Q&A at Exposures Trans Film Festival, September 20th

Hi, everybody! A couple weeks ago, “Notes on Vanishing” screened at the Exposures Trans Film Festival. Afterwards, I got on stage for a Q&A with Molly Moss, one of the fest's organizers – we had a great conversation and dug into some interesting topics. My fiancée was kind enough to film it, but the event took place in a big, echoey room, and the audio came out garbled enough that it’s difficult to understand at times. Instead of uploading the raw footage, I’ve decided to transcribe our conversation for your reading pleasure :)

Here it is, condensed for clarity.

✦✦✦

MOLLY: Hi everybody. Thank you so much for coming out, sticking around for the Q&A. Let’s give a big round of applause for Lily and the film…

(applause)

MOLLY: This is a huge, packed, gorgeous crowd! I think the film really spoke to a lot of the things we’re all dealing with right now. So first, I wanted to know if there was something that got you started on the things you’re exploring in this film. Was there a moment, or a question you had?

LILY: I feel like trans visibility is a constant rotating topic of discourse, and the trans women in my personal life seem to have a very different feeling [about visibility] than I generally see in media, or on the internet. I notice that a lot of people I love and trust on this stuff are very anti-visibility, and I was curious about that. These women aren’t normies, you know? But I guess they’ve assimilated somewhat, and that's worked for them.

I feel like… there’s a little bit of hostility toward transgender women… Don’t know if you’ve noticed… And I felt like the anti-visibility angle was often being framed as regressive. I kind of wanted to explore the argument for it, even though I’m not all the way on that side.

Oh, and obviously fascism. Short answer.

MOLLY: Yeah, that’s an answer for a lot of things today, unfortunately. But yeah, there’s a whole history of going stealth. That’s been kind of frowned upon nowadays, but it’s a survival tactic, you know?

LILY: Yeah! And obviously, there’s no going back from (gestures at my enormous face projected onto the screen behind us) this, visibility-wise, but I’ve found it tempting at times. There’s at least an illusion of security in that.

MOLLY: To get into almost the opposite question, in terms of visibility: you make a choice in this film that I found really interesting, which is to shoot a lot outside – as you’re narrating to camera – in different parts of Montreal. You’re making yourself really exposed and visible, and I was wondering what the thought process behind that was.

LILY: Yeah, totally. If anyone here has seen my other videos, you’ll notice there is a cat that is constantly climbing on my face, trying to bite me and stuff… Honestly, a huge part of it was not wanting to deal with that (laughs)

Another big factor was that I wanted it to feel like a bunch of separate scenes, and I live in a one-bedroom apartment, so the idea of staging a bunch of separate scenes was not super practical.

On top of that, visibility – being outside – it’s a natural pairing. And I think I want to do that more, it’s easier to get a nice-looking image out in nature.

MOLLY: I felt for you, because I could almost feel how cold it must’ve been in a lot of those [scenes].

LILY: Oh, Jesus. Like, we were in the old port, [where it’s] completely open, early March. I couldn’t move my mouth during some of these shoots. If I was directing someone else, I would feel terrible.

MOLLY: I love that it’s just a very practical decision, with regards to the cat.

LILY: Sometimes it’s the vibe, is the thing. If we’re doing a little cozy, sillier one, it can be fitting. But this was gonna stress me out, to be bitten every five minutes.

MOLLY: This was so interesting to watch in the context of this festival. The idea of creating temporary spaces for trans people to come together. At the end of this festival, we’re going to break things down, it’ll be gone for a year. As you were looking into these things – 75SHOTS, for example – I was curious if you had thoughts on what things are important for these kinds of community spaces?

LILY: I’ll have to give that some more thought. Part of me as an internet-dweller does not want to give the grass-touchers advice, ‘cause I feel like you guys are already doing great.

MOLLY: I’m a grass-toucher??

LILY: (gestures broadly at festival) You know?

MOLLY: I guess so! I’ll take the compliment.

LILY: But I dunno. I love the programming, the attendance has been great, I kind of just have praise for you guys. I was at the last screening, and loved the international focus. I think that’s so important. I could tell you I want to see certain kinds of movies, but ultimately it’s about taking the temperature, giving a [platform] to all sorts of things.

My thing is more for the audience: go to these, you know? Which is not advice that you need. There’s stuff tomorrow, right?



