 Hi, welcome to the All Things LGBTQ Interview Show, where we interview LGBTQ guests who are making important contributions to our communities. All Things LGBTQ is taped at Orca Media in Montpelier, Vermont, which we recognize as being unceded indigenous land. Thanks for joining us and enjoy the show. Hi, everybody. I'm here with a selected group of distinguished editors of this very thoughtful issue of sinister wisdom, transfeminisms, and we'll show that on the screen periodically. My guests are Julia Enzer, whom some of you have seen before, Claudia Sophia Gariga Lopez, Sarah Youngblood Gregory, and Shereen Ayatollah, sorry. Welcome. Hi. Hi. Thank you so much for having us. Oh, it's great to have you. I thought I would start, if you don't mind, by my reading your biographies. Claudia Sophia Gariga Lopez is a professor of queer and trans-Latina studies in the Department of Multicultural and Gender Studies of California State University Chico. She is an interdisciplinary scholar activist with a PhD in American Studies from the Department of Social and Cultural Analysis of New York University. She is the author of Trans Feminist Crossroads, Reimagining the Ecuadorian State, published in TSQ Transgender Studies Quarterly in 2016, and is currently preparing a book manuscript based on her dissertation, Gender for All. Dr. Gariga Lopez conducted a long-term participatory research, conducted long-term participatory research with trans-feminist and queer activists and artist groups in Quito, Ecuador, and has deep roots in community health and advocacy organizations in New York City. Her scholarship and visual art have been featured in a number of publications, including Global Encyclopedia of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender LGBTQ History, and Latinas Struggles and Protest in 21st Century USA, as well as the Social Science Research Council's items blog. Dr. Gariga Lopez is also one of the co-editors for the Trans Studies in Las Americas issue of TSQ in 2019. This is very impressive. Her scholarly work is grounded in a critical engagement with activism, public policy, and public health, as well as trans-feminist and queer performance art, and cultural production in Latin America, the Caribbean, and within people of color communities in the U.S. Welcome. May I call you Claudia Sofia or do you prefer a doctor? Oh, no, please call me Claudia Sofia. Thank you for the warm welcome. Well, thanks for coming. Our next guest is Sarah Youngblood Gregory, who is a lesbian writer and poet. She covers sex, kink, VDSM, disability, pleasure, and health care for queer and trans folks. Sarah serves on the board of the Lesbian Literary and Arts Journal, Sinister Wisdom, which we all know and love. Sarah's debut checkbook, Run, is currently under contract with Finishing Line Press. Her work has been featured in Vice, HuffPost, Game, The Rumpus, Jezebel, and many others. You may also know Sarah as Sinister Spinster from Instagram, where they talk about kink and sex ed. Welcome, Sarah. Now, Shirin Inyatola is an associate professor of English at York College CUNY. Her areas of research include composition literacy studies, auto ethnography, and she has a really interesting article about that in this collection, and queer theory. Her work has appeared in a variety of publications, including the Journal of Lesbian Studies and the Rutledge Handbook of Queer Rhetoric. She is currently working on an auto ethnographic project that celebrates the complexities of queer immigrant storytelling practices. Welcome, Shirin. Thank you. Now we have the editor-in-chief of Sinister Wisdom, should we say? Julie Enzer is the author of four poetry collections, including Avowed, and the editor of the Complete Works of Pat Parker and Sister Love, the letters of Audrey Loden, Pat Parker, 1974 through 1989, and I just read that. It's a wonderful volume, Julie. Enzer edits and published Sinister Wisdom, a multicultural lesbian and literary art journal. She lives in Central Florida, and she's also co-editor of this wonderful collection, nominated for Lambda Literary Award this year, Outrights. So welcome, everybody. It's great to see you. I have some questions that I was hoping you would respond to, and a lot of them have to do with how you put together a volume like this. So the first question I have is, how did the idea for this issue come about? It's a special issue on transfeminisms. How did it happen? Whose idea was it? I believe it was Red Washburn's idea, if I'm not mistaken, to which Julie was happy to accept. And Red Washburn said about recruiting the majority of the co-editors for this issue. And I think all of us gladly accepted. It was a really nice, diverse group of transgender, non-binary and cis-transfeminists. And we began meeting like two years ago, if I'm not mistaken. Having rather large Zoom meetings, I think we've all commented on how the pandemic and the sort of Zoom meetings that became so common as a result of the pandemic allowed for more communication across geographic boundaries. So we're spread out pretty far. And we come from different disciplines. Some of us scholars, some of us more literary people, some of us more artists. And I would say, you know, the meetings I thought ran really smoothly. I dare say this was a joyful, if not easy, then not hard process of everybody having their own sort of