4 ms·

Based on the "Personal Life" section of the page it would seem they were non-binary, making "they/them/their" appropriate pronouns. Additional it states they we

Based on the "Personal Life" section of the page it would seem they were non-binary, making "they/them/their" appropriate pronouns. Additional it states they were sometimes regarded as a trans woman, so to answer the grandparent comment's question, they were likely assigned male at birth.

aaron695 6y ago
He referrers to himself as a very old man, so that's their preferred pronoun - https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/245134641?searchTerm=%22Thomas%20Baty%22%20japan https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/245134641?searchT... It's possible they had to do that because of the times. But where is the evidence? Why is this not discussed in an encyclopedia we can look up? Do we need an uncensored Wikipedia now?
- klyrs 6y ago
  They're notable for writing the book they wrote at the time they wrote it. The book is notable in that trans people are normalized instead of being throwaways or villains. The book is quite early in my community's history, and its author is notable on that basis alone. Your dismissiveness and singleminded focus on their gender is unbecoming, and frankly kinda weird. You're not even discussing the book here, but complaining about the style of an adjacent article.
  - aaron695 6y ago
    If this out of copyright book is Notable, why is there no copy available on the internet? I would suggest, it is Notable because it is tied to the life of the author. Who I suspect was a gay British man living in Japan.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - klyrs 6y ago
      > If this out of copyright book is Notable, why is there no copy available on the internet? You made that up. Here's the actual criteria: [1]. > This page in a nutshell: A book is notable, and generally merits an article, if it verifiably meets through reliable sources, one or more of the following criteria: > 1. The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. As the article lists quite a few references, it's soundly in the Notable category. Please take this elsewhere. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(books) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(books)
- slg 6y ago
  I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the perceived hostility in your posts is accidental. Here are two tips that will help you avoid that unintentional impression and will allow you to escape the downvotes you are receiving. Transgender identity has changed a lot over the last several decades. You therefore shouldn't expect someone who lived before that to have used the same vocabulary and labels we use today. You also shouldn't force them into a binary gender bucket. There is a wide variety of transgender identities and it isn't exclusively about going from man to woman or vice versa. When you aren't sure of a person's preferred gender identity and pronouns, you are probably better off using general terms like they/them/their as the Wikipedia article does. You should never use "it" like you did in your first post unless specifically told to do so. It is can be viewed as dehumanizing.
  - aaron695 6y ago
    > You should never use "it" 'It' referrers to the situation, not the person. I changed the grammar a little to try and fix this.
    - slg 6y ago
      >There is no reference if it was a man who became a woman or vice versa Maybe that also isn't intentional and is merely poor grammar, but that certainly reads as if you are using "it" to refer to the person.
      - rebuilder 6y ago
        Since we're on a grammar tangent already, as a non-native speaker, I thought "was it a man who did this" was a valid construction. Am I in error?
        Freak_NL 6y ago
        That is fine, but keep in mind that a valid answer to that question can be “No, it was a cat that did it.”. If you are already sure it was a person and wanted to be specific, you could rephrase that as “Was the person who did this a man?”. (The answer to that might of course be “I don't know, they looked rather androgynous.” or the more down to earth “Dunno. Couldn't tell if it was a bloke or a gal.”.)
- ralfd 6y ago
  You got a lot of flak, but I was similarly confused and mildly annoyed. It does make a difference, especially at that time, if a woman lives as a man or vice versa. I could only deduce that at that time there were very few female lawyers. (Looked it up: In the US Arabella Mansfield was the first in 1869) At least Wikipedia has a copy before degenderisation: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Baty&oldid=965988333 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Baty&oldid...

aaron695 6y ago

He referrers to himself as a very old man, so that's their preferred pronoun - https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/245134641?searchTerm=%22Thomas%20Baty%22%20japan https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/245134641?searchT... It's possible they had to do that because of the times. But where is the evidence? Why is this not discussed in an encyclopedia we can look up? Do we need an uncensored Wikipedia now?

klyrs 6y ago
They're notable for writing the book they wrote at the time they wrote it. The book is notable in that trans people are normalized instead of being throwaways or villains. The book is quite early in my community's history, and its author is notable on that basis alone. Your dismissiveness and singleminded focus on their gender is unbecoming, and frankly kinda weird. You're not even discussing the book here, but complaining about the style of an adjacent article.
- aaron695 6y ago
  If this out of copyright book is Notable, why is there no copy available on the internet? I would suggest, it is Notable because it is tied to the life of the author. Who I suspect was a gay British man living in Japan.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - klyrs 6y ago
    > If this out of copyright book is Notable, why is there no copy available on the internet? You made that up. Here's the actual criteria: [1]. > This page in a nutshell: A book is notable, and generally merits an article, if it verifiably meets through reliable sources, one or more of the following criteria: > 1. The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. As the article lists quite a few references, it's soundly in the Notable category. Please take this elsewhere. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(books) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(books)
slg 6y ago
I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the perceived hostility in your posts is accidental. Here are two tips that will help you avoid that unintentional impression and will allow you to escape the downvotes you are receiving. Transgender identity has changed a lot over the last several decades. You therefore shouldn't expect someone who lived before that to have used the same vocabulary and labels we use today. You also shouldn't force them into a binary gender bucket. There is a wide variety of transgender identities and it isn't exclusively about going from man to woman or vice versa. When you aren't sure of a person's preferred gender identity and pronouns, you are probably better off using general terms like they/them/their as the Wikipedia article does. You should never use "it" like you did in your first post unless specifically told to do so. It is can be viewed as dehumanizing.
- aaron695 6y ago
  > You should never use "it" 'It' referrers to the situation, not the person. I changed the grammar a little to try and fix this.
  - slg 6y ago
    >There is no reference if it was a man who became a woman or vice versa Maybe that also isn't intentional and is merely poor grammar, but that certainly reads as if you are using "it" to refer to the person.
    - rebuilder 6y ago
      Since we're on a grammar tangent already, as a non-native speaker, I thought "was it a man who did this" was a valid construction. Am I in error?
      - Freak_NL 6y ago
        That is fine, but keep in mind that a valid answer to that question can be “No, it was a cat that did it.”. If you are already sure it was a person and wanted to be specific, you could rephrase that as “Was the person who did this a man?”. (The answer to that might of course be “I don't know, they looked rather androgynous.” or the more down to earth “Dunno. Couldn't tell if it was a bloke or a gal.”.)
ralfd 6y ago
You got a lot of flak, but I was similarly confused and mildly annoyed. It does make a difference, especially at that time, if a woman lives as a man or vice versa. I could only deduce that at that time there were very few female lawyers. (Looked it up: In the US Arabella Mansfield was the first in 1869) At least Wikipedia has a copy before degenderisation: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Baty&oldid=965988333 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Baty&oldid...