Maybe this is incredibly ignorant, but using female pronouns to describe Bruce in the 70s/80s is weird to me. I'm all for using them now but using them for that far back, especially when describing his male athletic accomplishments (he wasn't in the women's decathlon) sounds confusing and a bit like rewriting history. Same goes for Bradley Manning. He was a solider who leaked documents. She (Chelsea) is now sitting in prison. I'd love to hear others' thoughts on this. Am I being ignorant or coming off as transphobic?
Also, from Wikipedia:
- Jenner prefers to be seen as male until he reveals his feminine side publicly. He plans to share his new name when he more fully transitions, although he referred to himself as "her" and called his emerging identity "she". His gender transition is the subject of an eight-part documentary series starting July 2015. While Jenner has undergone some cosmetic surgery as part of his transition, he has not ruled out gender reassignment surgery, and feels life as a woman is primarily a matter of mental state and lifestyle. He said he has never been attracted to men and has always been heterosexual, but currently identifies as asexual. His announcement came at an unprecedented time for trans visibility, including legislative initiatives.
I don't know.
I enjoy the message of this article - one of support, and admiration. That said, you're 100% correct about the way the article is written. The author notes at the end: That sounds nice an all, but what it does is completely remove Jenner's agency in the matter. Jenner says "use male pronouns", then use male pronouns, or at the very most, use gender neutral pronouns. Using female pronouns without their permission or consent is just as bad as posting photos of them in a dress in the daily news, and is just as much of a breach of agency. However, if Jenner said "Use female pronouns", then all future articles should use it for all aspects of their life, past, present, future. While this seems strange at first, you have to realize that this person has always been their chosen gender, even though they weren't necessarily able to show it. It also creates linguistic and editorial clarity (which, as evidenced in this article, can make it difficult to read when the pronouns aren't all sync'ed up). No switching from m to f pronouns necessary - just use them all the time. Edit: as a side note, this is why 3rd person singular is SO USEFUL. Don't know which pronoun to use? "They" will do![Author’s note: While the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) recommends that the media use male pronouns when referring to Jenner, stating that “at this time, Bruce Jenner has not indicated that a new name or pronoun should be used,” I disagree. Since Jenner told the public that she has never fully thought of herself as male, I don’t believe that we should necessarily defer to using male pronouns just because that’s how Jenner has been referred to in the past.]
I'm really glad you chimed in on this. Thank you for the clarification in regards to Bruce Jenner as well as the more universal rules and... ... when you put it this way makes sense. I think it's the peculiarities of the situation (we always saw Jenner in such a masculine / athletic role etc) that make it feel strange and make it seem like we are rewriting history. This is especially apparent in instances where Jenner is not the direct focus of the sentence / moment: In my mind, the American media in 1976 were infatuated with, and commenting on, a male, even if she identified as female. It may be nuanced, but there is a difference between the media describing a male athlete like that vs a female one. I'm not saying we handle these cases in one way or another, just...yeah. I think another reason I may find myself grappling is because Jenner is a public figure that is removed from me and my personal interactions, not a close friend who I actually interact with. I do find that I refer to my IRL friends as "he" or "she", even when referencing them in the past. ie: "It was so funny when she did that" even if, at the time of the event, they presented as male.While this seems strange at first, you have to realize that this person has always been their chosen gender, even though they weren't necessarily able to show it.
The American media in 1976 were infatuated with Jenner, as much for her looks as for her athletic prowess. Time magazine called her “beautifully sculpted” and described “the waning light shining on his flapping chestnut hair” as she crossed the finish line.
See, you could rewrite that whole sentence and make it more clear and more inclusive: no mixed pronouns, much clearer to read. you could even modify to without too much trouble. Using the gender neutral pronouns also allows you to talk about Jenner without misgendering, but also without the sudden mental hurdle (for some people), and current permissive anomaly of referring to them with female pronouns.The American media in 1976 were infatuated with Jenner, as much for their looks as for their athletic prowess. Time magazine called Jenner “beautifully sculpted” and described “the waning light shining on [their] flapping chestnut hair” as they crossed the finish line.
“the waning light shining on [their] flapping chestnut hair” as they crossed the finish line.
“the waning light shining on [their] flapping chestnut hair” crossing the finish line.
There's been a few attempts. I see the occasional "Zie/Zir" or "Xe/Xim", both with a "zed" sound at the beginning. But I think you need to rethink how you use "They" every day. Say you are talking to a co-worker, or a colleague, and they are talking about a problem with their boss. you might say, "Why not talk to your HR rep and see what they say about it." (or you might not, depending on your opinion of HR. We all subconsciously use singular they every day of our life, all the time.
I actually wouldn't say that. If I knew the gender of the person I would say it. If I didn't I would absolutely say "he/she". We may... but I honestly try not to. I'm not super sure about my grammar, but I still try to speak clearly and mixed pronouns bug me. But who knows? Our language is evolving - and that may be the next evolution. And why not - we've got to be able to figure out a way to have these discussions. As lines of gender continue to blur in society, so will our rules of grammar that are based on gender. I wonder how other, more gender specific languages will adapt? Spanish ends words with "A" or "O" depending on the object. German is full of verb conjugations based on he or she. Exciting times!"Why not talk to your HR rep and see what they say about it."
We all subconsciously use singular they every day of our life, all the time.
I know in some nordic languages they have implemented the "Hen" pronoun, which is the Neutral. Herr being man, Het being woman, Hen being gender neutral. Perhaps other countries will do the same, or perhaps gender neutral people in those countries will be referred to with the plural pronouns, such as "Ils" in French.
I agree with coffeesp00ns -- A binary language just doesn't leave enough room for variety. One transgender relative of mine has taken to signing their email with both m and f names. One of the interviews, I think with Diane Sawyer, mentioned Deuteronomy 22:5 which prohibits cross-dressing. One of them says, "You see how far back it goes. They wouldn't prohibit it if it wasn't already happening."
Interesting thing about that deuteronomy quote - It's all about interpretation. If a trans woman is a woman, then wearing mens clothing is "cross dressing", and vice versa for trans men. you can read that as saying that trans men and women should be allowed to wear the clothing of their assigned gender. btw, lil, I appreciated the note you sent about your trans relative. It was heartening to hear. I don't have a significant other of my own, but in many ways I don't know if I love myself enough yet to intimately love another.
I agree. A transwoman wearing men's clothing would feel like she is cross-dressing. The Bible doesn't seem to recognize the trans concept but makes a point of making trans and gay behaviours an "abomination" Some primitive cultures really needed to organize their world in a simple way. Other cultures may have had more flexibility.
I think, in many ways, the societal problem comes from not those who "pass" as their gender, but those who do not, because we cannot classify them. They make use unsure, confused, because they are amgibuous to us. As a result trans people like myself, who do not pass, fall into the Uncanny valley for some people. It's fucked up, but in some ways those who feel that way can't help it, and changing means facing up to the fear they feel.
It's great that we are working through the process of giving people more than a binary option to designate the complicated intersection of biology, culture, and personality. The article doesn't do it, but the Wikipedia quote demonstrates a strange practice I think I've seen before. After making every effort to capture the current nuances of Jenner's self-assessment, when it comes to the people he is attracted to, the options are some combination of [ ] Men and [ ] Women. Are we missing something by plotting people's sexual identity with a multiaxis coordinate system, but the object of their affections must be a peg in one or two holes?
I'm not sure if Laurelai still stops by Hubski, but she's (and I hope I'm using the appropriate pronoun there) been very helpful to me in the past regarding such questions. That said, I would guess that the only persons that could answer your questions raised in your post are Bruce Jenner and Chelsea Manning.