contacts, networks that they wanted to invite to be a part of this. Of us feeling welcomed to contribute in our own ways. I'm predominantly a scholar. Maybe have one poem published before the poem that I have published in this issue. But I felt that this was a safe space for me to sort of return to a poetic artistic space. And so that was what the journal process was from my experience. I don't know if anybody else wants to speak to that. Well, let me add my two cents about the pandemic because this show has been going for six years. And we broadcast in Montpelieu, Vermont, which is not a hotspot, necessarily for a lot of writers, although writers and authors are here. But anyway, once the pandemic began, we realized the potential of Zoom. And so now we can enter, for example, we can interview you all from all over the country. And we've even done some international interviews. So it's great. Did you start out with 12 editors? Or did that grow as the process went along? I believe we started off with the 12 editors from the start. So, yeah, like I said, Red really said about recruiting a very diverse group of people. And we were all happy to oblige. Perhaps Red could speak more of the difficulties of wrangling for 12 different co-editors. But I felt like the meetings were very productive and very sort of like everybody was on the same page and looking for the issue to be really extensive and diverse. And it was. Who was that? The rest of your experience? Well, Julie, what was your role? My, my, I really did function as the publisher of this issue. I read and I talked about it in the conceptualization phase. And I knew, you know, Red's done a number of issues with sinister wisdom. And one of the things that they feel really passionately about is putting together multicultural, intergenerational groups of folks to edit things. And that's, you know, that's what we have. I feel like this is really the a pinnacle of his work with sinister wisdom, which started out interestingly with the Michigan Women's Music Festival issue that we published, Sinister Wisdom 103. And then Red also worked on our Dump Trump issue and an issue with the lesbian and herstory archive. And the sort of commitment to centering voices of people of color is really clear in this issue. And also in really thinking about intergenerational exchange, the issue has has trans folks who are really I think now recognized as trans elders like Susan Stryker and Pauline Park, as well as really incredible emerging voices. And all of that comes across in that wonderful conversation in the volume between Red and Matilda Bernstein and Sycamore. I love that. That was so, you know, it spoke to my sensibilities quite a bit. So how about our other two interlocutors? Did you have the same experience you were involved from the get go and you found the meeting smooth? And yeah, it was a really wonderful experience. I thought it was really fun to have so many different editors. I think, you know, at first it could be a little overwhelming, you know, at first glance to see 12 names on the front cover. But really, the experience was that there are a lot of different voices. But I think we were really united on the vision of the issue. And we came out with a really robust issue. And I'm really proud of how many different voices are in this issue. And I'm proud that I know this issue has found its home with sinister wisdom and that the reception has been so wonderful to it. It's just been really gratifying. And I think at our launch event, too, something that was really exciting was, you know, seeing the audience and the range of people that were drawn to this issue and drawn to sinister wisdom. Young people, you know, this was maybe their first piece published. And then older people who have been really familiar with sinister wisdom and kind of legacy subscribers. And then people who have just stumbled on thinking, I'm really excited about this topic and the work written here. And then they get introduced to sinister wisdom. So that was really exciting. And one of the things that I really wanted to see when working on this issue. Shireen, did you delegate among the editors? Like a visual arts person, you tell me. That happened. It happened very organically, too, in our meetings. A lot of times we would have, let's say, for example, poetry submissions. And there would be a few of us that would say, I don't know if I'm the person who's qualified to say, you know, what poetry will be included or not. And then somebody who had a lot more experience with that would step up and say, I'll do it, or I loved this one. And I think that happened because we were working with submissions in different forms, right, in poetry, visual arts and then prose pieces, essays. So it was really nice to have such a variety of skills represented by the editorial collective. And and I think in terms of the labor, it was really just something that, you know, this task needs to get done, who can do it. And then people would either volunteer or, you know, Radh would nudge us and then someone would reach out and reply. I mean, it was really it worked very seamlessly. Having 12 people, I think, made every part of it a lot easier to because it was such a shared and collective kind of labor. And that's really important, I think, to emphasize, because Radh really helped sort of shape this this quality