I find your use of "transphobia" a tad extreme. While I don't mean to trivialise your concerns at all (if incorrect pronoun use is problematic, it is problematic, even if it is only a subtle manifestation of "transphobia") the article as a whole seems to be rather fair and supportive. I would've thought transphobia is reserved for things more... vitriolic, perhaps. You say that "she never was a male just was forced to live like one", and I think that cuts to the heart of the issue. Being forced to live like a male, she was also forced to be treated like a man in linguistic terms. This is not a good thing; but it's that she was forced to live like a man, and not that people are not yet prepared to linguistically deal with her situation, that is the primary problem. See it from their perspective. They wanted to write about how a man who became a woman has been mistreated. Perhaps they neglected to use pronouns in a way that is accepted by the trans community, but given their intentions they can hardly be said to be "transphobic," I think. Of course, you can easily write off everything I say as transphobia... Is it "transphobic" in your eyes, indeed, for me to say that he was a man who became a woman? How else are we to talk about it? It would be confusing if they had used "she" and "Ashley" throughout; it would not read well, and would do a worse job of getting the story across. Perhaps "a woman in a male body changed her body to that of a female," yes...