If The System Isn’t Fair, Build a New One

“…the plan had run out of control. But rather than reveal this, the technocrats had decided to pretend that everything was going according to plan, and what emerged inside was a fake version of society. The Soviet Union became a society where everybody knew what their leaders said wasn’t real because they could see with their own eyes that the economy was falling apart, but everybody had to play along and pretend that it was real because no one could imagine any alternative—one Soviet writer called it hypernormalisation.”

—Adam Curtis, HyperNormalisation

This was the first I ever heard of Alexi Yurchak. Like a lot of us, I spent a lot of time watching TV in early 2020. I didn’t know why at first, but I found myself gravitating to stories from or about the Soviet Union. I re-watched HBO’s Chernobyl miniseries and Tarkovsky’s Stalker, somehow comforted by their depictions of real and imagined collective disaster and eerie zones abandoned by civilization. I watched long documentaries about the last days of Soviet socialism. In my now home-bound weekends I began to revisit the films of cult British director Adam Curtis as much for their hypnotic found-footage visuals and ambient soundtracks as their ruminations on the slow collapse of the 20th century order.

HyperNormalisation was the title of Curtis’s rambling 2016 smash hit which tackled post-truth and institutional rot in rich democracies. The documentary was eerily prescient and it turned out that Curtis had lifted its title from a 2005 book of academic anthropology called Everything Was Forever Until It Was No More. The quote from the book’s author, who trained as a physicist in the USSR before becoming an anthropologist in the US, made me jolt up in my chair. A fake society. Years of playing along pretending like what you saw wasn’t real: Hypernormalisation. A writer born in the Soviet Union had, in precise and clear language, articulated something I had felt as less than an itch, something like a boil under the skin. A recurring vague thought had a name now.

So this is it. I had kept thinking that to myself, over and over, as the summer of 2020 got hotter. This is it. I sat in my improvised home office, littered with my landlord’s mother’s things. I kept the windows open more often as the days grew longer. The whirring air of  ambulance helicopters ferrying Covid patients to nearby hospitals was now drowned out by the throatier sounds of the military helicopters which had begun to patrol Washington DC’s skies. 

This is it. 

I didn’t know if the phrase was resignation or prediction, or if I had been using it to label big or small finalities. I thought about it a lot at the end of my work days. The telework screens I spent my day staring at in my track pants were especially incongruous with the heavy floral prints and antique furniture of a room which, when I had moved in a few months ago at the end of 2019, I had agreed to never use. The user interface I used was all in heavy beige and navy blue and in astoundingly low resolution. There were two things that were omnipresent; the flag and eagle of the official seal of the U.S. Department of State, which was a transparent background on almost every interface, and the loading pinwheel of our cobbled together telework software which spun without end literally any time I tried to do something. 

A fake society. Years of playing along pretending like what you saw wasn’t real: Hypernormalisation.

Since March 2020 I had spent my days in this room, listening to the ambulances and helicopters, waiting for .pdfs to load. I was assigned to the Afghanistan Special Immigrant Visa unit, a group within the State Department which pre-screened Afghan nationals who claimed that they’d worked for the U.S. government to determine if they qualified for recommendation to begin the screening process to apply for an immigration visa. For the various Afghans who had worked for the American occupation forces as truck drivers, girl’s school teachers, security guards, and interpreters, the visa was their ticket out of a country that would eventually fall to the Taliban. I waded through grainy .pdfs of employment records from various American defense contractors, many of whom no longer existed, waiting for them to slowly load as I spent my days verifying the stories laid out in the Afghans’ desperate letters. I was a bureaucrat with no office, no stamps. A diplomat in an adidas tracksuit.  I am not going to save anyone. We do not actually issue visas in this visa unit. We give qualified access to a byzantine and years-long application process to some of those that apply. I know, really everyone in the unit knows, that this isn’t going to work. I no longer believe in any of this.

This is it. 

I didn’t know what I meant but it recurred more and more through the summer. Not that this was the apocalypse or the end of the world or even a final anything, but that the mass death in hospitals, the uprising in the streets, the abandonment of people by their government was the breach and rupture that I guess I had somehow been expecting. This wasn’t clairvoyance and I’ve never been a sage, nor somebody who predicted the future. It didn’t mean that I wasn’t scared and angry. It just means that I wasn’t un-done, I wasn’t shocked by what was happening around me. The feeling was eerie. It was a feeling that had a name now. 

Because I am married to an anthropologist, Everything Was Forever Until It Was No More was an incredibly easy book to find—she already owned a copy. Alexi Yurchak, the “Soviet writer” mentioned by Adam Curtis, is a successful and well-regarded academic and while not canonical, his work is referenced when discussing the inner worlds of Soviet life. I did not pick up the book to read it like an academic, however. I wanted answers, truth. He had named an eerie unplaceable feeling, and I assumed there would be more prophetic nuggets inside. I’m sure I couldn’t have been the only person to start reading Yurchak’s work after watching HyperNormalisation.

It didn’t mean that I wasn’t scared and angry. It just means that I wasn’t un-done.

I didn’t find prophecy, or answers. While hypernormalisation is Yurchak’s animating academic concept he deploys the concept sparingly, no more than a dozen times throughout the book. His writing is measured and clear, but at times very dry. I cycled home from protests, from the church basements where I’d gingerly stay six feet away from a few masked anarchists as we’d all bag up and deliver the donated groceries that the government couldn’t or wouldn’t provide, and I’d read another chapter of Yurchak. The hope was always for an aha moment, another revelation like the cliff notes summary I heard in the documentary but that never came. I fancied myself a rebel, somehow apart from my colleagues in my disgust with the system I was maintaining. I didn’t find any epiphanies spurring me to action. Putting down the book never crossed my mind, though. I kept reading because while I never saw any other revelations, in every chapter, I saw myself. 

The All-Union Leninist Young Communist League, better known by its Russian-language abbreviation Komsomol, was the communist party’s youth organization for young people under age 28. From elementary school well into university and postgraduate and working life, its functionaries—normal people who were ambitious or well spoken or capable enough to be offered the position of ideological worker—were the presence of Soviet communism in the lives of everyday people. Yurchak spends most of the pages with these people or people like them. University professors, administrators, party functionaries and those who in the 1980’s composed the striving middle class of an ostensibly classless society. The reality they inhabited seems initially to be a different and rabidly ideological universe. Red banners and hammers and sickles and colossal statues of Lenin abound, constantly reminding the young officials of socialist internationalism and vigilance against bourgeois ideology as they strive to build the Marxist-Leninist thought in hopes of developing socialism within the USSR. This would be, of course, on the way to the achievement of full communism, to world revolution, to the abolition of class society and all forms of exploitation.

I had met people like them at every professional development happy hour I’d ever gone to in Washington, DC. I was one of them.

I had met people like them at every professional development happy hour I’d ever gone to in Washington, DC. I was one of them. Beneath the window dressing of a different system and different words I saw the same general wish to climb the ladder and the same excitement about Making Things Happen and Getting Involved. Andrei, a young Komsomol secretary at an engineering institute who appears several times in the book, could have been any of a half-dozen young guys I knew who owned one suit and moved to DC to make it in government after finishing a master’s degree. 

They do political and ideological work but they aren’t politicians or ideologues, at least not further than they need to be. Andrei even sees the flags and the slogans and Lenin statues as alienating because he considers himself to be fundamentally a normal guy doing good things—not a stuffed shirt yelling slogans. Yurchak calls this self-professed normalness and distance from ideology “being vnye”, which literally means “outside”—an idea more powerful and applicable to the lives of American bureaucrats today than hypernormalisation. Considering oneself normal and a bit outside the system, like Andrei does, is something that allows him to participate in the work of obviously creaking and failing Soviet institutions, while reserving the freedom to interpret them and his activities in them as he sees fit. 

Andrei is apologetic about his party work in the same way diplomats upholding especially embarrassing or odious U.S. policies abroad are, the way I was when my job was Muslim-banning Iranian grandmothers all day. Look, it’s not great, but I’m a good guy, I don’t actually believe in any of this stuff, and I think I can do good where I’m at. You repudiate what you find distasteful in the system without repudiating the system, and very importantly, without ceasing your outward support for it. You find a way to let yourself off the hook for being there. Andrei may have given up, but he still shows up.

The form of the system is upheld, no matter what, even as everybody involved gives up on the ideals.

When he has to write his first big speech for the 1982 annual Komsomol convention, Andrei realizes he doesn’t actually have any understanding of Marxist-Leninist conceptual rhetoric. In a panic, but desperate to do his job well, he asks his old friend Sasha—who has moved on from the youth organization—for help. “Listen, don’t break your neck over it” says Sasha “take my old speech in the committee files…you may simply copy most of it.” Andrei delivers Sasha’s old 1978 speech with a few modifications and everyone is satisfied that the process of all-Union Leninist Komsomol revolutionary political education is moving forward. The form of the system is upheld, no matter what, even as everybody involved gives up on the ideals.

So what does Andrei’s plagiarized speech have to do with me, with us? What does late-Soviet cynicism mean about America that summer, when hospital hallways were full of the dying and the President suggested that we drink fish tank cleaner? The country where city governments painted Black Lives Matter logos on public plazas only after protesters were violently cleared away, and the country that two years later seems dead set on pretending that none of this ever happened? 

It matters for us because what emerges from Yurchak’s book, from Andrei and dozens of other people he interviews, is that nobody living in the late USSR considered themselves to be a cynic. No subject of his ever expressed a feeling that their way of life was coming to an end. The double consciousness of being vnye, the resigned box-ticking of party formalities, the actual lived cynicism of never caring about the things you profess to believe and the denial inherent to a hypernormalized life; none if it was actually considered to be cynicism by the people doing it. When we live in a failing system we all act like cynics even if we aren’t. Andrei loved American rock and roll and phoned in his official duties, but he still thought himself a devoted communist even if that was only because the prospect of the Soviet Union’s socialist system disintegrating was unimaginable for him.

I don’t want to try to draw a direct one to one parallel between the United States and the USSR here; this isn’t a simple A=B about two large global superpowers who share uniformly geriatric and frequently senile leadership, declining standards of living, vast and cruel systems of mass incarceration, lost wars in Afghanistan, and essential workers sent into COVID wards or the roof of Chernobyl reactor no.4, respectively, with little more than some plastic sheeting and a round of applause for protection. The close comparison between our two systems and the uncannily familiar emotions from 1980’s Russia underscore a final and glaring difference.

Six years before I read Everything Was Forever Until It Was No More, when I reported for duty at the Foreign Service Institute to begin my diplomatic training, I was absolutely as idealistic as Andrei. Eerily so. I had passed the extremely selective exam to become a U.S. diplomat, but I told myself that I wasn’t bought in. I had read Hardt and Negri’s Empire in graduate school, I was suspicious of U.S. Foreign policy and was acutely aware that the country I was called to represent had deep and serious problems. I promised myself that I would find my little corner in the institution and as much as I could, I’d do things right. I’d be fair. I was vnye and I was an ideological worker ready to be trained. 

It is not a conceit to say that we have ideological workers in the United States. That is what diplomats are, trained professionals to communicate American values to the world, our own Komsomol cadres. My instructor for media training in 2014 was a former Embassy spokesperson. They made it crystal clear what we were about. “If you get an uncomfortable question about the US, about what just happened in Ferguson or a mass shooting, you pivot to process.” They punctuated the lesson with a turning hand motion. “You explain that we have a system to resolve differences and problems. We have courts, we have democracy, we have civil society, and no matter how bad the accusation is, you say that we are dealing with it openly.” 

Understood deeply, this is a more utopian statement than any of Andrei’s paeans to the future classless paradise of full Communism. Any challenge to our American system can be met by the circular statement that the system exists, and is working. The perfect society isn’t some time off in the future—it has essentially arrived, it is the process that we currently have in America. Sure, we may need to tweak it. The cops will just need to wear body cameras so their murders can be adequately reviewed by courts. Government officials should put pronouns in our signatures when we send emails authorizing the separation of families. It could be a little better, but we are getting there. Just like the Afghans whose files I read every day, whom I knew were doomed, the best we can hope for is not a just outcome, but to give them fair access to the process. 

Any challenge to our American system can be met by the circular statement that the system exists, and is working.

I’d make sure my part of the system was fair was the most idealistic thing I’d ever allowed myself to believe. The United States of America has never bothered to promise what the USSR did, for the perfection of human life and human beings and an end to the exploitation that has plagued humankind throughout history. We nevertheless insist that we live in a kind of utopia.

Alexi Yurchak’s interviewees were not so existentially bound as we are to the process. They maintained it, diligently, because they had other things to let go of, other big and noble ideals to lose faith in. The last chapter of  Everything Was Forever Until It Was No More is about ease and grace. It is about the lack of surprise anybody felt when the Soviet Union suddenly was no more. They were ready for the end but they didn’t know it.