of work as something that we're all contributing to. It wasn't just like a hierarchy one person's in charge and everybody else has to figure out what their role is. It was very much like all hands on deck kind of thing. So I was going to ask you what your principles of selection were. And so you probably all had different dependent on which cadre you choose to join, depending on the submission or how did that work? You know, I feel like we worked more on the basis of recruitment. So from the start, we had Susan Stryker's piece on groundlessness, which she sort of offered up. And so there was some pieces that we knew were offered and that we would want to take. And I know that we did put out a call for submissions, but I think we also really did a lot of recruitment work. And that's really where the strength of having 12 different editors came into place, where it was less about saying, OK, what came in and how do we sort through these different submissions to say, would you really want to be a part of this? And can you get them to submit something in time? So if anything, it was a little bit more of like, did you call them? Did you follow up? Are they going to submit it? Is it coming? And less of a thing about saying, like, what are our criteria for accepting a piece? I will say that from the start, we wanted it to be as diverse in terms of the people whose work we were submitting and the type of work that we wanted to see. And I think that because that was part of our intention from the start, we were able to secure that diversity of expression and representation that we were hoping for. Well, you know, that's a great plan because one thinks of collectives. I mean, I was on the collective of a feminist magazine and a lot of times it came down to, oh, I like this one. Well, I don't like it. Well, why don't you know what I mean? And so it sounds like if you were soliciting the people, it would make a lot more sense. Um, how did you and I'll also just add one other thing about the, you know, 12 co-editors and also the size. This is one of our thicker issues. Yes, I mean, I just want to note that at this particular historic moment, there's such heat and excitement in thinking about trans issues among a range of people, right? Both folks who identify and see themselves in trans categories, but also people who are just interested in gender, interested in queerness, that there's there's just heat around these issues right now. And I think that was the other sort of thing that brought people together and that brought the pieces, the pieces out from folks is this kind of desire to really think about trans issues and also the way trans issues knit together with feminism and how they have a space in a journal that's historically lesbian. There's there's there's a lot of heat and energy and excitement about those ideas right now in wide ranging places. And that's why it's such an exciting volume, you know, because it it clarifies how groundbreaking all of this kind of thinking really is and how it corresponds with it intersects with feminism and this part of feminism. And, you know, the bifurcation that has prevailed in certain circles is just retrograde. It's, you know, it's false because this is the wave of the future. And it's very exciting, I think. So how did each of you become you were all recruited by red? Yeah, if I could just add to that, yes, it's the wave of the future. And also, it is a significant part of our history legacy past. And so I think that a lot of us are committed to sort of refusing a look back that says, oh, you know, feminists or lesbians of the past, we're all transphobic and it's not until now that we see that we see that inclusion of trans people and instead call forth a long history. You know, we can go back to Pauli Mori in the 1930s, the Combahee River, collected in the 80s, Cherry Moraga, Oriane Saldua, right? That women lesbian of color, feminism has been a super important place of foundation for the trans feminism of the present moment. And that we do a disservice to our own history and legacy by creating this division as a generational one, when really it's about a small subset of feminists and lesbians who have decided to take on this exclusionary position. And so I think that rather than create this really narrow framework of like exclusionary feminists or inclusive feminists or lesbians, we can sort of look to the broad expanse of trans, lesbian and feminist collaboration and solidarity and alliance and shared histories as as what we're calling forth in this issue that is definitely pointed towards the future in in this moment when that collaboration and alliance is so urgently needed because of the ways in which we're under attack in really explicit ways. Thank you, Claudia, Sophia, a very important point. So you each were recruited by Red to get back to how you happened to join up? Yep. Yep. We've been working with Red on other projects. I actually did not know Red before this. And we have gotten to know each other quite well. But Red had reached out to Marcy Blackman, who who I know from 100 years ago and Marcy reached out to me. So that was my, I guess, point of recruitment, if you can call that. And you have that wonderful conversation in the volume. Yes, Marcy and I had a conversation that we wrote for this issue as well. And I love the cover the conversations. I love