Semantics tricky when editing trans stories {Blade Blog}

[LostInTime]

Washington Blade

Several weeks ago in the Blade, we ran a letter to the editor from Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality. She wrote to take us to task for the way an AP news brief about a transgender prisoner was edited.

I only became aware of the letter when I saw the page galley which passed by my desk to be proofed. I would have liked to have made a few editor's notes in response to it then, but the page was already done and time didn't then permit me to research the matter and address Keisling's concerns.

[cindianna_jones]

I'm suffering the consequences of reckless editing in my personal business.  They can completely destroy your life and business and they hold no responsibility.  It sucks.

Cindi

[Thundra]

I read that whole GD article, and the bottom line is that they (he) %$#@^ up.
Why is it that when a gay man screws up regarding gender identity matters, that a long drawn out narrative has to ensue?  Everytime! A simple, "oops, we're sorry," would suffice, but no. There is always a long-winded "explanation" showing why they did what they did.
Because a gay man can't admit that he is clueless when it comes to transgendered people. Bottom line. He should just say I'm sorry and shut the hell up. That is all that is needed.
Dumb &%$!

[Hazumu]

Well, I 'sounded off'.  But it appeared that it was a private, internal communication to the Blade...

Karen