I understand that your comment relies on the understanding that Caitlyn Jenner’s deadname is Bruce Jenner, that the joke is that she participated in a racing series that’s nearly “Am Trans”, and that she went by Bruce when she was actively racing.
To avoid deadnaming, I’d still ask that you use language like “Caitlyn Jenner (formerly Bruce Jenner) was […]” and “The series she participated in […]” (or something similar). I totally get that none of your comment was meant as transphobia; I even used to think that “historical deadnaming” was the best way to write to avoid confusion, so I sympathize. I eventually realized, though, as e.g. on Wikipedia’s article for Elliot Page, that using their real gender and their chosen name historically is not confusing and is just more accurate to how being transgender actually works – i.e. that it’s not a decision somebody makes one day.
I don’t think it’s severe enough to rub up against Lemmy.World Terms of Service Rule 1.2 as “discrimination against queer groups”, so this is just a polite request and hopefully food for thought.
Serious question here. If someone was well known as a previous name and sex, is it still deadnaming to refer to them that was in a historical context? They’re a perfect example here. If looking for historical information on their racing history and articles, you have to refer to them as Bruce.
IMO, best practice is still to use the current name/pronouns. I think it’s OK to say something like “Caitlyn, formerly known as Bruce” if clarity is needed and then proceed with current name going forward. In this instance, everyone knew who we were talking about so it was unnecessary.
My personal take: If I’m synthesizing historical information and recounting it in the current day, I would use their current name and pronouns. The person they are today (or died as) still did those things. It also gives space to recognize that, although they might not gave had the opportunity to be out as a trans person during those achievements, doesn’t mean they didn’t feel trans back then.
In 2020 I was recalling a story about wanting to be them as a kid because of the Wheaties box and deadnamed them and people got really really mad at me. I had absolutely no idea they were the same person as Caitlyn Jenner, never seen or knew anything about the Kardashian’s and had no idea they didn’t just fall off and disappear completely
wait, was she a trump supporter?
Caitlyn Jenner is one of the most famous examples of pulling the ladder up after yourself
She’s clearly still got at least one foot on the ladder or she wouldn’t be raising an issue here. That’s a special kind of stupid.
and also getting with vehicular homicide
True story: Bruce Jenner was an active race car driver in the 90s. The series he participated in was the Trans Am series.
I understand that your comment relies on the understanding that Caitlyn Jenner’s deadname is Bruce Jenner, that the joke is that she participated in a racing series that’s nearly “Am Trans”, and that she went by Bruce when she was actively racing.
To avoid deadnaming, I’d still ask that you use language like “Caitlyn Jenner (formerly Bruce Jenner) was […]” and “The series she participated in […]” (or something similar). I totally get that none of your comment was meant as transphobia; I even used to think that “historical deadnaming” was the best way to write to avoid confusion, so I sympathize. I eventually realized, though, as e.g. on Wikipedia’s article for Elliot Page, that using their real gender and their chosen name historically is not confusing and is just more accurate to how being transgender actually works – i.e. that it’s not a decision somebody makes one day.
I don’t think it’s severe enough to rub up against Lemmy.World Terms of Service Rule 1.2 as “discrimination against queer groups”, so this is just a polite request and hopefully food for thought.
This better not awaken something in them
LOL. Lemmy… downvoted for facts.
Downvoted for deadnaming someone. It’d be a decent joke otherwise.
Serious question here. If someone was well known as a previous name and sex, is it still deadnaming to refer to them that was in a historical context? They’re a perfect example here. If looking for historical information on their racing history and articles, you have to refer to them as Bruce.
IMO, best practice is still to use the current name/pronouns. I think it’s OK to say something like “Caitlyn, formerly known as Bruce” if clarity is needed and then proceed with current name going forward. In this instance, everyone knew who we were talking about so it was unnecessary.
My personal take: If I’m synthesizing historical information and recounting it in the current day, I would use their current name and pronouns. The person they are today (or died as) still did those things. It also gives space to recognize that, although they might not gave had the opportunity to be out as a trans person during those achievements, doesn’t mean they didn’t feel trans back then.
They didn’t. Jenner went by Bruce and their gender identity was male at the time.
Still best practice to use current name unless the person has specified otherwise.
In 2020 I was recalling a story about wanting to be them as a kid because of the Wheaties box and deadnamed them and people got really really mad at me. I had absolutely no idea they were the same person as Caitlyn Jenner, never seen or knew anything about the Kardashian’s and had no idea they didn’t just fall off and disappear completely
Like you, I am almost completely unaware of anything said or done by the Kardashians, and I love that for both of us.
There are plenty of recent pictures of her at Mar-a-lago. She’s not just a supporter, she’s someone that has been to his parties
Still is.