Over the summer of 2020 I had something like that feeling as I saw things beginning to deeply fray around me. In the two years since, American society has clearly chosen a hypernormalised denial. More police, a pandemic that has only ended in name, no help for the struggling and no reckoning with any of what has transpired. Power still maintains that an alternative is impossible. We are asked to play along and just like Andrei, we are doing so, however unhappily. I don’t know if I can fully imagine any alternative to this system and the way we live now. I know that we, together, need to start. 

7 Books About Multiracial Experience by Biracial Asian Writers

When I was first starting out as a writer, I didn’t know other writers like me existed. All I knew was that in poetry, I had found a space to which I could bring my whole self. I was unsure at first; it took years of unlearning the urge to translate myself and undoing the impulse to explain my existence to confused strangers. I began to question: who am I writing for? Does it matter? What would my poems look like if I were just writing for my friends—or for my whole self? Poetry unfolded before me as a thrilling in-between space, a borderland, a dream dimension, a shifting place of possibility and play. 

I remember the excitement of discovering New Zealand Chinese poets for the first time, people like Alison Wong and Lynda Chanwai-Earle, who had been writing long before me. I had not been introduced to their work as I had been introduced to other poets, on reading lists and in exam questions. Instead, I came across them on the shelves of the creative writing department’s small one-room library. And with this discovery, I began to see myself for the first time as part of some kind of literary tradition—not the same literary tradition they taught us about at school; a less visible one, and less fixed. A lineage of my own. A literary tradition that not only looks to the past but also includes writers of the present and, crucially, makes space for writers of the future. 

It was not until years later that I found other mixed heritage writers and artists, both in Aotearoa New Zealand and elsewhere, mostly through social media. There is no one defining ‘mixed experience’; each of us experiences our racial identity in different and complex ways, in flux and in dialogue with the many other parts of ourselves. Reading these books by other mixed Asian writers nonetheless helped me understand and come to terms with feelings of un/belonging and dislocation. They give me the courage to keep writing into the in-between space.

Honorifics by Cynthia Miller

I had a feeling when I picked up Honorifics that I would feel a kinship with these poems, and I was right. Honorifics is playful, sensuous and full of blazing feeling, on leaving, returning, and the star-map of a family scattered by different migratory threads. These threads intersect on the page, where “lack of language is a longing”. After reading this line, I carried the words with me for days. Miller’s poems travel vast distances underwater and I could feel bits and pieces of myself being carried in the current along with them, as though the poet could see directly into the bright tunnels of my dreams. Sometimes a book makes you feel so seen that you have to pause, take a breath, put the book down and pick it back up again: “You have carried everyone you love, / and for so long, and over such distances.”

Amnion by Stephanie Sy-Quia

Part family history, part excavation, Amnion traces the coming-of-age of an artist in parallel with lost fragments of memory, genealogy and myth. “My English is unrooted. / I turn these soft sounds over in my mouth, my throat, my jaw […]” Sy-Quia writes, attentive to the way language dwells in the body; how it feels to inherit intersecting languages of empire. On attending a Catholic boarding school as a teenager, the poet writes: “My body became as incendiary as a vernacular.” Amnion itself is incendiary; it is a work of resistance, both linguistic and political. This book made me want to write again after a long period of not writing, which is the best feeling—when a text speaks to you so loudly that you have to say something back. 

Edinburgh by Alexander Chee

During lockdown, I remember going for a walk and listening to a podcast interview with the American writer Alexander Chee. On the subject of passing, he said: “every new social scenario has a moment within it where I figure out whether this person has understood who I am or not.” I had to stop under the trees and type his words onto my phone. I thought of them while reading Edinburgh, Chee’s first novel, published back in 2002, which I sought out in my search for novels with main characters who are mixed. In Edinburgh, Chee’s grip on language is extraordinary; I felt myself tumbling down the cliff of each sentence. There’s one moment when Fee, the narrator, says: “It is confusing for some people to look at me. Watching me takes longer than most.” It’s through Chee’s fiction and essays that I’ve found a way to begin to unpick this complex question of seeing and being seen. 

Turning by Jessica J. Lee 

Jessica J. Lee’s debut Turning, published in 2017, is a remarkable book: part memoir, part nature diary and travel journal. Lee chronicles a year of swimming every day for a year (yes, every day) in Berlin, a city she had just moved to at the time. It’s a book I always want to give to friends, because it is truly a gift. It has gifted me so much knowledge, not just about limnology – the study of inland waters – but in teaching me how to be alone in an unfamiliar place, and how to piece together your own meaning of the word “home.” In Turning, I found, for the first time, someone with a background similar to mine writing about her experience of moving through urban and rural landscapes, which was life-changing for me as a writer. 

Sikfan Glaschu by Sean Wai Keung 

Some of my favorite food poems live here in this collection of poetry by the Scottish poet and performer Sean Wai Keung. Sikfan Glaschu is an intimate psychogeography of a city, an unfolding landscape with rich characters and tenderly familiar locations: KFC, the local fish and chip shop, Chinese takeaways. Many poems weave multiple languages together—namely English, Cantonese and Gàidhlig (Scottish Gaelic)—painting a complex portrait of living between languages and between cities. One section of the book is titled “Dreams from Kitchens,” a phrase that captures so much of what I love about this poet’s body of work: kitchens as rich spaces of connection, dreaming and longing, much like the dream-space of a poem. Keung writes: “And just the knowledge that it was possible / to order congee for breakfast in certain places in the world really / did make you feel more at ease with being alive.”

Mixed-Race Superman by Will Harris 

This small book contained one of those ‘aha’ moments for me, when I was seeking out other writers who have reflected on the experience of moving through the world as a multiracial person. In Mixed-Race Superman, the poet Will Harris unpicks multiracial identity and masculinity through the lens of two celebrities with mixed heritage, Barack Obama and Keanu Reeves. Harris writes philosophically and engagingly on the subject of the self: “with too many heritages or too few, too white or not white enough, the mixed-race person grows up to see the self as something strange and shifting […] shaped around a lack.” In these lines I recognized a feeling I’d long been struggling to put into words. I often turn to Harris’s poetry, too, when I’m working out how to approach issues much bigger than me in my writing, such as colonization and migratory family histories. 

Crying in H Mart by Michelle Zauner

Crying in H Mart by Michelle Zauner, who is also one of my favorite musicians, is a heartbreaking read—but it’s also brimming with joy, music and mouth watering food memories, especially of Korean snacks and supermarkets. For so many of us, food is the bridge that connects us with our heritage early in childhood, the “unspoken language between us.” This is one of those rare memoirs that pulls you all the way in, making it hard to come up for air. Her prose is quick and hungry and all-consuming, packed with luscious detail. Especially unforgettable is Zauner’s writing on making kimchi, a monthly ritual I’ve also sought solace in recently: “my mother always used to tell me never to fall in love with someone who doesn’t like kimchi.”

Helen of Troy Battles Southern Hospitality

helen of troy makes peace with the kudzu

my father foxholed me in the lee of the porch, 
gloved and hungry, ready for battle, 
straining at the leash until he launched me 
into the yearly war. i sprang at them, 
the tendrils threatening the house, 
the little questing outriders opening
their mouths to eat. i yanked them. 
i hurt them. i beat them back, 
arms streaked with dirt, following their line 
to the great press of the mother-vine, 
the carpet of vegetation toppling our fences, 
creeping along in inches, in yards. 
the blanket of it. the smother. i tell you 
i was raised among all breeds of weapon—
hand trowels and knife-blade shovels, 
weedeaters, hedge trimmers, chemicals 
in ranks of deadliness, their attendant 
nozzles and hoses, and so when i tell you
i became myself a single sharp edge,
perhaps you’ll hold in your mind the crèche 
that honed me. an animal hunger. 
a green grasp with shadow beneath, 
a moving thing fed on new gulps of land. 
i walked out into the mass of it, boots 
to my knees against the coiled mines 
of copperheads, my mother behind me,
watching the sky for a white spread
of wings. i grew my whole life in a house 
death longed to touch with one soft finger, 
and when i looked out at the building wave, 
i thought, do it. the world around me 
hunkered under the wrong spread of life, 
and yet i saw that it was living, 
edges softened, blanks filled in—a sphere 
that begged my absence, that collected 
my childhood in its outstretched hands 
and pushed it under the skin of itself, 
hidden and repurposed, folded away, 
breathing gently under combs of wind. 


helen of troy feuds with the neighborhood

if you never owned a bone-sharp biography,
i don’t want to hear it. if you didn’t slide
from the house at night to roll 4-wheelers
out the shed, if you didn’t catch branches
on your cheeks and flip the beast 
in a mud rut, go down yelling, come up
laughing, if you didn’t roar the woods 
with star-love brothers, with blood-wait sister,
squinting through pine dirt, through cobweb,
through creatures with fur that explode 
into wings, through devils with fins 
that grow legs and run. through boys 
who become brutes and become boys again. 
through girls who die 
and stay that way. if you didn’t see a swan 
become a wolf. if you didn’t see a wolf 
clamp teeth around a swan. if you didn’t
go away and come back again,
helen judas, helen stranger, trojan helen,
helen of the outside. if you didn’t limp
your way home, dark house, door sealed tight, 
all the street with eyes sewn shut,
i don’t want to hear it. i want you silent. 
i want you listening to me. 

Messy and Honest Is My Memoir M.O.

In Knocking Myself Up: A Memoir of My (In)Fertility, Michelle Tea chronicles her path to pregnancy and motherhood as a 40-year-old, queer, uninsured woman. The tone is irreverent, the storytelling is hilarious, and the topic—choosing to exercise one’s reproductive freedoms—is extremely timely.

Tea’s journey is full of ups and downs, from a series of insemination parties that involve a drag queen’s sperm in a warm bowl, to buying black market fertility drugs online, to ultimately entering what she calls the “Fertility Industrial Complex,” undergoing multiple rounds of IVF. Along the way, Tea falls in love and gets married, consumes a jar of honey charmed by a witch with a fertility spell, and wages a constant battle against “how straight and white and middle class the whole baby world is.” She doesn’t shy away from breaking down the astronomical costs, particularly for those who rely on assisted reproductive technology, of having a baby in the US, either.

Tea is a multitalented writer, performer, activist, and (more recently) podcast host—on her Spotify show Your Magic, she’s done tarot readings for folks like Eileen Myles, Alexander Chee, and Phoebe Bridgers. She is also the co-creator of the legendary spoken word roadshow Sister Spit, the founder of the literary nonprofit RADAR Productions, and was a 2021 Guggenheim Fellow. 

We spoke over Zoom on a sunny Friday in July, about a month before her new memoir’s launch.


Shayne Terry: Let’s start with a heavy question. The project of this book—to document one way (of many) to have a baby and one way (of many) to create a family—will always be important, but it feels especially important right now, particularly with the overturning of Roe v. Wade. How are you feeling about the timing of the book’s publication? 

Michelle Tea: It’s really weird. I mean, we’re always having weirdness somewhere in this country around all of these things—queerness and queer families and reproductive freedom—but we are in such an intense place right now. It’s hard to figure out what’s being realistic and doing your due diligence, and what feels paranoid, but the Supreme Court’s decision on Dobbs jeopardizes the entire artificial reproductive technology world, which is how I had my child and how many people have children. If life begins at conception, then what are we doing with all these “lives” that are sitting in freezers all over the country? So that’s really disconcerting. 

And if they continue down this route, it would affect my entire life. I have a trans husband. This is a Court that doesn’t believe that trans people exist. They don’t believe that queer people should be married or that we even have the right to have sex in our own homes. Everything that the Court is doing right now affects me really directly. I still don’t know what the fuck to do about it, beyond voting and taking to the streets and doing the things that we all know how to do. I take a lot of comfort in knowing that there are people who have more access and power through their vocations—like that incredible Berkeley professor who testified in Congress [Khiara M. Bridges]—who are fighting really hard right now, and I just want to support them.

ST: And also, your story, this first-person account, might change people’s minds. It happens. 

MT: Oh my god, you are an optimist! It does happen, I do believe that, but I feel like people have their heels dug in more than ever right now. I mean, I sure know I do. I certainly didn’t write it to convince anybody of anything. I kind of gave up doing that when I was much younger. I spent a good amount of time back then trying to change the minds of everyone around me. It was very painful and stressful. So yeah, I didn’t write it for that. I wrote it to educate, entertain, delight, reflect people’s experiences back at them, give them hope or a guide. Some people will read this who have no interest in having a child ever. Maybe they’re not even queer, maybe they don’t have a uterus. It’s not just for people who want to have babies. It’s about being alive and having a body and taking a chance. 

I think it’s hard as an author or as an artist to have a political agenda. I mean, I’m a political person, and lots of creative people are, we really care about the world. But for me, I will insert my political agenda if it’s effortless and artful, and I really value those moments because they are rare. But that’s not necessarily the point of art making.

ST: Totally. Rather than trying to make an argument, the tone you chose for this book is more like your best friend telling you a wild story. It’s lighthearted and fun, even though you cover serious topics—homophobia, racism, miscarriage, colonialism, the state of the US healthcare system . . . 