reading conversations. So that particular literary form is especially vibrant, I think. What did you like most about the issue? And what did you like most about your cooperative experience? You said how long did you say it took to put it together? Claudia, Sophia, did you say two years or two months? About two years. That's a big commitment. Yeah, yeah, we we we paused in between stuff, but yeah, it took about two years. Things happen. What did you like most about the issue that is multi-generational and multi-racial, et cetera? I really love that it's published in a lesbian journal. You know, I think sinister wisdom is a foundation of lesbian literary history. And I think, as as I've said, right, that trans feminism is not new to sinister wisdom. Trans people have been collaborating and contributing to it for a long time. But I think that for many, it's sort of a bedrock of of lesbian culture. And I think that it's really important that we have this moment of really explicit positioning of this journal. So I really enjoyed really reading Julie Enzer's introduction for the ways in which it sort of documents that arc of of the journal, which, you know, kind of shows a little bit of of back and forth of how this is a debate that happens within lesbian feminism, but also kind of like how we land to this point of really explicit naming and taking up of trans feminism. And let me ask you about the reaction to this volume. It's been primarily positive, would you say? Yes, it's hard to gauge, isn't it? I mean, you know, you send it out into the world and some people respond and. Yeah, there have been there's been a lot of really wonderful feedback from subscribers, long term subscribers and also new subscribers, too. And on social media, too, I've gotten a few messages saying, hey, I saw this. I think you're a part of this. I just subscribed. I'm so excited. I wish I'd known about this like 10 years ago. So I've been getting a lot of really wonderful messages from people that have been really gratifying to see. And I think Julie can speak to this as well, because she fields a lot of the emails, but it's been a very positive response. I would just add really quickly that the launch, I think, was it was a reminder of how people are responding. And I wrote this to Julie several times. I think I use this word many times, but it was beautiful. It was moving and beautiful to witness that launch. And just to see, you know, the variety of people who were in the Zoom room. It was so multi-generational and it was very representative of the people who read Sinister Wisdom and have for a long time. And it was it just felt like a very positive energy in that space. The readers were wonderful and the reading the comments that in the chat. I mean, it was just incredibly lively and warm and also intellectually, I think, completely satisfying. So I just wanted to add that. Well, I was going to add just a couple of things. One is that after the launch reading, someone emailed me and said that one of the readers is the true heir to Dorothy Allison, which I thought was really fun and wonderful. So I encourage people to to look at that video to hear that. And the other I mean, I want to echo what Claudia Sophia said earlier about the ways that this issue traces the contributions of lesbians of color to contemporary trans feminism formations, which I think is is really something that is that comes out more and more, but that I just like to repeat that and remind us of the really so much of the groundbreaking work that happened in the 70s and 80s by lesbians of color and also lift up the Arab American trans round table that is at the end of this this issue, which I think maybe one of the most consequential pieces that I've published as a part of Sinister Wisdom and in the fall, it'll be my 50th issue of the journal that's that I published. And the round the Arab American round table is really extraordinary. Every every single word and every single line of it. What I loved about it was that it ends with people's dreams for the future. And then, you know, it was provide I was like, well, what are my dreams? What kind of world do I mean, you know, so it's really inspiring that way. And it's a I know there are a couple of pieces after that that are very good. But, you know, it's really powerful. You're right. It is. And I just want to make sure we name a hymn said to Mateo Badrin, who really convened it and was the the architect behind a lot of that. And I'm so grateful for his work. Yes. Just Joe Cuddy in that at some point, he mentions he talks about homegirls and, you know, the people of color whose work has inspired him. So naming them also. All right, let's we move to Claudia Sophia's definition of trans feminism, what she says. And I'll ask you to respond if you'd like. May I quote you to yourself? Sure. Trans feminism is an intersectional and internationalist movement, a radical transformational politics that is not exclusively tied to trans issues, an important point. It's a practice of world making that integrates trans liberation into other struggles for social justice. Would you mind elaborating a little on that? It's a fabulous definition, I thank you. Well, I guess I would say that I began studying trans feminism in 2011 when I traveled to Guito and encountered Proyecto Transgeneral or Transgender Project. They began as