I have mixed feelings about this article, mostly becasue of the reporter's past treatment of transgender people who have criticized the Dallas Voice for using the word "->-bleeped-<-" on several occasions.
For example,
http://www.dallasvoice.com/busey-doesnt-always-protest-the-word-->-bleeped-<--%e2%80%94-sometimes-she-endorses-it-1015111.htmlThat article is especially concerning since Ms. Bussey always made it clear that she had a problem with gay and lesbian cis persons using the word "->-bleeped-<-," and that transgender people are permitted to "reclaim it" if that is their wish, just like black people can use the n-word.
And then there is the way he starts out referring to Ms. Bruce with masculine pronouns, until he gets to the transition, and then using male identifiers when referring to her pretransition. This is the same sort of "literary device" that violates the Associated Press Stylebook, and that drew much criticism here when it was used in articles covering Mike Penner's transition, prior to the detransition and suicide.
And it personally rubs me the wrong way when he uses "transgender" as a noun. I know some dictionaries say it is only an adjective, while others say it can be a noun, but GLAAD and the Associated Press Stylebook Supplement have said to use it as an adjective only. I'm not going to bother telling Mr. Jones any of this, becasue he has turned a deliberately deaf ear to such protests in the past.
In closing, I don't mean to be a stick in the mud, and/or rain on Ms Bruce's parade, but sometimes things need to be said. My criticism is only of the reporter. I think Ms. Bruce is great, and support her in every way.