MT: I really wanted to capture the optimism and the lightness with which I took on the whole project of trying to get pregnant. It was an act of optimism. To go into it any other way—I just wouldn’t have done it. There were a lot of strikes against me. I didn’t have a partner, so I didn’t have that support of a second person. I was doing okay financially right then, but historically I’d lived most of my life pretty broke. I had only recently been able to figure out how to make an income that felt really abundant to me, so part of me was also like, “You want to jeopardize that by having to feed another mouth, when you’re still not completely confident that you can keep feeding yourself?” I didn’t have health insurance. It was before Obamacare and I was getting my healthcare at free clinics in San Francisco, which is actually a great system in that you can get treated, but it’s a shitty system in that it’s hard. I didn’t realize how hard it was until I then got health insurance, and the compare-and-contrast blindsided me. 

I really wanted to capture the optimism and the lightness with which I took on the whole project of trying to get pregnant. It was an act of optimism.

But if I focused on all those things, I would have felt really defeated and given up, so I had to focus on taking this life-affirming gesture—affirming that life is, in the grand scheme of things, inherently more bright than it is sinister, more generative and abundant than it is scarce and punishing. 

I didn’t want the story to be a drag, because it didn’t feel like a drag. I had a lot of hope. And honestly, so did everyone around, and I didn’t necessarily expect that. I mean, I definitely had some queer friends who were like, why are you doing this? I’m 50, so my experience of my generation’s queer culture or subcultures or whatever, it’s a lot of artists and radical queers who are like, who fuckin’ wants babies?

But my mother was like, do it, which is wild because my mother is always worried about everything I do. And my sister, who I respect so much and who is so wise and an incredible mom, she was like, do it. My AA sponsor was like, do it. Everyone I knew who had a kid and who really knew me was like, do it. My doctor, once we progressed to the point that I was getting IVF, was like, Oh, we’ll get you pregnant. (You know, for a million dollars.) But we’ll do it. There was so much support that it was easy to keep that kind of lightheartedness.

ST: This is a pregnancy and birth story, but it’s also a love story; after you decided to have a baby on your own, you fell in love and got married, and the two of you ended up having the baby together. But—spoiler alert—you reveal in the afterword that the marriage ended six years later. What was it like to write about the magical years of falling in love, knowing how it ended? 

MT: It was super hard in all the ways! I wanted to really take you through it the way that I experienced it. When I fell in love, I fell in love, and I was in love, and so I wanted to be true to that. But also when you’re in love, you have a lot of ideas about a person that might turn out not to be true. I definitely thought it was really important, for the book, to give people the love story. I mean, going back to having an agenda, I think it’s important to see real queer love, and so I wanted to offer that. At the same time, it was really important for me to, at the end, reveal where I’m at now, and that was also really hard because I didn’t want to take that as an opportunity to just revenge-write about my ex. I wanted to be as honest as I could be about the fact that it wasn’t a sort of conscious uncoupling where we’re like best friends now. I wanted to allow for it to be very messy. 

ST: You could have just ended on the happy note of finally having this baby after so many years of trying, and the memoir would have simply documented a specific period in your history. Can you speak to your instinct to add the afterword and burst that happily-ever-after bubble? 

MT: This is not my first book, and it’s not my first memoir. I’m aware of the questions that come up and the assumptions that people make when they read a memoir and think they know you. You’re always sort of trapped in that moment of the memoir on some level. And so it was important for me to not make it seem like I was still with this person. For my own sake, for their sake, for the sake of our new partners. And going on a book tour, did I want to have to be like, “No, we’re divorced now” to an audience? 

My M.O. with writing memoir has always been to be as truthful as I possibly can.

This is my life. I’m aware that I’m spinning a tale about my life, but it’s still my life and how I primarily experienced it. But for other people, it’s a story and they get invested in the characters. My M.O. with writing memoir has always been to be as truthful as I possibly can. Not doing that, it would have felt like I was putting a lie out into the world.

ST: The cover of the book features this amazing photograph of you as a pregnant pinup girl—blonde wig, red panties, unmissable belly—who’s kicked off her heels and is reclining on a couch after gorging herself on cookies and donuts. It’s part of Sophie Spinelle’s Modern Conception project. What was it like to pose for those photographs? 

MT: It was a really long day. They were all shot over one day in Sophie’s studio in San Francisco, and I was very pregnant. It was a lot. But I was taking the long view. I was like, I’ll be very grateful that these pictures exist. My favorite, which is also the one that I suggested, was when I was sitting on the mountain of cheeseburgers in a stained tank top. That was really my experience of pregnancy. I was just hungry all the time. Food tasted delicious. I’m always sort of a messy eater and a bit of a slob in the best of circumstances but, you know, my body was just really different. Like, really, every single part of my body was affected by the inflammation, down to the joints in my fingers—I got carpal tunnel! You just swell. Not to mention just like all the meds and stuff that you’re on that can fuck with your system. So I loved that one the best, and I love the one where I’m like an earth goddess with my feet in the stirrups. I don’t love the Virgin Mary one, but I think it’s just that I’m vain, I don’t like how I look in it.

ST: That’s actually my favorite one. There’s something really powerful about co-opting that religious imagery, knowing the story behind your conception.

MT: Yeah, I forget that that’s maybe offensive!

ST: You founded Amethyst Editions, an imprint of The Feminist Press, to champion queer writers, and I know you read a ton in general. Whose writing are you really excited about right now? 

MT: I’m reading Fariha Róisín’s book Who Is Wellness For? Edgar Gomez’s High-Risk Homosexual is really great. I love everything that Mattilda Bernstein Sycamore writes. I’m always reading a bunch of books at once. This morning I was reading Ashley Ford’s book Somebody’s Daughter. I’m a huge fan of Raquel Gutierrez, who has a new book out called Brown Neon. And I just got White Magic by Elissa Washuta. 

Then, I was at a reading last night and I bought a book. It’s called My War by Matt Roar. It’s 90s San Francisco skater kid poetry dealing with boyhood and encroaching manhood and, like, what does it mean to be a kind of sensitive straight skater kid who’s deep in that culture. It’s good. And then I got a book called Post-Traumatic that I haven’t started yet but it looks awesome.

Lisa Hofmann-Kuroda On The Importance of Deep, Imaginative, Listening

In our series Can Writing Be Taught, we partner with Catapult to ask their course instructors all our burning questions about the process of teaching writing. This month we feature Lisa Hofmann-Kuroda, a writer and translator from Japanese. Check out her 4-week online literary translation workshop. We chatted with Hofmann-Kuroda about very long bike rides and quietly listening to the text, rather than projecting onto it.


What’s the best thing you’ve ever gotten out of a translation workshop as a student?

I don’t think the terms “teacher” and “student” are very applicable in the context of a workshop. We’re all just people sitting in a room, or a zoom room, and one of them makes some suggestions about things we could do, or read, or talk about. But that doesn’t mean everyone has to do that. We collectively decide what we’d like the space (and time) to be used for, and what makes sense to do given our collective abilities, inclinations, and resources. The best thing I’ve ever gotten out of a translation workshop is the feeling that it was possible for me to translate something, and that there were other people who believed that, too. It’s easy to believe that most things are impossible. I like to think of the workshop as a space where that belief can be suspended, at least for a little while.

What’s the worst thing you’ve ever gotten out of a translation workshop as a student?

The worst thing I’ve ever gotten out of a translation workshop was the feeling that what I was translating wasn’t interesting or worth reading closely. Maybe that’s another way of saying: distractedness, inattention, and arrogance.

What is the lesson or piece of translation advice you return to most as an instructor?

They left all these clues on the page to help you hear what they were hearing

Bela Shayevich once told me that not even the worst translation could ruin a truly brilliant text. Sometimes I think about that and it takes the pressure off. It also reminds me that translation is really a negative capability. It’s about not getting in the way of what’s already there. You have to become very quiet, and very ghostly. You have to really listen to the text and not project too much onto it. When reading a piece of music, for example, you know the composer heard something in their head at one point, then they wrote it down, and now you’re looking at this piece of paper, and you have to try and play what they heard, to bring it to life. They left all these clues on the page to help you hear what they were hearing, so your job is to listen deeply, and imaginatively.        

Can everyone translate?

No, because we live in a capitalist society where creativity and self-expression are available only to an elite minority, while the majority of people in the world have to work so hard and so much just to stay alive that they don’t have the time or resources to even think about something like literature, let alone literary translation–however talented they might be. I feel like it’s important not to lose sight of that. That said, it depends on how we define translation. More than half the world’s population speak more than one language (oftentimes not by choice), so I feel pretty confident in saying that people are translating all the time, for each other, for fun, for love, for work, because they are in life and death situations, and so on.      

Would you ever encourage a student to give up translating? Under what circumstances?

Currently, it’s impossible to make a living off of translation, which is part of why the majority of its practitioners are so devastatingly old and white, and why it’s seen as a retirement hobby rather than a vocation. There are lots of practical reasons to give up on translating as a job–precisely because it’s not seen as a job at all–but I hope that translators will use their collective power as workers to demand better pay and working conditions so that less people will have to give it up in the future. Speaking of which, if you’re interested in doing that, hit me up. 

If you want to make a living as a translator, you should absolutely translate with publications in mind.

What’s more valuable in a translation workshop, praise or criticism?

That seems like a false dichotomy. The most valuable feedback I’ve received in workshop has taken the form of questions that forced me to think about why I made a particular decision. That said, most translators (and writers) are probably pretty critical of themselves already, or just have a lot of negative self-talk in general, so I think praise can go a long way toward helping someone keep their craft alive. Which is not always an easy thing.

Should students write with publication in mind? Why or why not?

Lurking inside this question, I feel, is the eternal “is translation an art or a job” dichotomy, with the assumption that if you think of it as a job (i.e. translate with a publication in mind) then you somehow aren’t a ‘real’ artist or are some sort of vulgar commercialist. I think that’s ridiculous and if you want to make a living as a translator, you should absolutely translate with publications in mind. I don’t think tailoring your work to your audience diminishes your art. I think we do that all the time anyway. This idea that there is some terrain of pure, free, original expression untainted by the thought of money, or publishing, or editors, or capitalism, is just totally made up. We are always translating or writing with someone or something in mind, the self is an illusion, etc etc. On a more practical note: unless you just feel like it for some reason, don’t translate an entire novel before you find a publisher for it! That is called working on spec and it is uncompensated labor. You can love your art and still respect yourself as a worker and acknowledge that what you do takes time and skill and in that sense has actual value.

What’s the best hobby for translators?

I’m not sure, but I like to go for very long bike rides.

What’s the best workshop snack?

I’m partial to popcorn.

7 Books That Speak the Truth of War for Civilians

War operates like a disease. Only those who have personally experienced it know its toll. For them, they will suffer from the pain of it, and stay up all night praying to God to be healed from it.

Warmongers never talk about the costs of war, and so it falls to brave writers to reveal the emotional, economic, and physical tolls. I wrote my memoir, War and Me, to inform readers about ordinary Iraqi citizens and the horrors they faced during many years of war—the Iraqi-Iranian War which lasted for eight years; and then the Iraqi-Kuwait War (Gulf War), which ended with the imposition of an economic blockade in Iraq that lasted for thirteen. 

On my first day of middle school in Najaf, the government announced they would close schools for ten days, until “certain victory” in the war with Iran was announced. But the war did not end in ten days. It lasted eight years, and all my friends were killed in the war or went missing in it. As a young woman, I hated seeing my father and brother go off to fight, and when I needed to reach them, I broke all the rules by traveling alone to the war’s front lines. That was my reality.

In my book, and in the list of superb books below, readers learn the truth about war for innocent citizens: crushing poverty and starvation, constant danger and fear, job loss, severe lack of medical care, and the absence of security and freedom. In a world on fire, these writers find courage, compassion, and a voice.

In Order to Live by Yeonmi Park

In her memoir, Yeonmi Park delves into the darkest corners of life in North Korea, a country whose inhabitants live in abject poverty, starvation, deception, and misery. Park describes the constant indoctrination that prevents the population from rising up against the “Great Leader.” With dignity and bravery, she also divulges that she and her mother were sold into sexual slavery in China and endured horrific hardships before they found their way to freedom in South Korea. Now a human rights activist, Park works tirelessly to bring attention to the oppression of North Korea’s citizens. 

Testament of Youth by Vera Brittain

Vera Brittain’s memoir is an insightful and exquisitely written record of World War I told through the lens of a young, fiercely independent spirit. Brittain details falling in love with a soldier and becoming active in the war effort as a nurse for the wounded. The war cruelly robs Brittain of her lover, her brother, her dearest friends, and her academic work. But it also opens up new worlds, allowing her to travel alone to foreign fronts, first in Malta, and then in France to work in hospitals near the front. Brittain is a shrewd and intelligent observer of all aspects of war, and her story has lost none of its power to shock and enthrall readers since it was first published in 1933.

