3 ms·

It could be a norm in journalism that trans people are referred to by their birth names. In fact, it used to be. It was a bad norm, we changed it. I don't thi

It could be a norm in journalism that trans people are referred to by their birth names. In fact, it used to be. It was a bad norm, we changed it. I don't think this should be an unprincipled exception, that journalists should casually refer to people in ways they don't want to be referred to, unless they happen to be trans. I think it should be the rule. Because not doing that makes you an asshole. And journalists shouldn't be assholes.

tptacek 6y ago
Sure, but this wasn't about calling Lana Wachowski "Lana" instead of "Larry", but rather about disclosing that Lana was formerly known as Larry, which is something the NYT still does. And, of course, not all norm changes are bad. But I'm suspicious of norms imported from message boards, especially if they have the effect of depriving people of information. Better, in a situation like Alexander's, that the article simply not get written --- which is what happened.
- mindslight 6y ago
  Presumably the NYT would be referencing "Larry Wachowski" for some deliberate purpose, like tying into previous work or detailing some aspect of being trans. Bringing up the past is unavoidable if its an integral part of the story. This situation is more like reporting on someone who transitioned long ago, didn't do anything of note before then, doesn't broadcast trans as part of their public identity, and yet NYT still felt the need to inform everyone that they used to be a man. We'd rightly question their motives for that unkindness.
- sobani 6y ago
  One of the most popular beauty vlogger (NikkieTutorials) is trans. She became the most popular before that was publicly known about a year ago. Would it have been ok for a newspaper to write about "One the most popular beauty vlogger" and then add somewhere in the article: "oh some other factoid she was able to keep hidden all these years: she's trans!"?

tptacek 6y ago

Sure, but this wasn't about calling Lana Wachowski "Lana" instead of "Larry", but rather about disclosing that Lana was formerly known as Larry, which is something the NYT still does. And, of course, not all norm changes are bad. But I'm suspicious of norms imported from message boards, especially if they have the effect of depriving people of information. Better, in a situation like Alexander's, that the article simply not get written --- which is what happened.

mindslight 6y ago
Presumably the NYT would be referencing "Larry Wachowski" for some deliberate purpose, like tying into previous work or detailing some aspect of being trans. Bringing up the past is unavoidable if its an integral part of the story. This situation is more like reporting on someone who transitioned long ago, didn't do anything of note before then, doesn't broadcast trans as part of their public identity, and yet NYT still felt the need to inform everyone that they used to be a man. We'd rightly question their motives for that unkindness.
sobani 6y ago
One of the most popular beauty vlogger (NikkieTutorials) is trans. She became the most popular before that was publicly known about a year ago. Would it have been ok for a newspaper to write about "One the most popular beauty vlogger" and then add somewhere in the article: "oh some other factoid she was able to keep hidden all these years: she's trans!"?