MOLLY: Yeah.

LILY: Come to the stuff tomorrow!

MOLLY: Okay, I am gonna open up to audience questions, if you’re cool with that. Does anyone in the crowd have questions?



AUDIENCE MEMBER #1: You’re reporting on the argument that trans people should disappear in the face of hypervisibilization, and the violence that’s linked to that. But there’s been a lot of trans theory about the tension between: “we are invisibilized” and “we are hypervisibilized”. These arguments constantly bumping against each other.

For example, Viviane Namaste writes that trans people in the 90s were invisibilized by the state, in the sense they can’t access shelters, IDs, things like that. I’ve also found that in talking to my friends, especially nonbinary friends whose identities don’t always integrate into systems.

I guess I’m wondering what your thoughts are on the inverse of [the hyper-visibility] argument: the ways in which trans people are invisibilized, and the violence coming from that.

LILY: To be honest with you, it’s just a different kind of recognition. When we’re talking about legal IDs, it’s not the “visibility” that happens on television. I think we are lucky enough to have landed those [legal recognition] victories here, although they’re at risk of backsliding. Hmm… Let me think about this. There’s a lot here.

MOLLY: I think we’re also reacting to the time we’re living in. In the 90s, perhaps people were fighting for more visibility, and now that we’re hypervisible, the community has different goals in mind – maybe to be the normies that touch grass.

LILY: Obviously interfacing with the general public is important. For my own well-being I’ve had to think about just reaching each other. It feels a lot more dignified, not having to explain yourself like everyone in the room is three years old all the time. That’s my priority, finding each other, because we have a critical mass that can do a lot, even on its own.

MOLLY: The most I’ve learned to be comfortable with myself is by interacting with other trans people, not necessarily trying to make other people understand who I am, you know?

LILY: Totally! And like, I have very rewarding relationships with cis people–

MOLLY: Some of my best friends are cis.

LILY: (laughs) But the systems? Institutions? I dunno… I hope they find their way through this. It’s their mess.

MOLLY: Anyone else have a question?



[AUDIENCE MEMBER #2 asks a question my mic didn’t pick up.. Molly recaps.]

MOLLY: The question was about the section of the film where the screen’s split into two, with you talking and the film you’re talking about [We’re All Going to the World’s Fair] and how that directed attention away from you. What was the thought process behind that?

LILY: Two-part answer. First part: I had already decided I wanted the video to be very wide. And the movie’s not that wide. So it was partly just a practical affordance, just wanting to fill the frame.

Secondly… I’m making this stuff for YouTube, right? That’s the thing that makes me a living. You sort of need to use these weird tactics to keep people watching, and often just having a lot happening is effective. I made a video a couple years ago where I talked about super intense, overwhelming video sludge [Everything Is Sludge: Art in the Post-Human Era] and I projected it onto my face, and that is one of my best-performing videos. People watch it for so much longer than they watch anything else I make.

[Future Lily chiming in with a clarification: I specifically like the content sludge effect because it feels bad to watch. This video was designed to be overwhelming and disorienting, same as Everything Is Sludge. I wouldn’t use this trick divorced from that context, only pursuing viewer retention – that would feel gross.]

MOLLY: I also found it so interesting, the tension between questioning visibility while also… This video is available on YouTube, the economy of which is constantly pushing you to be as hypervisible as possible.

LILY: Totally. There’s a real incentive to be part of the discourse mill, the outrage machine. I would probably be much better-off financially if I was just making very topical, somewhat inflammatory videos about JK Rowling or whatever. I’m really fortunate that, after a few years of [making videos], I don’t need to do that anymore. I can put something out whenever I [feel I] need to. The videos do less well, but it feels a little better, I don’t feel I’m stoking the flames so much.

Not many people can choose to say no to that. It’s really down to having a base of support on Patreon [hey - that’s you!].

[AUDIENCE MEMBER #3 asks a question my mic didn’t pick up. Molly recaps]

MOLLY: The question was about being visibly trans in relation to government bureaucracy, and the “X” gender marker, which a lot of people feel complicated about.

LILY: I’m fortunate that’s not a calculus I’ve had to do. I did the legal change to “F”. It doesn’t feel my place to say “do it”, or “don’t do it”, but definitely understand the risks. Understand that it’ll mean you can’t travel to certain countries.