The Sorrow of War by Bao Ninh

Bao Ninh’s harrowing tale depicts the lasting impact of war on an individual’s conscience through the journey of Kien, a veteran of the Glorious 27th Youth Brigade of the Vietcong. Kien struggles with PTSD, substance abuse, and an indescribable longing, a hope for a better future that he knows will never come. Ninh beautifully illustrates the emotional aftermath of war, a subject that often goes underrepresented in war stories.  Though it was written in 1990, the novel is still fresh, presenting a unique, but surprisingly relatable, story of one soldier and how war changed both the world around him and the world within him. The Sorrow of War was banned in Vietnam upon its release for its negative representation of war and the government. It is that exact rawness, however, that makes it such a standout read.

The Broken Circle by Enjeela Ahmadi-Miller

The Broken Circle is a heart-stopping memoir that details the brutalities of war on Afghanistan’s citizenry. As a child, Enjeela has great pride and affection for Kabul, a prosperous and peaceful city. Everything changes after the Soviet invasion of 1980, when her family is thrust into chaos and fear. Enjeela, her siblings, and their father spend the next five years attempting a dangerous escape out of the country, where they hope to mount a desperate search for their mother, who left Afghanistan to seek medical attention prior to the civil war. Enjeela’s is a story that conveys war’s horrific effects on children.

Against the Loveless World by Susan Abulhawa

This powerful novel presents a refreshingly original portrait of a Palestinian woman who fights for a better life for her family as she travels throughout the Middle East as a refugee. Born in Kuwait in the 1970s to Palestinian refugees, Nahr, the protagonist, dreams of falling in love with the perfect man, raising children, and opening her own beauty salon. But the US invasion of Iraq changes everything. Instead, she becomes a refugee, like her parents before her. After trekking through her temporary home in Jordan, she lands in Palestine, where she finally makes a home, and falls in love. As her destiny unfolds under Israeli occupation, Nahr’s subversive humor and moral ambiguity make this book a special treasure.

The Face of War by Martha Gellhorn

One of the most prolific investigative journalists – and a former wife of Ernest Hemingway – Martha Gellhorn writes in a way that makes readers feel as though they are in the throes of war alongside her. In The Face of War, Gellhorn takes readers from the Spanish Civil War in 1937 through the wars in Central America during the mid-1980s. Some of her reporting and interviews are so damning and explosive, they were never published by  the contemporary news media. Gellhorn’s brisk, candid reporting reflects her deep empathy for people no matter their political ideology; it is a truly transformative anti-war book.  

Do Not Say We Have Nothing by Madeleine Thien

Madeleine Thien has crafted a novel that is at once deeply personal and broadly political, rooted in the details of life during Mao’s Cultural Revolution. Thien vividly describes two successive generations of a musically gifted Chinese family – those who lived through Mao’s Cultural Revolution and their children, who became the students protesting in Tiananmen Square. As readers become emotionally invested in Thien’s multidimensional characters, they learn how Chinese citizens were forced to reimagine their artistic selves during China’s political campaigns and how their fates were irrevocably changed by the Cultural Revolution.

I Rewrite My American Story in “Everything Everywhere All at Once”

Before my first Asian American Studies class, my last semester of college, I thought my brown ass was white. Nowadays, I credit ethnic studies—from CRT to Beyoncé—for making me a person of color. 

When I tell people this, they seem neither shocked by my delusion nor appalled by my POC betrayal. They seem, TBH, kind of bored, like my obsession with racial-identity development is old hat. And so I’ve come to think it’s a given: of course East Asians want to be white. The sky is blue, oppression is intersectional—what else is new?

But what if it’s not indifference? Let me slow it down this time like honey. I’ll run it back pure and unpack these very loaded American phrases: “wanting to be white” and “becoming a person of color.”


Before the US, my whole childhood set in Taiwan, I dreamt one night about an American-Born-Chinese pop star. Dressed in all white like a church girl, he was flying through the sky. I was him in the dream, though I saw him from afar. When I woke up and realized I was still myself—nose, still piggy, tummy, still flabby—I crash-landed, sinking into disappointment.

I was learning it at a young age: becoming cozy with whiteness meant destroying anyone who wasn’t.

Then I moved to the suburbs of Chicago. I became the Asian boy who always finished the sheet of multiplication problems first. The school placed me in gifted math right away. In fifth grade, the two people I bullied were Angel Davila and Shonda Okazaki. I made fun of Angel for having a “girl’s name.” I terrorized Shonda. While she didn’t “look Asian” to my ten-year-old self, her last name sounded Japanese. I don’t remember what I did, only that her mom, a Susan-Sarandon type in white-working-class drag, asked the teacher for a parent meeting. I was learning it at a young age: becoming cozy with whiteness meant destroying anyone who wasn’t.

In middle school, my English standardized-test scores caught up with my math. I got my dad—I guess he was around?—to advocate for my transfer to gifted English. It worked. We wrote our own books of poetry. Returning my first piece of writing, the teacher, a white woman squarely within J. Crew’s target demographic, told me not to get ahead of myself. It was my first time hearing this idiom. I couldn’t wrap my head around what it meant. Next year, at the high school, in “honors-gifted” English (🤷🏽‍♂️), I turned in an essay filled with long words from the thesaurus. The teacher, my Dumbledore, questioned all this diction, told me to stick to what I knew. Since then, I’ve written every sentence to prove my competence in the English language. 

The summer before college was my first time feeling literary fiction in my soul. I was reading Infinite Jest—a notoriously long novel about loneliness, familial estrangement, and the futility of finding worth in one’s achievements—written by the dangerously white-male David Foster Wallace. On the big, floral couch at home, the skirt all stained by dog piss, I set the book face down at the sight of myself on the page. What I didn’t see in that moment was how Wallace would never see me. What I wouldn’t see for the longest was the particularities of my queer Asian American life. 


When Jobu Tupaki, alien superstar, saw every variation on the course of her life, everything everywhere all at once, she took it to mean nothing mattered. Nihilism is why she made the everything bagel—a weapon of mass destruction, if we take the Alphas’ word for it. And why wouldn’t we? They are the heroes, after all.

🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩👀

Let’s take a minute to revisit Jobu’s origin story for the bewildering everything bagel.  

I started by putting all my hopes and dreams on it. Then I put all my report cards. Next came every breed of dog and wanted ads on Craigslist. Finally, the actual seasonings. With so much on it, the bagel collapsed, creating a black hole. 

People who don’t do well in school are unfit for American life, undeserving of any more lifelines.

The juxtaposition of aspirations and grades brings up well-worn American myths. In the neat plot of model minorities, 4.0s open doors to hitherto unavailable opportunities. SATs measure intelligence, if not inherent worth. People who don’t do well in school are unfit for American life, undeserving of any more lifelines. This illogic defies harder, more honest narratives about all of the country’s isms. 


My first semester of college, a month or so in at Brown, Wallace killed himself on my birthday. I took it as a sign I would be the next American genius. My second semester, I took Japanese History. I wanted to learn about myself but figured Chinese History had nothing to do with me. I didn’t think twice about a white man teaching an East Asian Studies class. I also took Intro to Ethnic Studies. I read Kimberlé Crenshaw as though intersectionality were an intellectual puzzle to solve, a concept irrelevant to my life. 

I took Advanced Fiction. Another Asian American was in the class. I neither identified as such at the time nor assumed kinship with any Asian, but I remember this woman just like I remember the majority of the workshop. It was a remarkably attractive bunch, hip in precisely the ways I associate with Brown: thrift-store cardigans and cute, Icelandic backpacks; New Yorker subscriptions and Criterion editions of Fellini flicks; the faces of Student Labor Alliance and the College Hill Independent, cool extracurriculars that made a difference. I felt in all moments like a guest. I wouldn’t take another creative-writing class for eight long years. 

A baseline of self-loathing. An open wound in the shape of myself, which I filled with longing for white men. A field of landmines for anyone who was other. This is what I mean when I say I thought I was white.


White supremacy sets up Asian Americans endlessly to act as beige pawns. In the case of Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College, which is bound for the Supreme Court, Edward Blum and the Asian Americans he’s organized accuse the Ivy League icon of institutional racism. The predictable ruling would “likely reduce the number of Black and Latino students . . . with more Asian American and white students gaining admission instead.” It’s wedgy shit like this that makes it hard to believe in “BIPOC solidarity”—hard to keep calling myself a “person of color.”

So, when Jobu says that everything’s a matter of chance, here’s the film’s implication. Making it in America has little to do with talent or hard work. Success is about the largely random factors of one’s positionality: race, ethnicity, sex, class. 

Jobuvision is chaos to the Alphaverse, epicenter of becoming anyone you put your mind to, that madness of meritocracy. Far from evil, Jobu’s a hero—an iconoclast against Asian American mythologies, ones that rest on anti-Blackness.


Before my first Asian American Studies class, my last semester of college, Asian meant out of place to me.

Before my first Asian American Studies class, my last semester of college, Asian meant out of place to me. It meant obedient and robotic, the opposite of artistic. It meant conformist and indistinguishable, the opposite of American. It meant boring and awkward, the opposite of personable. It meant the opposite of Black.

Never mind that back in high school, in jazz band, the students who set the bar for improv were Filipino and South Asian. That my group of friends senior year, all of us misfits, who wore thrift-store tracksuits on the last day of school, was majority Asian and Middle Eastern. That the friend who got me through college—who I’d known since elementary school and turned into my lifeline once we were a commuter rail apart in New England—was Indian. 

Never mind these facts. Believing in whiteness meant denying what was in my line of sight, most of all myself. It took seven semesters of thawing my frozen sense of self to find Asian Americans worth studying. 

My last semester of college was my first time in an American classroom where everyone was Asian. It was my first time making friends at Brown who accepted me exactly as I was. (It was my first time cuffing it with somebody who looked like me.) It was my first time learning that Asians have been on this land longer than the United States; that contrary to my anomalous presence in the Midwest, Asians live all over Latin America; that contrary to my family’s wealth and our post-’65 migration, Asians in the U.S. are also refugees and undocumented immigrants. 

It was my first time finding power and pride in the term “Asian American,” which originated in the radical movements of the ’60s. For the first time, Chinese, Japanese, and Filipinx students were crossing paths at San Francisco State College. Across the Bay, in Oakland, the Black Panther Party organized around self-determination. This model of Black liberation gave rise to the first “Asian Americans,” who demanded SFSC offer relevant curriculum and representative faculty. 

My last semester of college was my first time identifying as Asian American. I am thirty-one now. I was in the class a decade ago when I learned about Vincent Chin. Chin lived to be twenty-seven. I was months short of twenty-one. That’s when I learned about Trayvon Martin. Martin lived to be seventeen. 

I learned in the class that two white men killed an Asian American because the man was Asian.

I became Asian American in the shadow of a grim coincidence. I learned in the class that two white men killed an Asian American because the man was Asian. At the same time, the nation was grappling with the fact that a white man killed a Black boy because the child was Black. I recall no talk during class about Vincent Chin and Trayvon, no addressing the parallels of the two incommensurate acts. 


In the film’s most overtly political scene, Jobu steps out of an elevator in Elvis drag. Evelyn is handcuffed. Waymond is unconscious. Police are on the premises.

A cop tells Jobu that she can’t be there. Heated, King Tupaki taunts him. You keep saying “can’t,” but I don’t think you know what that word means. Serving Yvie Oddly, she reveals a second face on the back of her head. She snaps the neck of one cop and positions another to get shot. Then a cop shoots Jobu in the back. Evelyn watches her daughter bleed until Jobu pulls out a ketchup bottle, revealing the deadliest gag.  

It’s hard to make sense of an Asian American woman killing cops and staging her own homicide. Scrubbed clean of the historical record, popular imagination does not associate Asian Americans with racial violence. In the minds of many, attacks on Asians in America started with “kung flu” and Trump and peaked with the shootings in Atlanta. 

Why might a text that’s Asian American in form choose content so tethered to Black American experiences? 


The case of Vincent Chin made it plain that I wasn’t—would never be—white. What would I become instead? Whom? Would I claim a role of racial target, which in 2012 was taking shape in the image of Trayvon Martin? If I did, I’d be putting down my limited access to whiteness just to pick up a misguided claim to anti-Blackness. What kept me from swapping out one over-identification for another? 

I had never talked about this before—the nebulous place of Asian Americans in the U.S. racial hierarchy.

One day, in the Asian American Studies class, discussing the concept of honorary whiteness, I said I often felt other POC assuming I was basically white. I had never talked about this before—the nebulous place of Asian Americans in the U.S. racial hierarchy. The professor—a father figure, of course—asked a question, simple and difficult. How do you know that people perceive you that way? I heard doubt in his asking, but I had no answer, so I dropped into overthinking, a Virgo’s groove. How did I know? Was I making all of it up? Was I the only one judging me—the only one even thinking of me?

At the ceremony for the English department, I noticed that English majors were either Asian or white. At the college-wide graduation, donning a red and yellow stole made for everyone in our class, I was part of a community—finally—at the end of four otherwise alienating years. 