the legal patrol, which was a collaboration between law students and street sex workers who were experiencing arbitrary arrests, extortion, physical abuse and a number of other atrocities on behalf of the police in Guito. And what they did was develop a series of sort of interpersonal interventions with the police. They would patrol the police, they would patrol the streets in the same times and places as the police, and they would dialogue with them about how sex work was not a criminalized practice, what it means to solicit sex, what it means to enter into a non-official contract with someone. And in that way of addressing police abuse led to political education, community building, et cetera, empowerment for trans sex workers. And so I think that trans feminism, different from something like queer theory, has always been based in sort of the material conditions of trans people. And that's exactly what makes it possible to sort of branch out into other issues. So a recurring experience for sex workers of all genders is migration, right? And so many times, feminist debates about whether sex work is inherently oppressive or whether there's space for liberation and empowerment or autonomy or agency within sex work are limited by their lack of attention to how migration policy systemically disenfranchises sex workers. And so those are some of the ways in which when you attend to the material conditions of trans people's lives, you necessarily open up into a broad range of other issues that expand beyond what we traditionally think of as trans issues. I'm thinking here of the work of Paisley-Kara in Sex Is as Sex Does where he talks about how the most important policies to put forth for trans people would be comprehensive immigration reform, prison abolition, universal health care, right? Things that are not necessarily thought of as trans issues, but that are actually the things that most profoundly impact trans people's lives and their ability to live their lives as trans people. So those are some of the ways in which I think trans feminism is this sort of deeply intersectional politics. I add they're internationalists and to me internationalist means anti-imperial, anti-colonial, right? Right now, living in Puerto Rico, we are experiencing deep structural abandonment, consistent power outages that are the result of efforts to and successful efforts to privatize the electrical grid so that the United States companies can extract more money and more wealth to upwardly distribute it to the United States. And those are things that deeply impact trans people's lives, right? We have a systemic lack of health care available in Puerto Rico and that is a result in great part to Puerto Rico's colonial status to the United States. And so for me saying that it's internationalist really means sort of understanding that on top of supporting migrants' rights, people's ability to move somewhere else when conditions in their homeland do not allow for them to flourish. It's also about being able to stay where we are and pushing back against the displacement. So for example, Puerto Rico has been subject to gentrification as a form of colonization for some time now, but really in the pandemic moment, right? We have this sort of renewed interest in Puerto Rico as a place where people can be outdoors all year around and this proliferation of Airbnb's in every single direction that make it so that people are increasingly unable to find affordable housing. And that impacts trans people's lives because trans people experience higher levels of poverty than other portions of the population, especially when we get into people of color. So those are some of the ways in which I think that trans feminism involves this sort of expansive view of politics and that has really been a point of identification for me as a trans feminist to not simply limit my understanding of trans feminism as like the inclusion of trans people into traditionally feminist issues, but instead sort of what happens when we focus on peoples who are most marginalized in our society and place them at the center of our attention and understand that what is most beneficial for women of color, trans people, people who are homeless will ultimately be in the benefit of society as a whole. Good. Here we go. I mean, it's so true. Everything's got to have a materialist base or what's the point? Let me turn to the next definition if you wouldn't mind on page 109 of my copy. This is Pauline Park who says, trans feminism meant for me is a mode of analysis that helps us understand gender in its widest sense and the relations of power circulating throughout society that are inextricably linked with dominant and alternative discourses of gender identity and gender expression. And just as important, if not more so, trans feminism is a commitment to social justice, which is what you were just talking about, quality of Sophia rooted in the understanding of power relations and the experiences of oppression based on gender identity and expression. Just like feminism, there will inevitably be many varieties of trans feminism as there are trans feminists. Does anyone want to respond to that particular definition? Jareen, Sarah, I feel like I'm in the classroom and I don't want to press you. Well, we will go on to the third definition. I will just say it's lovely to hear these things