I'm going to comment on a story that we, even here at Pam's House Blend, referred to as a same-sex marriage in our piece NY: officials duped into granting marriage license to same-sex couple.
I'm angry regarding how this story is being covered. This is not a same-sex marriage story; this is a transgender person not being able to marry the one she loves story. This is a story about why marriage equality is more than a gay and lesbian story; part of why marriage equality is a lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community civil rights issue.
If the couple in question technically was a same-sex couple, then for sure this couple are definitely not a same-gender couple. This was a marriage between a man and a woman where the state doesn't recognize the woman as a woman.
But at least in one example, it seems that even the LGBT media is gaying up this relationship by using male pronouns, using the male legal name of the female partner in this opposite gender couple, and putting the female name of the female person of the opposite gender couple in quotation marks. From The Advocate (emphasis added):
Two men fooled the New York City Clerk's office into certifying what is believed to be the first same-sex marriage performed in the state, reports the New York Post, which published the couple's photo on its front page on Sunday.
Hakim Nelson and Jason Stenson were married in a ceremony at the clerk's office on May 26, 10 days after obtaining a marriage license at the office. Same-sex marriage is illegal in New York, although the state recognizes same-sex marriages performed elsewhere.
Nelson, 18, and Stenson, 21, said that when they applied in person for the license, Nelson used a state benefit card that lists his sex as female. The clerk did not ask him about the male-sounding first name -- Hakim -- that appears on his identification. He wore an orange dress and white leggings, with his hair falling at his shoulders.
Nelson goes by the name "Kimah" and hopes to have transition surgery one day. Stenson views Nelson as a woman, and does not consider himself gay.
So, the LGBT publication The Advocate now refers to pre-operative transsexual women as men. I'm a pre-operative transsexual woman myself, who was referred to as transgender in The Advocate just last week: was it a fluke that The Advocate didn't refer to me as "Mr. Autumn Sandeen?"
Obviously, I'm seething over this. Let me clearly state in less than judicious terms what my opinion on the LGBT publication The Advocate not following the Associated Press's, GLAAD's and/or the NLGJA's guidelines of referring to transgender people by their target gender:
F*ck you, Advocate.
Don't gay up a transgender person's wedding. If the LGBT press wants to use this marriage to make the point that marriage equality is more than just about gays and lesbians, then fine. Want to identify a transgender woman as a man to make it a same-sex marriage story? That is just not acceptable in the slightest.
Advocate, you should know better. When you showed disrespect to Kimah and her gender identity, you also showed disrespect to me, and all other trans women. I couldn't feel more maddened and offended about how your publication reported on this story then if your goal was to personally antagonize me.
Below the fold: A letter from the Alabama Gender Alliance on how The Advocate covered this story. |