I was moving to Los Angeles that summer for grad school in social-justice education. I would start a career in “urban” public schools—that is, to work with youth of color—which is really to say, to teach low-income Black and Latinx kids. I was immeasurably, inter-dimensionally self-conscious about pursuing this role as a rich, East Asian man. While I surged with social-justice values, I was at a loss about what would make my care credible to the people I sought to serve. 

So, en route to LA, in the middle of a summer renaissance, I attended the National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance conference. At an “intergenerational plenary” that filled a hotel ballroom, a queer, South Asian woman said something that would stick with me for years. Though I’m technically Asian American and proudly so, too, I identify as a person of color much more—politically, spiritually.

At the time, this self-articulation felt as intimate as a password—magical like a riddle solved. In the ballroom, jotting down every word as if divinely revealed, I thought, It’s cute to be Asian American, but the real work is in solidarity to those more oppressed than I, and the only appropriate role for this duty is as a queer person of color.


Jobu’s everything bagel is literally a black hole. Given the film’s wobbly preoccupation with phalluses and anal penetration, I’m inclined to read the bagel as—well—as a Black hole.

I acknowledge that this gloss might seem glib, literal and a little embarrassing, but, no shade, so is the film. I would also assert that a crucible of American culture is an obsession with Black bodies—controlling them, inhabiting them. So, if I may:

Entering the everything bagel—Black hole—symbolizes fucking a Black person.

Entering the everything bagel—Black hole—symbolizes fucking a Black person. Loving Black people is the last thing you’re supposed to do if vertical assimilation is one’s MO in this country. The opposite is how you make it: hide privilege, champion hard work, ignore injustice, marry white, make hapa babies, lock the Tesla driving through Black neighborhoods.

People strive for other endgames. When non-Black people come into racial consciousness, whether white or of color, we often immerse ourselves in the breadth of anti-Blackness. We act like Black death is the whole of Black life.

Jobu allegorizes first-gen kids like me who go to liberal-arts colleges, go in on ethnic-studies classes, go home all gung-ho about communism and queerness, and go off on relatives about their racist, sexist views. Jobu’s black hole of a bagel symbolizes an all-consuming understanding: the fictions of American life hinge on the premature death of Black Americans.


From the start of my teaching career to the summer of 2020, a passage of my life bookended by two chapters in the Movement for Black Lives, I believed in the predictive power of positionality. The premise was this: socialized as a cis man, East Asian and rich, I was doomed to hurt people, to reproduce patterns of harm. 

I wore this fate like a corset. Behaviors I tried to anticipate and hide: talking too much in my teacher-education classes, where the majority of my peers were women and only one or two were Black; mispronouncing the names of my Latinx students; mixing up the names of students with similar positionalities; locking my car doors “just in case” after passing a Black pedestrian; choosing bougie restaurants for dates without considering access and cost.

I made it a job to monitor all my thoughts and choices. Everything I did, I distrusted on account of my suburban origins, all that white supremacy I internalized growing up the only one. Everything I said, I said to myself first—a line from Tegan and Sara, a queer, white band that gave words to my anxiety in high school and whose music, along with that of so many white indie acts, I put aside to excise myself of whiteness. 

I listened exclusively to rap, believing that conscious Black music would correct my basically white consciousness.

I student-taught at Compton High School. I commuted there from Koreatown. Every day, I listened exclusively to rap, believing that conscious Black music would correct my basically white consciousness. One morning, at a railroad crossing, cutting it close to the start of first period, I broke into tears listening to The College Dropout. “I’ll Fly Away” and “Spaceship,” gospel teeing up slice-of-life rap with Afrofuturist motifs, were teaching me about the lives of my Black and brown students—their dignity and their despair, I was sure. I felt good about myself for crying. It meant that I really cared.

The one class I taught was small. The students were majority Latinx, minority Black. The guiding teacher, a Black woman who ran the kind of classroom in which students rarely spoke, chose for me to teach poetry. I designed my first-ever unit around good kid, m.A.A.d. city, the Kendrick Lamar album set in Compton. For the final essay, which the students wrote in class, I assigned a prompt about how accurately the text represented “life in the hood.” 

That weekend, the guiding teacher emailed me and my teacher-ed professor. On the day of the in-class essay, after I left, some students came to her during lunch and told her how uncomfortable they were with my prompt, how hurtful it was that I’d called their home “the hood.” 

The teacher ended my student-teaching assignment early. She afforded me the opportunity to apologize to the students in person. I would like to think I took it—that I went back in and acknowledged to the students that I had disrespected them and their communities—but honestly, I’m not sure. I remember the students’ faces, their names and even their voices, but all I remember about the end is my massive shame over my preventable, almost textbook mistake.

In her official evaluation, which would factor into my credentialing by the state, the guiding teacher wrote that some people are not meant to be teachers. I took “some people” to confirm my worst fears about myself. I took it to mean Asian American men. My positionality would always be a liability. No matter my hypervigilance, my conscious cultural consumption, I would always end up hurting the people I was building a life to love. 


If the cops had stopped me for breaking the law, anti-Blackness might have implicated my partner.

Five years later—after I failed enough at teaching to get better at it, after I entered the first romantic relationship of my life, after I left my job as a high-school teacher and moved in with my partner, after we took the plastic off the sofa—we had reservations one night at a restaurant down the street. Before heading out, I opened a can of hard cider. I drank it on our walk there. My partner’s Black. He brought up this evening months later, pointing out my carelessness in drinking outdoors. If the cops had stopped me for breaking the law, anti-Blackness might have implicated my partner. Had police escalated—

My partner didn’t go into all this. He knew I knew, I think. In fact, early in our courtship—before he presented me a key to his apartment while humming “Darth Vader’s Theme”—we talked about the benefits of dating people of color, all the energy we were saving instead of coddling and convincing white partners. We took for granted that our experiences and worldviews overlapped as Asian and Black men—that “people of color” functioned intimately as well as politically. That hope was why it hurt when he told me what I’d done the night we walked to dinner. 

I learned in my twenties to condemn myself for thinking like a white person. This script assumes that the crucial division in white supremacy is between whites and people of color. But as Frank B. Wilderson III argues in Afropessimism, anti-Blackness and Black cultures are what structure the world that we all share. White or not, anybody non-Black needs a reminder of the world we’re accountable for.


As news spread in 2020 of attacks on Asians in America, I was ever aware of my privileges. Moving through the world in a body more masc than not; living in LA—in Little Tokyo—almost never the only Asian; young and able-bodied and dressed in the fashion of Angelenos; I figured myself, if not safe, then at least less vulnerable than most.

Then a white man killed eight people, six of them Asian women. Since then, government at every level has invested and intervened to #StopAsianHate. In contrast, since the 2020 elections and uprisings, the buzz around police abolition has dissipated. While enough Asian Americans have refrained from “#AsianLivesMatter,” the state’s limited acknowledgement of anti-Blackness—inconsistent, largely symbolic—implies over and over that Black lives don’t matter in the United States of America.

What I can’t get over about this inequity is that Asian Americans gained state resources through the use of Black American discourse. After the Atlanta spa killings, admonishing traditional media for erasing before anglicizing the Asian women’s names, Asian Americans enjoined social media to “say their names” in the original languages. Indignant about public indifference and incredulity, Asian Americans urged people to “check on their Asian friends.” To balance out the grief, Asian Americans were even showcasing “Asian excellence” on social media.

Asian Americans use Black cultures to make sense, to be seen. We do so without crediting Black people. Our gains have been disproportionate to what’s afforded Black Americans. We’re not the only ones to do this. America has a problem.

To use what doesn’t belong to me and get more out of it than the creators—this is a specific mode of theft.

To use what doesn’t belong to me and get more out of it than the creators—this is a specific mode of theft. The behavior is settler colonial; it’s model minority and anti-Black. 

This is the defining challenge of my Asian American selfhood: crafting a way of being that’s as genuine as it is just. 


The Alphas represent the burgeoning movement of Asian American conservatives, anti-affirmative action, pro-criminalization. The Alphas try to radicalize Evelyn by stoking her class-based resentments (laundry, taxes, laundry, taxes) and endowing her with a purpose: save the whole-ass multiverse by making things how they used to be. 

As the MAGA agenda makes clear, you make your own civilization supreme by conjuring outsized enemies. Enter Jobu Tupaki. Sexual deviant. Remorseless murderer. Cop killer! No goals or moral code. An agent of chaos. 

If the Alphas stand in for Asian American conservatives, Jobu represents their cultural opposite: the Social Justice Warrior. A genderfucking queer. An iconoclast. A police abolitionist. No ties to the status quo. A revolutionary.

Reading the almighty Tupaki as a paradigmatic SJW—a BLM, FTP, QTPOC leftist—we can interpret Jobuvision as an awareness of systemic oppression, of the life-or-death stakes of people’s social location. When one becomes aware that race, class, and gender all condition the life you get to live, the world begins to unfold as a multiverse. 

The multiverse represents more than all the paths one’s life can take. The multiverse is metaphor for hierarchy, for how unfairness is the grounds for everyday living. 


Trained to name and shame my privileges, I can qualify and even loathe every nice thing about my life.

Aware I’m positioned to thrive while others struggle to survive, I’ve learned to minimize my struggles and discredit my successes. Yes, I got into a competitive Ph.D. program for creative writing without publications or an MFA, but I did undergrad at an Ivy, and the year I took to apply to writing programs, I did so unemployed as my parents paid all my bills. Yes, this is my third essay at Electric Literature, the biggest platform of my career so far, but I met my editor at a conference, which I paid full price to attend. Trained to name and shame my privileges, I can qualify and even loathe every nice thing about my life. When I follow this logic, it’s like I’m not a person at all. I’m a cheat code, a string of privileges and pure luck. 

Now get all up in your mind the iconic scene of Everything. Mother and daughter, rocks, overlook an expanse of nothing. The two are in a universe where conditions aren’t right for life. The only thing to do is watch. Jobu acts like it’s peaceful at first, an existence limited to observation. Then she tells the truth. The nothingness has felt like a trap. She’s been pursuing Evelyn not to kill her but to find another way, a subjecthood that would allow her more life. 

Plato who? Cave what? 2022 is the dawn of talking rocks. Good morning to this allegory and this allegory alone of my East Asian American life. 

Proximity to white-male privilege is my lot. Since the start in 2020 of the white-liberal frenzy to “expose” white supremacy, I’ve felt mighty uneasy. The culture and the market were aligned for the nation to go on a journey, something racial-justice-y. I’d started mine the decade before, feeling guilty and very much alone. I reached a bitter standstill. To live an ethical life, I had to accept I didn’t matter. The stories that called for championing would center me but rarely. The harms that warranted spotlighting would never be my own. 

In a culture that feeds on spectacles of suffering, I’ve got a whole lot of nothing. I refuse to lay claim to any oppression other than what governs us all. I’ve resigned myself in adulthood to a status of American insignificance. 


Everything is committed to redeeming Asian American men as indispensable political actors. It does so by staging our near-constant humiliation. 

The movie’s running bit is belittling Waymond without his knowing. Alpha Waymond derides the weakness of Waymond’s body. He mimics Waymond’s voice to blend into a hysterical crowd. Waymond Wang even ridicules himself. In one scene, confronting Gong Gong, Evelyn takes on Waymond’s voice, literally speaking as him. Waymond’s right there, but he doesn’t seem to recognize his voice, calling it weird. Evelyn changes voices again, chirping this time. The film subtitles the noises as actual dialogue. By the end of the scene, the joke is less the birdsong than the affect of an Asian immigrant man. 

The film’s atmospheric abuse of Asian men simulates our American condition.

It breaks my soul to enumerate Waymond’s many humiliations. This is precisely the point. The film’s atmospheric abuse of Asian men simulates our American condition. The movie implicates all audiences in our quotidian indignities. You might find yourself laughing at all the gags until Waymond turns out to be the linchpin of the family.

His importance comes to light in the epic kindness speech. The conservative Alphas are bent on eliminating the leftist Jobu. An Alpha recruit at first, Evelyn has become a SJW sympathizer. After Evelyn stabs Waymond for all the Alphas to see, he puts himself in the middle of their fight. He begs Evelyn, Please. Be kind, especially when we don’t know what’s going on. 

Everything Everywhere turns on this very plea. Because of Waymond, Evelyn chooses empathy over nihilism. Fighting with kindness, she defeats the goons. She wins over Gong Gong and reconciles with Joy. If the movie has an overt thesis, this is it. In a polarized, disintegrating world—an age of extremes and radicalization—reach across the aisle. Relate to the pain of the other.

For a movie about the multiverse, this is noticeably facile, perfunctory. The not-uncommon position turns a blind eye to power and politics. The naivete passes muster only because it’s delivered by a cishet, Chinese American man, a social location presumed to lack ideological allegiances. 

The movie tries to make Asian American men relevant by presenting us as pitiable and, on top of that, apolitical, a rare class of angels that soars above the times. For this rhetoric to work, the film tears out the people most likely to grasp identity politics at its roots: Asian queers like me.