that you pull out, right? Because I think that this is one of the things that journals can do really well. And this issue is calling into being a new way of thinking about the world and people are working on different definitions. And I think that's one of the things journals do really well is bring multiple voices together to work through meanings definitions, to think about and roll around ideas. And I think that's one of the things that's a real success of this issue. And as you were reading it, I was recognizing the many ways that those sentences from Pauline Park echo with different sentences, different ideas, different topics, but still that echo there across the many decades of the journal. I think what's really important about this particular paragraph is that we're talking about trans feminisms, and I think that becomes very underscored here. Because I think there's a tendency to imagine trans feminism as sort of a singular or monolith kind of approach or lens. And it is not and it cannot be. While there are shared struggles, I think to just echo Claudia Sophia's incredible explanation of the definition provided in the text. I think this is a struggle to end oppressions of all kinds. So it is of course inextricably linked to all other such struggles and what leaps to mind is looking at the policing of national borders, looking at issues of access to health care, housing, medicine, food security, all of those very basic needs that are fundamental to our humanity. If we were to find solutions for that, that is exactly what is needed here. And it is vast and it is huge. And that's why we cannot, I think, pigeonhole one particular concept of trans feminism. It is multiple. It is feminism. Well, should we go through the third definition or should we move to asking Julie how to get the issue? I'd love to hear the last definition. Three is a good number. All right. It's Matilda Bernstein's Sycamore definition on 227 if you have the book before you. A trans inclusive feminism has to mean changing feminism itself or else what is the point of inclusion? It's not just about having us in the room. It's about how we can do this binary. It's about how can we undo this binary way of thinking in order to end transgender-based violence, rape culture, and patriarchy in all its forms. A steadfast reliance on categories of men and women, male and female, is part of the problem, not the solution. I think that's an important point to add to our conversation also. Absolutely. Yes. I think that dismantling of the sex-gender binary is one of the most important contributions that trans feminism has to offer feminism. The way that sense the creation of that gender sex binary as a way of refusing the imposition of specific gender roles on people assigned female at birth, we've been limited by it. I think that it in many ways creates a biological determinism, a gender essentialism that is actually harmful to much more than just trans people. When I think of trans feminism, it is much more than feminist solidarity to trans issues or feminist inclusion of trans issues. It's allowing feminism to be meaningfully and deeply transformed by trans politics in ways that will help us break out of our sort of self-made enclosures that really don't serve us at this point. I think that trans feminism pushes back against a sort of wounded attachment to biological determinism that really sort of only thinks of womanhood in terms of its victimization in relation to men. I think that that really limits our political vision to not be intersectional and internationalist in the ways that I just pointed towards trans feminism having the potential and the real manifestation of being. Sherry, do you have anything to add? I just think, you know, when I think about trans feminism and trans feminism, I think about how everyone is doing and interested in and intrigued by and performing gender at all times. I think some people don't want to really think about that. I think there's a lot of pushback to people who are explicitly saying like, yes, I am doing gender, right? I am playing with gender. I am transforming. I'm doing all these different things with it. And I think what's really exciting when I think about trans feminism is it wants everyone to confront gender, right, cis people too. And I think that's a really important necessary thing because we're going to talk about, you know, dismantling the gender binary as we need to. We also need to talk about the people who are doing gender and why they're doing it in those ways and what it might look like if they thought about it and could transform it with themselves and other people in their lives. So to me, that's an exciting possibility. Absolutely. Before we continue and get to last words, I'd like to call on your colleague, Julie, you've gotten a sampling now, reviewing audience of what's in this exciting volume. How can we get it, Julie? So Sinister Wisdom is available for direct order through our website at sinisterwisdom.org slash sw128. That's the number or you can just go to sinisterwisdom.org and it's right on the homepage. Click there and you can purchase a copy through PayPal. If you're not comfortable with PayPal, I also, you can send checks through the mail. The address is on our website, sinisterwisdom.org. And if you have any questions, my office number is also on the website. People