Two things about this in today’s Times :
1. I’ve published 11 novels, only 5 are crime, a little less than half then. And I’m very happy to be called a crime writer but it’s not the only kind of writing I do.
2. “a lesbian”. Well, I don’t know that I am, solely. A lesbian is so specific. Yes of course I’m out/gay/queer/dyke/whatever word you (and I) agree suits that sexuality, but the use of the word as noun rather than adjective is incredibly limiting. It makes it sound as if that’s all I am. And none of us like to be considered just one thing. (or even just two.)
I know it’s easier for journalists to put us all in boxes. It’s very simple to call me a crime writer who is a lesbian, it’s specific, to the point, not incorrect, and puts me neatly in not one but two boxes. The problem is that I’m not very fond of boxes and I’m far less fond of the reductive noun than I am of the more inclusive adjective. None of us much like being considered any one thing.

Do check out the anthology though. That’s the juicy bit.