Not long after “My Family’s Failures” published, in the thique of revising “My Drag Masculinity,” I watched the movie a fifth time. Back in the dark of the theater, no longer crying about family and abandonment, I had the bandwidth now to start processing the gay stuff emotionally as well as intellectually.

I’d thought through the implications of framing ass play as irrational. Queerness is a joke, a total humiliation.

From viewings one through four, I’d thought through the implications of framing ass play as irrational. Queerness is a joke, a total humiliation. While this wasn’t lost on me—the cruelty—I judged the audience, not the text, whenever people laughed at Asian American bottoms, at Hot-Dog Evelyn and Deirdre. 

The fifth time, though, I felt it: stepped on and struck out by butt plugs and dildos as gags; betrayed by the phallic undercutting of the women’s queer intimacy. Everything is so insistent on the absurdity of Asian American queerness that by the end of my fifth viewing, I stared down an obliterating question. Are queer Asian Americans real in Evelyn Wang’s universe? 

This movie that’s helped me heal—that’s helped me feel what had gone numb in thirty-one years—does it accept that I’m that girl? Does it know the particularities of my queer Asian American life?


I remember what it feels like to doubt that I am real. I’ve worked so long—with such tenderness—to recover from systematic self-denial. 

Tension is not a problem to solve. Tension—far from purity—is what it feels like to be alive. Tension—multiplicity—is a fulcrum to ride to freedom.

Now that I’ve felt what it’s like to be whole—loveable, desirable, and uncontainable by the inhuman Black-white binary—I refuse to be divided again. Masc, femme; Black, white; Asian, American—all of the above, always—I am everything. With my loves, we are everywhere, free to be all the contradictory things at once.

The Actual American Dream Isn’t on the Magazine Covers

Sneha, the 22-year-old protagonist of Sarah Thankam Mathews’ debut novel All This Could Be Different, is the dutiful immigrant daughter. Despite the long recession, she bagged a corporate job right after college, and a free apartment in Brewers Hill, Milwaukee. She regularly sends money home to India and is also working toward a visa sponsorship. Her life, on the outside, is set—except for the supine after-work hours, the loneliness unquenched by desperate swipes on dating apps, the bed temporarily warmed by one woman after another. When a chance encounter with Marina, a professional dancer, incites a crush that burgeons into a burning desire, Sneha realizes life may have more to offer. As her feelings deepen, she is compelled to contend with her identity, her (in)ability to share parts of herself, and the familial past she has buried.

A beautiful, authentic rendition of the brown queer experience and immigrant dynamics, All This Could Be Different is a love letter to these communities. It is a novel of possibilities, and a novel bound to steal your heart.

Sarah Thankam Mathews and I spoke over Zoom about finding community, the immigrant hustle and the American Dream, coming of age and emotional intimacy, and much more.


Bareerah Ghani: One of the most profound threads in the novel is the exploration of adulthood from the eyes of someone in their early twenties. Sneha talks about her present life as a period of freedom and looks to “adulthood” as an inevitable circling back to a path that’s already been carved out: find a stable job, get a partner, buy a house. At her age, I also felt like being an adult meant eventually giving in to what others asked of me. I would love to hear your thoughts on this warped sense of adulthood.

Sarah Thankam Mathews: Writing a coming-of age-novel, I felt aware of the ways in which the form can be conservative, although a lot of queer and postcolonial writers have done a lot to innovate within the conservative shape. Ultimately, I found it useful to almost put an explicit reference to the concept of “coming of age.” There are references to Goethe, who wrote what’s considered in the western frame one of the first Bildungsromans. And there’s this definite explicit acknowledgement of the western concept of coming of age, which is this liminal stage between childhood and adulthood, where you have some degree of satellite freedom, but not the full assumption of responsibility. I want to be careful with how I talk about this because Sneha is responsible for many things—for example, she’s responsible, like many immigrant kids, for sending money home. But what I’m talking about is specifically the responsibility to reproduce society as it exists. That’s what I mean when I say conservative. Ultimately, as I wrote my way deeper and deeper into the novel, I found the characters within it sort of shaking a fist at the world as it is, feeling really no investment in reproducing it, and in fact desirous to imagine different ways of being, of relating to each other, things that look like something other than bourgeois pro-capitalist. 

BG: It’s especially heartbreaking how Sneha often feels like she isn’t seen by her family. How do you grapple with the idea that sometimes we have to conceal parts of ourselves from the people who raised us and shaped us? 

I think it’s really up to us young South Asians to break intergenerational patterns of relational harm or trauma—and break them ideally in both directions.

STM: One of the shaping mechanisms of this novel is silence. Its first-person narrator is aloof and silent, and often deals in lies and cordoning off the different facets of herself. The thing about that is, on one hand, it’s deeply understandable given her background—from the ruptures of immigration to the criminalization in her family’s history. I feel a deep well of compassion for Sneha, and I hope some readers do, as well. This is someone who’s defiant about being seen as any kind of victim and is mocking the concept of trauma but definitely carries a heavy burden nonetheless. On the other hand, Sneha’s approach makes her unknowable. That’s what lying and silence does—it makes us unknowable, and sometimes to the people we love the most. 

Part of the overarching project of this book is to examine what it means to be in community with people, to know and let yourself be known, to give and take in mutuality. The novel is advocating for a certain kind of large-hearted, generous, and honest relational style between people that allows them to build relationships and community with each other.

BG: I found it interesting that even when Sneha has real, steady friends and a partner, she struggles to be vulnerable. At one point, she tells Thom that in her culture there isn’t “always a big focus on, like, attention, affection, saying feelings out loud.” This resonated with me and I’m wondering what you make of this truth about South Asian culture. To what extent do you think it serves to work against our ability to maintain intimacy and be emotionally available in relationships?

STM: I really don’t see certain things as exclusive to South Asian culture. I have met plenty repressed WASP parents in my life who’re out there harming their kids’ psyches. But I do think there are specific challenges for young people to navigate if they’re diasporic; if they, like so many South Asian people, come from families who’ve experienced meaningful trauma, whether that’s partition or the longer wounds of colonization, or just, like, the trauma that is immigration. I’m an immigrant, I came here in my late teens. There was a lot about that process that was incredibly difficult and wounding for every single member of my family and it’s the sort of great, shaping force of my life. So I think it’s really up to us young South Asians to break intergenerational patterns of relational harm or trauma—and break them ideally in both directions, not just for the next generation, but also work to have engaging conversations with our elders, our parents, when that’s possible. And the reality is that it’s not always. 

BG: Sneha and Thom’s dynamic is particularly interesting. He treats Sneha like one of his boys. We know he cares for her, loves her genuinely, but then on several occasions, when Sneha is pouring her heart out to him, he shows a lack of empathy. I’d love to know your thoughts on what I perceive as a typical hetero male friendship dynamic, where there’s a macho facade and a seeming lack of overt emotional support. How do you see all of this in connection to emotional intimacy in friendships and in the community we build around us, outside of family?

STM: The relationship between Sneha and Thom means a lot to me. One, you have a dynamic between two people who have their own relationship to masculinity. Sneha, in a lot of ways, idolizes masculinity, thinks of it as a superior way of being. That’s evident in some of her choices, some of her relational approaches, and even things like, she would much rather be sort of the strong, silent cowboy type than let her feelings spill all over the place. Early in the novel, when she says that she recognizes something of herself in Thom, that’s a lot of what she’s referring to—this spark of recognition that here is someone who’s also sensitive, who also thinks about the world and art and politics, but ultimately is kind of a bro, like they’re both kind of bros together. You see the challenges of real intimacy when two or even one person in a friendship is really committed to being apathetic and chill, and not letting their soft underbelly be exposed. And you see that in real contrast to the feedback cycle of general openness and generosity that, with some exceptions, you witness between Sneha and Tig. The other thing that is very interesting to me about Sneha and Thom is that they’re coworkers. They work in the same company, the same system, and one of the things that comes between them is conflict about who’s getting paid more. There’s something about their relationship that allows us as readers to think about what it means to have friendship and solidarity at work, and also what it means to compete with your close friends in capitalistic systems. Professional jealousy comes up in a lot of friendships, but it isn’t necessarily talked about.

BG: Sneha’s corporate life routine—the consistent back-and-forth between just home and work—makes her seem like a cog in the capitalist machine. I think it also speaks to the idea that the American Dream sold to the immigrant child from an early age seems to leave no room for personal ambition and drive. How do you contend with this as it connects to the immigrant hustle, the desire for a better life, and capitalist greed?

STM: In the novel, when Thom, whose radical politics Sneha does not at that time share, accuses her of being an aspiring member of the bourgeoisie, Sneha’s response is a little bit like: “fuck you, yes I want to have this life that I’ve never had”—and implicit in what she says is that Thom got to have it, his parents are doctors, etc., and so it’s really easy for him to play Mao. I think the beauty of the novel is that it can allow deep characterization, individual consciousness, and individual history to inhabit these questions. Sneha is not a super ambitious girl-boss type. I think what she’s really motivated by – because of her personal history – is safety. And a different character—frankly, like a younger version of me—would’ve been more motivated by the explicit question of ambition and climbing the ladder and making oneself a story. Sneha’s very much like: Maslow’s needs, I want safety, stability. There’s something very heartrending to me about that. And I think that that is actually the most common American dream. 

The more complicated narrative that the American dream doesn’t ever examine is that there’s a reparative quality to what immigration can be.

A lot of Time Magazine cover stories of the American dream focus on a certain kind of pioneer wunderkind narrative when in fact, the actual American dream has to do with the fact that the world is extremely unequal—in part because of imperialism, war, climate change, and post-colonialism—and the quality of life and the safety and stability one can have is very different, based on what country you are born into. And the quality of life and the safety and stability one can have is very different, based on what country you are born into. So, it makes a lot of sense to me personally that people – who come from parts of the world which have been affected if not ravaged by colonialism and war, and the poverty and resource theft that ensues from those things – want to immigrate to richer countries that, in some cases, were responsible. Suketu Mehta talks about this explicitly in his book, This Land Is Our Land. One of its opening stories is of this Indian elder who, when confronted by a racist British man who was like, “why are you here, go back,” says: “I’m here, because you were there,” meaning, you were there in my home country. I think that’s the more complicated narrative that the American dream doesn’t ever examine, which is that there’s a reparative quality to what immigration can be.

BG: I find it interesting that Sneha often feels like she is her parents’ investment. At one point, she says, “All my choices are mortgaged to the people who have made my life possible.” I think this could ring true for many immigrant children, who are seen and treated as avenues for family success. How justified is this approach in your opinion, keeping in mind the fact that immigrant parents undertake the difficult task of starting anew in a foreign country, with language and cultural barriers, looking for safety for themselves, their children, and the generations to come?

STM: The reality is that families are wildly different. Most of the families I know who’ve experienced immigration—and specifically, where people have engaged in this script of “we’re investing in our children, we’re giving everything to our children”—the primary impulse isn’t anything other than dogged, sacrificial love. I want to honor that. It’s the sort of collision of this love against an unequal and extractive world that creates the hardship in my eyes. It’s the hardship of familial separation. It’s of using guilt as a weapon because you don’t see your child, who you love so much, as separate from you, and so you’re trying to control what they end up doing. I see it all as a flawed but deeply human expression of something beautiful and transcendent—which is love. And some things that are hard and fraught, like racial and wealth inequality, meets, frankly, an unwillingness to accept that your child has their own life and agency, which is a challenge for parents to accept across all cultures.

There’s a passage of the novel where Amit asks Sneha this sort of pitying question about arranged marriage and she’s struck mute because she doesn’t know how to say what she wants to say. And one of the things she says is, “I did not know how to explain this stubborn love for my parents that I staggered under, iridescent and gigantic and veined with a terrible grief, grief for the ways their lives had been compost for my own.” I think that’s like the novel’s attempt to engage with what it’s like to at least be on the child’s side of that dynamic.

BG: What advice would you give to a young queer brown person like Sneha, experiencing their early twenties?

STM: Find your people. Remember that you matter, very deeply. Try to situate yourself in the world. One of the things about being very young is that the world is large and incomprehensible to many, and trying to learn about the world and being in love with the world is one of the great gifts you can have as a young person. Particularly if you’re queer, situate yourself in queer history and lineage. The great comfort I always held onto was that there were other people like me—in long time, in present time. It’s ultimately about finding people like you, people you can build bridges of commonality with and see yourself reflected back in—and knowing that it’s often going to be hard, depending on who you are, but it’s also going to be very beautiful, joyful, and glorious.

Accept Irrelevance! You’re Being Replaced!

“The Replacement” by Alexandra Wuest

The news comes in the form of an email. YOU’RE BEING REPLACED, the message says, and I glance around the office. The typists are typing, the copy machine is copying, and the shredder is shredding. The room looks like the type of workplace you’d see in a movie set in an office, not a Post-It note out of place: cubicles, computers; shades of grey and blue; the soft sounds of machinery filling the background. Everyone is acting the way they always act.

