The phrase,"despite not having the penis you expect," is unnecessary and transphobic.

@1: I hear you. Thank you for commenting.

One wonders how meritorious a body of work ('queering' as you so love to say) such as this will be perceived in regards to its power upon the viewer and society or what relevance it will actually have at that point as we become comfortable or anesthetized to the story in light of changed circumstances and attitudes. That it will be seen as a possible relic of a past culture. While the personal, physical, and emotional journeys portrayed here are powerful ones (as social bigotry and prejudice, as well as personal tragedy, obviously are) it bears (no pun intended) critical consideration that even if one aligns all the right 'aspects' and angles to an artists conceptual intentions and 'story', is it great? Will this stand the test of time and if so why? There is much that stirs interest and adulation in the present amongst the 'art crowd' but the tough question to pose here would be the notion that "as little lasts the long haul and withstands the sands of change, will this?" Especially in light of such a high cool factor. This type of personal narrative photography with all it's grandiose intentions and web of personal intrique posed as great art is just too little and TOO LATE. This work most definitely needed to be done 30 years ago to deserve true consideration from a stylistic, conceptual, and historic point of view.

@1 I can see how the phrase could be taken that way, but that's not the way I read it. It could just as easily be taken as a stereotype of bears in hot tubs never regarding a transman as a 'peer'. I haven't seen the piece, but I wonder if the absence of the 'expected' penis in that context is exactly the point.