I’m someone who would like to be read as a gender that doesn’t raise eyebrows. For me, I feel I wouldn’t want to elicit that kind of negative attention, but I’m not about to say everyone needs to present as a man or woman. Some people are happy to give the finger to anybody who makes it an issue.

MOLLY: The gender marker has an interesting history. It’s something I took for granted for so long, but it’s a fairly recent invention when it comes to IDs.

LILY: Yeah. A friend of mine who’s been out for ten or fifteen years was really heated when the X gender marker came to pass. She was like, “Wait, no. I thought we were going to take them off. I thought that was the whole point – to make gender less important.” I feel that’s a fair beef.

[AUDIENCE MEMBER #4 asks a question my mic didn’t pick up. Molly recaps]

MOLLY: Can you elaborate on the meaning of the word visibility [as you’re using it], and how it’s become harmful?

LILY: When I’m thinking about visibility, I’m thinking about a larger slice of the public having more detailed ideas about what trans people are, what transitioning involves, how we look and sound. I think here, the big drivers of that were trans people’s increased presence in film and TV, and social media. The prominence of certain trans writers [and journalists].

I feel very conflicted about all this. One of the more straightforward takes that I have is: the harmful visibility has mostly not been stuff that we chose to do. It was, for example, one fourteen year-old being a little silly, and then thousands of YouTubers running with it. We can’t hold ourselves to the standard of not a single trans person being cringe.

MOLLY: I have to apologize. I have been cringe in the past. I’m sorry to the transgender community.

LILY: (laughs) We’re here to forgive you. And me, hopefully.

But yeah, could we have predicted that stepping into the sunlight would backfire in a way we weren’t prepared for? Probably some people did, but consider that the “anti-gender movement” in Europe alone has spent over a billion dollars. That’s not the kind of resource you can anticipate being levied against you. I can’t blame anyone for thinking we were living in a better world than we actually are, you know?

MOLLY: I would also point out that we’re not the only targets of like, reactionary conservatives who want to make the world how they imagine it used to be. We’re just one target, but they’re also trying to trample on other forms of progress.

LILY: I’m glad you mention that. Part of what got me over the hump of “Oh my God, this is all our fault” was asking myself: do I think it’s their fault for losing on abortion? Do I think it’s refugees’ fault that people are targeting refugees? No. There can be strategic mistakes, but also, fascists are gonna do their thing.

AUDIENCE MEMBER #5: I was wondering, if you made a film with a message to trans youth, what would you include in that? And if you have a message to your younger self, what would that be, specifically on trans issues?

LILY: I guess I’d want to say find each other… When I think about it, there’s a lot of pain that comes up. It’s fucked up, and I’m sorry… Come to film festivals. (Laughs) No but seriously, you should actually transition if you want to do that. It’s worth it, and you can get away with never doing it, but you should watch Jane Schoenbrun’s other movie [I Saw the TV Glow] if you’re thinking about doing so.

MOLLY: Yeah, I can’t recommend anything more than being physically present with other trans people in a room. You don’t even have to talk to each other – just kinda vibe with each other, it honestly helps.

I wanted to close off [by asking] if there’s anything you’re working on next, that you want to share. Any videos coming up, or questions you’re interested in pursuing. Yeah, what are you working on?

LILY: Yeah! Lemme put it out there: this is getting a sequel. I’m doing one that’s a little more explicitly about surveillance. I don’t remember if it has a title right now.

MOLLY: Notes on Vanishing 2.

LILY: (laughs) But it’s about nannycams, like the ones people hide in AirBNBs. It’s about how arguably the first movie camera was shaped like a gun, and deployed like a gun, and it was called a gun. The chronophotographic gun. It was invented by a doctor who basically thought the human body was really stupid and useless and worse than machines, so let’s use a machine that can replace human eyes. So, you know, we’re doing perception still.

MOLLY: The first transhumanist.

LILY: Oh god! Okay, I know we have to wrap this up, but he built artificial organs because he thought human organs were less objective.

MOLLY: What year was he doing this in?

LILY: 1850s and 60s.

MOLLY: And did it work for him?

LILY: He took some awesome pictures. So… he’s kind of my GOAT, to be honest.

MOLLY: Alright, well! I’m very much looking forward to that.