I walk into my boss’s office. She appears to be in the middle of doing something very important on her computer while riding a stationary bike. In the corner of her office, there is a trash can overflowing with hundreds of half-eaten chopped salads, and her desk is littered with lipstick-stained cups and bottles of every beverage imaginable. When she doesn’t notice me, I knock on the doorframe, and she stops pedaling and looks up.

Am I being replaced? I ask.

Oh good, she says. They told you. Things have been so busy around here I was worried I’d have to do it myself. 

She steps off of the bike, rifles through a desk drawer, and pulls out an ornately decorated cupcake. She hands me the treat with a smile.

ACCEPT IRRELEVANCE is written in pale pink frosting across the top of the cupcake. I take a bite, and the cupcake tastes like a mixture of refined sugar and unrefined pity. 

Why? I ask, my mouth full of dry cake crumbs.

We just feel you’re not the right fit, my boss says. It’s nothing personal, but we’ve found someone who’s a better match for the position. She hands me an empty cardboard box. Here, you can use this to pack up your belongings.


Back at home there is a problem with my key. It no longer fits inside the keyhole on the front door. No matter how many times I try, I can’t get the front door of my apartment to unlock. The key is suddenly a mismatch. I put my box of personal items from the office down on the ground and look around for the spare my boyfriend and I hid when we first moved in. It isn’t in its usual place under the doormat, so I bang on the door with a fist.

Boyfriend! I yell, and inside I can hear the sound of footsteps. A few seconds pass, and the front door finally creaks open to reveal my boyfriend standing in the doorway with an apron tied around his waist.

I hold up my key and begin to explain that it no longer fits in the keyhole, but my boyfriend interrupts me before I can finish.

I have to stir the sauce! he says. I don’t know what sauce he is referring to. He doesn’t usually refer to sauces at all. He rushes down the hallway toward the kitchen.

I pick up the box and follow him inside where I find him at the stove stirring an enormous pot of marinara sauce. I’ve never seen my boyfriend cook before, but tonight the kitchen table is piled high with crystal platters overflowing with food: piles of shellfish, a rack of lamb, freshly baked bread still steaming from the oven. I pick up a caviar-dusted deviled egg and watch my boyfriend strain spaghetti at the kitchen sink. 

What’s all of this for? I ask. 

To celebrate! he says.

Celebrate what? I ask. The fact I got fired today?

My boyfriend makes a face like he’s forgotten to take a soufflé out of the oven, which it turns out he has. He turns away to rescue dessert, and we both hold our breath as he pulls the chocolate soufflé out of the oven. He closes the oven door and wipes his hands on his apron before turning back to look at me.

About that, he says, and his eyes dart around the room. I follow his gaze and find three overstuffed suitcases waiting in the corner by the trash can.

What are the suitcases for? I ask.

Your stuff, he says. Your replacement will be over shortly. She’s finishing up some things at the office. That’s actually why we’re celebrating. She got promoted already!

She’s replacing me here too? I ask. I thought that was just a work thing.

What’s the difference between life and work these days? he says. He returns to the stove to stir the giant vat of sauce. A second later, he raises a single finger in the air as though trying to determine the direction of the wind. Hold that thought, he says. I have to send some work emails. He puts the wooden spoon down and bends over a laptop perched nearby on the kitchen counter. When he is finished typing, he closes the laptop and looks back up at me. Sorry, where were we? 

Where am I supposed to go? I ask.

Have you checked your email? he says.


I wait for the train to arrive and read through my inbox. Apparently, the email had gone to my spam folder by mistake. The subject line says, NEXT INSTRUCTIONS, but when I click on the email the body of the text only reads: TBD. I don’t know who to contact about the oversight. I put the phone back into my pocket and watch the train pull into the station.

Almost all of the seats on the train are already full. As I walk down the aisle in search of an empty seat, I can’t help but notice all the passengers have something in common. They all look a lot like me. Some more wrinkled, some more taut; some with beauty marks, others with boils. I walk through train car after train car trying to locate an empty seat.

When I finally find one, I sit down and pay a conductor in a blue hat for a one-way ticket. Sitting to my left is an elderly woman. She too looks a lot like me—only about one hundred years my senior. She has a newspaper spread open on her lap. 

Where are you headed? she asks.

To my parents, I say.

Oh that’s nice, she says, and the train makes noises to announce it is departing the station. Outside the window the landscape starts to blur.

Where are you going? I ask.

To my parents, she says and laughs hysterically. I join her in laughing, but I don’t know if we are laughing because her parents are likely very old or if we are laughing because her parents are likely very dead. I make a pillow out of my hands against the window and try to fall asleep.

I wake up to a finger poking me in the ribs. I open my eyes. It is the elderly woman trying to get my attention.

Do you want any sections of the newspaper? she asks. She holds the paper a few inches from my face. I’m still half-asleep but I nod groggily. She hands me the style section, and I browse the wedding and engagement announcements until I see a familiar face.

It’s my boyfriend printed in black and white, smiling up at me. I’ve never seen the beautiful woman standing next to him before, but I know who she is immediately. She has thin upper arms and a smile that doesn’t show her gums. She has a knack for arts and crafts and a head for business. She can dish it out and she can take it. She is my replacement, and I stare at the diamond ring glittering on her finger. The picture is small, but the stone still looks impressive.

The article says my boyfriend proposed by hiring a skywriter to write WILL YOU MARRY ME in the clouds. It occurs to me that my boyfriend and I were together for a total of six years and never discussed future plans, let alone marriage or proposals written by airplanes. I scold myself for always forgetting to look up at the sky and crumple the newspaper into a ball.

Hey! the woman says, snatching the paper back from me. I haven’t read that section yet.

The conductor returns to our row.

Excuse me, ladies, he says. It appears we have a problem.

No problem here, I say. Just a misunderstanding about a newspaper.

Next to me, the woman grunts in disagreement.

I wasn’t referring to a newspaper, the conductor says. He leans in close to my seat and lowers his voice to a stage whisper. I’m sorry, but it seems your seat has been double booked.

Behind me I hear the sound of a woman clearing her throat and turn around to see my replacement standing a few feet away, a single dainty suitcase in her hand. She smiles in my direction.

You can have the seat, she says warmly. I can stand, it’s no trouble at all.

The train conductor beams at my replacement. She looks even more beautiful in person than she did in the newspaper photo. Her skin is pore-less, her posture is ballet-straight, and her breath smells like a dentist’s idea of heaven.

Now, that’s very generous of you, the train conductor says, but with a selfless attitude like that, we couldn’t possibly allow you to give up your seat.

Really, I don’t mind! 

No, no, no. He shakes his head. Follow me, I think we all know a person like you belongs in first class. 

He takes her by the arm and leads her towards the front of the train. Before they disappear into the next car, the conductor turns back to shoot me one last simmering stare. He wags a finger in my direction and looks as though he has something more to say to me, his face resembling a cat about to hiss, but he turns and continues toward first class with my replacement.

When they’re out of sight, the elderly woman turns to me excitedly.

That’s the lady from the newspaper! she says.

I know, I know, I say. Who announces their engagement in the newspaper anyways?

No, the woman says. Not that. Look, she’s on the front page. She puts on a pair of enormous reading glasses and hands me another section of the newspaper. Sure enough, on the front page is another photograph of my replacement. In this photo, she stands with a pair of comically oversized scissors in her hands and appears to be in the middle of a ribbon-cutting ceremony.

It says here she uses all of her vacation days to visit towns that have been destroyed by earthquakes and tornadoes and floods, and rebuilds the schools and hospitals and playgrounds all by herself, the woman says. Isn’t that something? And on top of that, she works a full-time job.

Wow, I deadpan. How selfless.

Oh, look here, the woman says, pointing to the final paragraph of the page-long article. This says she just got promoted at work—again!

I stare out the train window and watch the landscape become more familiar and stranger at the same time. Outside, the neighborhood where I grew up is coming into clear view, but all of the businesses I once knew have been replaced. I barely recognize the train station when the conductor comes over the loudspeaker to announce we have reached our destination.


When I finally arrive at my parents’ front door I don’t bother trying my old key. I don’t want to take any chances. Instead I knock on the door, which has recently been repainted a new color, and yell, Mother! Father! It’s me!

When the door opens, it isn’t my mother or father who opens it, but my replacement.

Oh, come on! I say, when I see her standing in the doorway.

She is wearing a different outfit than she was on the train and is freshly showered and blow dried. It’s possible she’s gotten a new haircut in the short time since we parted, a difficult to pull off style that she does in fact pull off. She doesn’t look like someone who spent several hours on a train and then another hour walking uphill, but then again, she was carrying considerably less luggage than I currently am. 

What are you doing here? I ask.

What do you mean? she says. This is my family.

I can hear my mother’s voice shouting in the background. Honey! Who is it at the door? 

I elbow my way around the replacement and find my mother on the living room sofa flipping through albums of old family photos.

Mother! I say. She looks at me as though I am an item on a menu that doesn’t meet any of her dietary restrictions, like something wrong, something to be sent back, or something to be avoided entirely in the first place.

Who are you? she says.

Don’t you recognize me? I ask. I’m your daughter.

No, she says, getting up and standing next to my replacement. This is my daughter.

I try to think of a way to prove I am who I say I am. I walk over to the photo album she is holding and point to a family portrait. I am twelve years old in the photo. See? I say.

See what? she says. That isn’t a picture of you.

I look closer at the photo and see she has a point. The child in the photo doesn’t wear the unflattering bowl cut or the orthodontia-neglected smile of my childhood; doesn’t share my adolescent habit of standing as though my hunched shoulders are an apology for the mere act of existing. Instead, the child in the photo looks like the replacement standing in front of me, only younger, and her very presence in the photo makes the rest of the family in the portrait appear a little lovelier too, both the same and not at all in my absence. 

I pace around the room, trying to think of an alternative method to prove to my mother that I am her daughter.

Well, I say, if I wasn’t your daughter how would I know about the time you bought me gerbils for my tenth birthday? And how I accidentally let them escape and they got into the walls of the house and ended up having hundreds of babies? And how it took us months to find all the babies and how years later we’d sometimes hear scratching in the wall and realize we hadn’t found them all?

My mother makes a face like she is doing algebra in her head.

That sounds pretty irresponsible, she says. And unappreciative of such a thoughtful gift. I don’t think my daughter would do that. She puts an arm around my replacement.

How about the time I wrecked dad’s car a week after I got my driver’s license? I say. Or when I got so depressed in college I had to come home, and the doctor said the reason I was sad all the time was because I ate only pancakes for the whole semester? Or what about the time we all went to Bermuda on a family vacation and I locked myself in the hotel room for the entire trip because I had my period and was afraid of being eaten by sharks?

My mother shakes her head. My daughter would never do those things. She shows up to my house with flowers and gifts and bouquets of chocolate-dipped fruit. If you’re supposed to be my daughter, where are your flowers, your gifts, your bouquets of chocolate-dipped fruit?

I look at my overstuffed suitcases and the box from the office. 

I didn’t bring any flowers or gifts or bouquets of chocolate-dipped fruit, I say.

Tsk, tsk, my mother says. Definitely doesn’t sound like my daughter. Plus, you have a certain brittleness about you. My daughter wouldn’t have that. She goes with the flow. She’s always trying to help others. She never asks for anything. She doesn’t have all this . . . baggage . . . that you seem to.

She picks up the box from the office and hands it to me.

I think you should take your things and go, she says.

My replacement gives me a pitying look. Here, let me help you with your suitcases, she says, but I don’t accept her assistance. These are my things and I don’t need anyone else to help me carry them. 

As I walk away from the front door, I can hear my family cheering inside the house. Another promotion? my father’s voice yells. Let’s celebrate! Someone is blowing into one of those noisemakers they sell at party stores. I turn around to try to catch a glimpse of my family through a window but find that my mother has already pulled the curtains shut. 


I walk for what must be several days. All the trains that pass by are fully booked, not a single empty seat available for me to purchase, and every day my luggage seems to grow heavier and heavier. Eventually, when I can barely lift the suitcases, I stop by a weigh station and the scale confirms my suspicions.

I begin to take things out of the suitcases to make them less heavy: out-of-style clothing, unread books, supplements I’ve consistently forgotten to take, dirty socks, the guitar I never learned how to play, overpriced facial serums, half-finished and long-ago abandoned knitting projects, expired tubes of mascara, a dust-covered yoga mat, pants that no longer fit, a broken umbrella I’d been meaning to replace. As I walk I scatter my belongings behind me one by one like a trail of breadcrumbs that leads to my parents’ house, to my former self—to my replacement? I’m not sure anymore. Things are getting fuzzy. As each suitcase empties, I leave the luggage behind too. 

Another day passes and I’m down to only the cardboard box. All I have left now is what I took from the office. I can barely remember packing them: a dying houseplant, a bottle of hand lotion, a photo of my boyfriend and I summiting a mountain, a punch card for a coffee shop near the office that is just one punch away from a free small drip coffee, a birthday card signed by everyone in the office in which half of my colleagues misspelled my first name. The things I once put on my desk to mark it as mine, but now have no use for. 

