2007/07/04/runaway_bride/
Rachel
You should ask the spammer. He knows, apparently...
(Shouts: Siobhan! Another one for the lexical destroyer...)
Carolyn Ann
Sorry I meant to say "it", not "he". Spammers aren't rewarded with a gender.
Carolyn Ann
Personally I hate giving people labels of any kind — as soon as you do that, people start to make assumptions. To me, sexuality is a wonderful rainbow of different coulours, infinite in variety. Too try and define exactly what you are would be as futile as trying to count snowflakes.
Like I said, 99.9% of trannies are idiots.
It's just you and me against the world, hon.