Not a mod, but the thread seems to be getting off-track / turning into debate. Invariably this happens every time there's a thread remotely like this, but maybe try to keep on topic.
Embrace the inevitable cancer. It's coming. Anyway, yeah, do people have more things to say on the actual implementation stuff?
If you feel anything must be done because your character is LGBT, then label said character with "LGBT" on their shirt, preferably in scarlet. Be sides that, just treat them like a human.
It all comes back to such issues like homosexuality in fiction. It's taken a large leap, and continues to take larger leaps. Yet the divide between a realist and a deluded moron is the fact that we now have, as Chained has stated, a generation that is built on doing the right thing but they seem to be doing it in the worst way possible; to the point that arrogance and self-indulgence and egotism exacerbate the already horrifically skewered perceptions of people. "Please don't call me a woman. I identify as gender-queer." "It's wrong for a doctor to decide the sex of a baby." "Straight people have no business in pretending to empathise what the LGBT community go through." It's like SJWs got so encapsulated with becoming accepted that they've clouded their own judgement and take any form of opposition as their own form of white whale. Anybody who disagrees or has an alternate view is THE ENEMY. I know some people that really do get offended when homosexuality or lesbianism is shown in fiction purely because they believe that it detracts attention away from transsexuality or bisexuality. The limits are endless to how some people see a ladder and some see a hole. At the risk of derailing this thread more, I'll probably throw up a debate topic or something just to keep this topic on its intended path.
What's wrong with identifying as some form of gender queer? And sex is the sex parts, so that's nothing to do with your gender; as in transgender. But as for people who say you guys can't empathise, I say fuck them. If we didn't have allies we'd be nowhere. Still getting beheaded or burned at the stake or at least shun and taunted and treated unfairly. You are a representative of the reason I have grown up in a mostly super-positive environment for my orientation, we need people like you to continue existing. And there's nothing wrong with trying to understand others pain. Especially since there are other things that can cause discrimination such as mental illness (e.g. depression), personality disorders (e.g autism spectrum) and physical disability (e.g. ALS). Respect sir.
Why bother mentioning a person's sexuality unless it somehow drives the plot or becomes a key element of the story? So-and-so fall in love or hook up and as a result X happens. Or so-and-so is gay and as a result, they do X and cause Y to happen. There needs to be a reason to mention it in the first place, otherwise it's just useless information that the reader doesn't need to enjoy the story.
Meh. Personally I like incidental traits (And define a "reason" anyway). Although I do sometimes include plot elements around it and the social connotations are at least referenced a little.
What I mean by "have a reason" is that it's all good and well to say: 1. "The woman at the end of the picnic table was Gwen. Gwen is a trans woman who lives next door to Mike." Ok. So you introduced a trans character. You're so edgy! But wouldn't it be more interesting to say: 2. "When the introductions were made, the men all seemed to hover around Gwen. Much to her amusement, they took turns shaking, squeezing and (in the case of the new guy that came with Stacey) kissing her hand! Oo la la! Her cheeks reddened as she wondered what the guys would think if she were to run into them in a public restroom, straddling the urinal and giving her boy-baton a few shakes before tucking him away. "Oh well," she thought, "let them enjoy their ignorance - I sure as hell will!" And with that, Gwen got up to refill her margarita, scanning the party for that hand-kissing cutie. The first example was a simple description that really doesn't need to be there. The second example was more in-depth and contributed to the story in an entertaining way that helped drive the story and open up potential sub-plots.
So you're asking people to write well. That has nothing to do with whether the character is LGBT Even then, a passing reference or two to her starting to take hormones could work just as well. And it's not about being edgy it's about realism and interest.
That's what this trans woman is like. She doesn't have to conform to your standards. She's free to be herself, isn't she? Can't she just exist without your JUDGEMENT?! Haha I'm just throwing some of that attitude back at you. Don't bring piss to a shit fight.
I'm not interested in fighting with you. Your example of an 'interesting' trans character is one who's amused by people perceiving her as cis as if it's a game, daydreams about some guy finding her in a men's room as if that's not a dangerous situation for a trans woman to be in, refers to her junk as a dude, and behaves as though her being trans is a naughty secret that she's taking advantage of the silly men not being in on. In 100 words you've managed to include so many weird fucked-up concepts about trans women that the density gives me a headache. If you ever do decide you want to write a trans character, for the love of god do some research into the basic experience. There's also considerable stylistic difference between your two example paragraphs. One's a boringly-phrased two-sentence bit from a seemingly-omniscient third-person perspective, the other's a very close-third paragraph of narration and internal monologue. They're obviously not equivalent. Of course the second one has more characterization and action; that's how you purposefully wrote it. You just as easily could have written example one as "The woman at the end of the picnic table was Gwen. Gwen is a woman who lives next door to Mike" and it still would have been boring, while writing an engaging and interesting introduction for the character that includes mentioning that she's trans. Your example proves nothing because you set it up to that way.
I'm not trans, so I can't say this with 100% certainty, but: There's another problems that IzzyBot didn't mention: Firstly, unless it's story-pertinent (And it if IS story pertinent, that's a whole 'nother can of worms,) it shouldn't matter what kind of genitals a trans person has. You don't introduce a woman by having her think about her vagina, so why should you do it differently for a trans character? (Also, from a purely story-structure standpoint, that would be a really weird way to introduce a character. You're dedicating one paragraph to their introduction, and you spend the whole time talking about how they're trans, without really showing any other facet of her personality.) And, to bring up your original point about character introductions: Your first 'Example' is just fine. You mention that a character is trans, which will presumably inform their character later on. It's not the smoothest reveal, but it doesn't have to be, because it's not a huge part of their character in the story. It's a passing trait, worth a passing notation. There's nothing wrong with just mentioning things about characters.