I turn a corner and realize the streets resemble something I remember from a dream. I look around and realize it’s not a dream at all—I’m almost exactly back where I first started, just a few blocks away from my office. 

I hoist the box onto my hip and continue walking in the direction of the building. I don’t know what I’ll do when I get there but it feels good to have a destination.

As I get closer, I notice there is something different about the block than the last time I was here. It is lined with movie trailers. I pass by a table laid out with craft services and walk up to one of the trailers. There is a sign on the door that says CASTING. I knock on the door. 

A man with a baseball cap and a headset around his neck opens it.

Can I help you? he asks.

Can you tell me what is going on? I ask, pointing to the rest of the trailers lining the street.

We’re filming a movie, he says, and looks me up and down. Actually, we’re in need of some extras. Do you have any time to kill?

I look down at my box of belongings. I won’t be needing my things anymore, so I put the box down on the ground and follow the director into the office building.

As we walk he explains the movie is set in an office, an office that happens to be my old office. When I had worked there I hadn’t realized it was a movie set.

The director tells me where to stand and I follow his directions. He hands me a stack of papers that are entries from my childhood diaries, outlining all the various ways I have disappointed myself and others throughout the years.

Here, he says. You can shred these in the background of the next scene.

Won’t the shredder be too loud? I ask the director.

Good catch! he says. You’re a natural at being an extra. He hands me another stack of papers. You can work on filing these instead. 

This new stack of papers is a collection of news clippings celebrating my replacement’s myriad accomplishments. The stack is as thick as the stack of my diary entries—maybe thicker.

Should I file them alphabetically? I ask.

Doesn’t matter, the director says. You’ll barely be on-screen. He turns his hands into a frame, closes one eye, and pans his fingers around the room like a camera.

It’s funny, I begin to explain. I actually used to work in this office—

Quiet on set! the director yells, and a hush falls over the crew.

I watch as the movie’s two leads are guided by a PA to a pair of Xs taped onto the carpet. 

The scene is a love scene, and I watch the main characters rehearse their flirtation by the water cooler. They make working in an office look so much more romantic than when I was doing it myself. I think of the days when I was the new girl in the office, but it feels like a story that happened to someone else. It’s possible I’m mistaking something I saw late at night on TV for a memory. 

Action, the director yells, and I watch the camera make slow circles around the couple. I’m far enough away that I can’t hear what they’re saying, but I can see their faces, and I recognize the woman. She’s my replacement, and I have to hand it to her, she’s doing a better job with the role than I ever did.

Everyone Has Moved On and I’m Still Thinking About Miranda’s Coming Out Scene

If you’re queer and have watched And Just Like That you probably remember the picnic scene. In “Diwali,” episode 6 of the Sex and the City reboot, Miranda Hobbes, Charlotte York, and Carrie Bradshaw meet for lunch in a park along the East River. All is well until Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) reveals that she had sex outside of her heterosexual marriage and, that she did so with a non-binary person, the Che Diaz (Sara Ramirez). Glassy-eyed, Miranda asks Charlotte (Kristin Davis) not to have a big reaction. (Carrie already knows). She then very calmly says, “I had sex with Che at Carrie’s apartment after the surgery when we thought she was asleep.” Without missing a beat, Charlotte shrieks a bunch of rhetorical questions: head shaking, eyebrows raised, eyes bulging in a way that is reminiscent of her ex-mother-in-law Bunny, whom she once despised. She asks, “Are you GAY now?” Miranda immediately responds, “No,” but then shrugs: “I don’t know.” Charlotte continues: “You spent your whole life with men. You’re MARRIED to a MAN and now you’re suddenly having non-binary sex!… You are not progressive enough for this!” 

In what feels more like hurt than anger, Miranda storms away from the table as Charlotte calls out, “You’re having a midlife crisis! You should have just dyed your hair!” Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker) coaxes Miranda to return to resolve the disagreement. After watching this scene, I railed against Charlotte and the show to anyone who would listen—including my therapist. I began to recognize my queer identity about five years ago, in my late 20s, which until recently is not something I’ve often seen in life or media. Miranda’s vulnerability, confusion, overwhelm, and shame feel so true to the early days of me stepping into my queerness. And Just Like That took on a pivotal moment for older queer viewers and had Charlotte trample all over it. Her reaction ignited what, deep down, I still fear when coming out to anyone. 


Her reaction to Miranda’s queerness in And Just Like That felt like a betrayal not only to Miranda, but to me.

I was always a Charlotte. At 12, I snuck TBS reruns of Sex and the City in my basement, thumb on the remote’s channel change button in case my parents walked in. I identified with how judgmental she could be, how much pressure she put on herself, and how conventional she was. She was possibly the only character who made sense to me when she admitted to thinking blowjobs are gross (lesbian clue #1). Binge watching the library box set DVDs during sleepovers with my ballet friends in high school, I looked around the room as Charlotte told her friends, “Maybe we can be each other’s soulmates. And then we can let men be these great, nice guys to have fun with” (lesbian clue #2). It was Charlotte who understood me (we even both attended Smith College—lesbian clue #3), which is why her reaction to Miranda’s queerness in And Just Like That felt like a betrayal not only to Miranda, but to me.

The coming out narratives we’re accustomed to seeing on TV often center on teenage characters, so I was especially tuned into this moment that felt closer to my own experience. It was painful to see Miranda vulnerable in a way I was intimately familiar with and to witness what felt like rejection from Charlotte. (Carrie’s lack of eye contact throughout the conversation wasn’t so hot either.) But after months of rumination, I’ve come to realize that sometimes the truest depictions of coming out moments on TV are also the most uncomfortable. And perhaps just because they feel uncomfortable doesn’t mean they’re necessarily bad representation—or bad TV.

With a few months of distance, I’m able to think about Charlotte’s reaction less emotionally and more critically. By the end of the picnic conversation, she tells Miranda she wants to understand and asks, “What is wrong with people just staying who they were?”—also a reference to Charlotte’s child Rock (Alexa Swinton), who is exploring their gender expression. Carrie, in a rare moment of wisdom (the only writer character I will ever respect is Jo March and that’s final), chimes in with “Some of us just don’t have that luxury.” Charlotte doesn’t yet understand that there’s an inevitability to being queer. It’s a whole different way of looking at the world and it’s really not possible to stay who you were once you open that door.

Charlotte doesn’t yet understand, but she will. If anything is true about both the Charlotte of the original series and the reboot, it’s that she is committed to and capable of growth (another reason I identified with her). We’re talking about the woman who abandoned deeply ingrained dreams of a WASPy future to convert to Judaism for Harry Goldenblatt (Evan Handler). By the end of the first season of And Just Like That, she is more open to understanding Miranda and Rock, even throwing Rock an obscenely expensive “they-mitzvah.”

I’ve had people of her generation push back, question my identity, and ask me to defend or prove my choices.

While it was painful for me to watch Charlotte react to Miranda the way she did, I recognize that it’s not possible for any televised coming out moment to appease every viewer. Coming out is different for everyone, and it’s not one thing, done one time, in one way. It’s an ongoing, lifelong process. There’s also a generational element to Charlotte’s response. Maybe the picnic scene bothered me so much not just because it felt homophobic, but because it did feel realistic to how women of Charlotte’s generation sometimes react. I’ve had people of her generation push back, question my identity, and ask me to defend or prove my choices, albeit less aggressively. It’s the fluidity that seems difficult to understand. How could someone who has, until this moment, seemed straight come to a different conclusion about themselves? If this is truly their identity, why didn’t they figure it out sooner? Without exposure to stories like mine and Miranda’s, some people don’t trust the legitimacy of a later in life identity shift. In this way, Charlotte’s response is both true to her character and true to life. Can we, as viewers, fault a TV show for putting a version of truth on screen when it’s a truth we don’t want to see? 

In the last couple of years, we’ve seen more positive reactions to characters coming out on TV, non-reactions, and queer stories that don’t address coming out. There’s Dr. Kai Bartley (E.R. Fightmaster) on Grey’s Anatomy, whose storyline focuses not on the fact that they’re non-binary, but on their Alzheimer’s research and budding relationship with Dr. Amelia Shepherd (Caterina Scorsone). Taissa Turner (Tawny Cypress) on Yellowjackets deals with the aftermath of surviving a plane crash while running for political office with little mention of her sexuality. And Just Like That is not one of those shows. When Miranda’s storyline and Charlotte’s response didn’t fall into a familiar category, it was a bit of a shock to my system.


The purpose of And Just Like That seems to be to rectify the lack of inclusivity in Sex and the City, and that’s certainly true of Miranda’s queer storyline and coming out. The original show’s characters were mostly straight, cis, and white. The few LGBTQ+ characters and characters of color were stereotypes. Carrie’s gay best friend Stanford Blatch (Willie Garson) and Charlotte’s gay best friend Anthony Marentino (Mario Cantone) were caricatures, interested mainly in fashion, sex, and making fun of people. The reboot brings more diverse characters, but not in a way that’s progressive. The characters of color function largely as bolsters for the main characters without much depth of their own. Do we know anything about Lisa Todd Wexley (Nicole Ari Parker), other than she’s a documentarian, the “Black Charlotte” who Charlotte wants to impress, plays tennis, collects art, and sometimes has marital discord but not in a way that moves the plot forward? Does representation mean anything if it’s done superficially? Writer Melanie Curry explains, “When viewers of color ask for inclusivity, we want genuine and honest representation—not side characters who are the punchline of every joke.”

The characters of color function largely as bolsters for the main characters without much depth of their own.

Curry’s insight is true for the LGBTQ+ characters in the reboot, too. As with the new characters of color, And Just Like That’s newest queer character, Che, is a caricature of someone who is non-binary, bisexual, and a comedian. They wield a “woke moment” button during their podcast, are self-obsessed and sex-obsessed, and have a very soapbox-y standup routine. After having sex with Miranda, Che suggests Miranda DM them on Instagram if she wants to hang out again, which, in my experience, is not how real people make plans. Then there’s trans character Rabbi Jen (Hari Nef), who pops up in the season finale to help Rock study for their they-mitzvah and affirm the strength of Carrie and Miranda’s friendship from a public restroom stall. We don’t know anything about Rabbi Jen (though there is a they-mitzvah program prop with her bio!) but Twitter users immediately called for a spin-off. 

While perhaps there are elements of Stanford, Anthony, Che, and Rabbi Jen that viewers connect with, it’s Miranda who has all the depth. And Just Like That allows her to explore how unsettling, overwhelming, and confusing it can be to embrace your own queerness, which is invaluable for both queer and straight viewers. When Che tells Miranda it’s a turn-on to ask for what she wants, Miranda replies, “I didn’t know that!” In this moment, adults stumbling within their queerness everywhere felt seen. When Miranda surprises Che at their apartment with cookies and Che isn’t instantly responsive, Miranda flies down the stairs, calls herself “so fucking stupid,” and questions why she came over. Writer Heather Hogan has identified what we are seeing Miranda work through as “late-blooming queer mania,” and that feels accurate. 

Having your sexual or gender identity shift at any age, but especially as a fully-formed adult, can be daunting and disorienting.

Within the queer community, we discuss how the most genuine queer narratives in film and television don’t revolve around coming out at all. Instead, they examine queer people living their everyday lives while navigating their evolving identities. Generally I agree with this. But coming out in adulthood is a different animal. Having your sexual or gender identity shift at any age, but especially as a fully-formed adult, can be daunting and disorienting. Seeing how Gen Z so fearlessly embraces their identities both on TV and in real life, it’s easy for Gen X and Millennials who didn’t or couldn’t come out earlier to feel left behind. All of this is why Miranda’s story matters. That representation needs to be on TV precisely because it rarely has been. Watching Miranda navigate her identity—and messily—is validating and valuable for those of us coming out later in life. Even if it’s painful or uncomfortable, we need to see her vulnerability as she stumbles through the process of getting to know herself. What we don’t need to see is queer and minority characters without nuance, or worse stereotypes and caricatures.

And Just Like That is HBO Max’s most-streamed series of all time, and it spurred wide internet discourse on race, gender, disability, age, and sexuality. It wasn’t always productive, but published essays and social media posts did move the conversation forward. I didn’t think critically about the way Miranda’s husband Steve Brady’s (David Eigenberg) hearing disability was being portrayed until a hearing impaired friend posted about it on Facebook. I was beginning to side with the Che haters when a writer tweeted that not allowing Che the same grace we gave our Sex and the City main characters as they made questionable romantic choices for two decades is not okay. And I’ve seen more conversations about coming out later as a result of Miranda’s storyline. I’m begrudgingly grateful for the discourse that And Just Like That has brought to the surface. It feels a little like therapy for 12-year-old me—the me who might have realized her identity earlier, if she had the kind of TV shows and media discourse we have now—including, I suppose, the picnic scene.