are welcome to call me and I'll help you get your hands on a copy. We do ship twice a week, we're shipping out copies regularly. That's sinisterwisdom.org slash sw128. Very good. I personally am not a fan of PayPal. So thank you for providing those other options. Now we're drawing to a close, friends. So let us, let me ask you for last words. What do you want the audience to leave the audience with an in advance? Let me thank you all for coming. This has been very informative and enlightening and fun. So last words. I'll say to pick up on the definition of from Matilda Sycamore Bernstein, one of the things of having Matilda in this issue is he talks, she talks really beautifully about coming out in lesbian communities and sort of pays homage to lesbian communities as sort of a crucible central to their identity. And I really loved that moment. And it's not the only moment in the journal where there's this thinking about lesbian communities and how they've strengthened and helped forge different trans folks. And I think those moments are really beautiful. And it's another part of the issue that I'm really proud of. I think that's really a high point. And I was trying to think of some way that I could, I might zerox that whole conversation and send it around to friends. But of course, I'll encourage them to get the issue and buy it too. Thanks, Julie. Last words. Sure. I think I would just say how grateful I am for this opportunity to be a part of this project. So special shout out to Red. Thank you, Red, for always putting me on to cool opportunities. This is not the first time and hopefully not the last. And I would just say that Susan Stryker's piece on groundlessness really helped me understand my place as someone who is not trans within trans feminism, right? cisgender people are the ones who most propagate transphobia and therefore it is cisgender people's responsibility above all else, right? To attend to transphobia and to combat it and to extricate it from our lives or the blueprints of our thinking. Trans feminism has helped me understand myself differently. So I do think of myself as gender non-binary, but I also understand that I'm red and received as cis throughout the majority of my life and that understanding myself as gender non-binary does not mean I don't have unexamined transphobia to work through. So I would say that, right, that it is our responsibility to take on this work and to not shy away from that responsibility, to not feel guilty. Audrey Lorde has this great quote from her essay on the uses of anger where she says, I have no creative use for guilt, yours or my own. Guilt is only another way of avoiding informed action of buying time out of the pressing need to make clear choices out of the approaching storm that can bend the trees as well as feed the earth. We are in that storm of transphobic hate, of anti-feminist hate and legislation waving over us and we need to sort of not shy away from making clear decisions and letting people know where we stand and kind of solidarity means sharing risks, right? So sharing the risk of confrontation, of judgment, of whatever it may be to understand the need to sort of stand together and to be creative as opposed to the sort of silent destruction that we tend to think is safer. So those would be my final reflections. Thank you, Claudia Sopia, and thank you for that wonderful quotation of Audrey Lorde. I'm very impressed. All right, Jareen, Sarah, last words. I would just say Claudia Sopia says it the best. And so with Claudia Sopia's work, but Sarah's work, everybody who has contributed in some way to this issue are people that are out there in the world doing so many things. And I think many people have other work that can be accessed and read or looked at or, you know, considered in some way and experienced. And I think so if this issue speaks to anybody in a particular way to continue the work of finding the contributors, asking them and paying them fairly to do other kinds of work in the future or making sure that their labor is compensated in some kind of way, but keeping this energy going and thinking also about the wide circles that each of us also have and how there is a way for us to involve people, to support people, and continue the work of centralizing trans feminisms in a variety of venues. So I would make that suggestion to the audience. Thank you very much. I'm sorry. Go ahead. I didn't mean to cut you up. I just said thank you for having us. This has been great. Sarah. Thank you. I echo what everyone else said, but I would also just encourage people to really consider supporting sinister wisdom. We know that we need queer and lesbian media. We know that we need queer and lesbian and trans media. We know it. Sinister wisdom is doing the work and I encourage everyone to support the journal or to the issue, subscribe, all of those good things. Thank you. Very good. Julie, you want to wrap it up for us? I don't have anything to add. Thank you so much. And it's always a delight to talk with you. The issue is Sinister Wisdom 128, Transfeminism, available at sinisterwisdom.org. Thank you, friends. Thank you for joining us. You're welcome to come back any time individually or together. Thank you, Anne. Take care now. Bye, everybody. Good to see you again. Bye. Bye. Thank you for joining us. And until next time, remember, resist.