I don't really like the way the writer keeps using female pronouns for Keith, but still, good on him (the soldier, not the writer).
Ugh, the writer mis-genders him the whole time! That's really brave of him, doing something that huge that could lose him his job.
It is really annoying that the writer keeps calling him by the wrong pronoun. Good for Keith!! I hope that everything goes well for him!
my journalisem teacher did a whole lecture on pronouns in regards to transitioning individuals. He said that you have to use the pronoun that represents the person's emotional and mental gender that they are transitioning into on the basis that a journalist is not suposed to take sides, but simply represent the story without personal bias. A girl got really upset, saying that they dont do that on Fox News, and his responce was 'since when was 'fox news' news?"
Rarely do I see reporters and writers using the correct pronouns when it comes to trans people. Even major papers like Rolling Stone (which I thought would be liberal enough to know better) fail.
Well, they actually do even worse, by acknowledging they are talking about a transgender person but then misgender hir on purpose anyway like in this article. Usually, the best one can hope for is a "So and so, who was born female but identifies as a man, blah, blah, blah" and then correct gendering for the rest of the article. I wish they wouldn't even do that, because it feels like they are taking it for granted that trans people aren't real. Although, I guess the alternative is trans invisibility, which I don't want either, but I guess they should come up with a more sensitive and affirming way to say it.
The article says "Keith declined to be identified by her real name because under military policy, troops diagnosed with “gender identity disorder” are deemed medically unfit for service and face administrative separation." and "Defense Department regulations list gender identity disorder as one of a number of medical conditions that, while not considered disabilities, may “interfere with assignment to or performance of duty” and are grounds for administrative discharge." So it's basically a secret sex change. And for the people vehemently bashing the writer for using the "incorrect pronouns"... lay off. I'm going to ruffle feathers here, but "Keith" is only at the very beginning of the process, and Keith doesn't even go by that name yet, only using the name as a way to be identified in the article while remaining private. It may or may not be correct to refer to Keith as a she at this point (after all, we don't know Keith or his/her preference on which pronouns to use), but it's not abhorrently wrong as some of you are making it out to be. The writer isn't maliciously misidentifying. At the very worst, he's not as aware about transgenders as a LGBT community is. In the second section, they use the feminine pronouns for the MtF they interviewed. It's a well-written piece done by a good military writer, and I'm surprised that a Military Times newspaper would even run a piece like this, so good on them for writing and publishing this.
Hate to sound like a broken record, but the writer calling Keith the wrong pronoun was really stupid. Any which way, congratulations to Keith! :eusa_clap
Go Keith! *cheers* Now, for the article...it's "he," dammit! HE! I also noticed that part of it mentions that individuals diagnosed with gender identity disorder are deemed "unfit for service"...so the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell wasn't as great for everyone...
Yes, we all get the point, the writer should've probably said "he". Go write the author; there's a link to his email if you click his name. I'm not going to debate my point anymore. However, I think there are more important merits of this article other than a not-exactly-incorrect usage of pronouns. Like a military-sponsored newspaper staffed by primarily active and former military members, with a target audience of current and retired military members and military-interested readers, are writing about transgenders currently serving and undergoing the procedure. To me that seems like a great step given the ultra-conservative nature of the military.
