Trans Journalists Association Style Guide- what can/cannot be said

[Winesalot]

I have linked an archive link so I hope it works.

This is where the state of journalism ‘should be’ in the eyes of this association. I can see a lot of areas that are problematic here.

• don’t mention criminal history unless transperson agrees to have it released
• don’t dead name or ask previous names (mmmm... way to hide said past transgressions)
• don’t mention women unless it means transwomen as well
• don’t even say ‘identifies as’ just say ‘is’
• and don’t give a platform to terfs, truscum (I hate that word) or trans medievalists.
• don’t give misinformation about sports (ummm.... there is plenty of peer reviewed information that proves there IS issues but they say ignore it)
• don’t give emphasis on detransistioning

If you talk to terfs never call them feminists.

There is so much wrong here. There are some relevant points too that would apply when talking about anyone else. I have to pop out but thought to quickly put this up for those who may not have seen it.

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20200705235423/transjournalists.org/style-guide/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20200705235423/transjournalists.org/style-guide/

That guide and the tenets of journalism are polar opposites.

It reminds me of that very funny video clip someone circulated a while ago. "They're saying the quiet bits loud."

The whole set of guidelines can be boiled down to "Don't say the quiet bits loud."

If you talk to terfs never call them feminists
But terf stands for trans exclusionary radical feminist...Pfft. Idiots.

If you talk to terfs never call them feminists
But terf stands for trans exclusionary radical feminist...Pfft. Idiots.

This made me laugh. DOH!

What is a "trans medievalist"?

When I google the term, I just get some articles about so-called transgender people in the middle ages, who seem to be mostly females dressing as men in order to do things women weren't allowed to do.

No one is talking to the feminists anyway. Or at least not the feminists who know what a woman is.

I think journos are going to see the stuff about "don't talk to truscum" and "don't talk to detrans", and it's going to inspire some articles about the controversy in the movement. They don't even have to talk to any natal women.

Also, I have to say I loved the "please when talking about trans people in sport make sure you say it is trans MEN who are competing with cis women but otherwise don't mention it thanks" That's got to pique some interest for journalists, right? Who wrote this guide? Were trans men involved at any stage?

Love the bit about avoiding any cis voices on trans issues, but trans people should be interviewed on a wide range of non trans subjects.

I’ve just googled “trans medievalists”

Still none the wiser.

Thinks you can change sex by application of leeches?
Big fan of The Canterbury Tales. Thinks the Wife of Bath is trans exclusionary when she refers to her “queint”?
Likely to die of the plague?
Up for a few witch burnings?

What is a "trans medievalist"?

Maybe it's one who looks into the possibility of recreating Hannibal's crossing of the Alps with elephants. Transmontane and all that. Of course it's the wrong period of history, but as the esteemed collective of journalists who occasioned this thread would no doubt agree, when it comes to factual innacuracy, the appropriate response is always "Up to a point Lord Copper."

What is a "trans medievalist"?

A trans person who also likes taking part in historical re-enactment role play?

What is a "trans medievalist"?

That is transmedicalist. Apologies, but that was autocorrected and quite apt I am sure in this association's eyes.

They define it as Transmedicalists are a fringe part of the trans community who believe that experiencing gender dysphoria and seeking gender-affirming medical care is a prerequisite of being trans.

ie. Transmedicalists are bigots for labelling anyone without gender dysphoria as not falling under the transhumbrella. (another autocorrect that I thought to leave there because it is Friday and I am feeling perverse).

They go on to say Many wrongly argue that non-binary people cannot be trans and spread the inaccurate message that non-binary people don’t need or want gender-affirming medical care. Avoid elevating this harmful ideology, which ignores the varied experiences of trans people. On the rare occasion that it’s ethical to report on this ideology, bear in mind that only reporters deeply familiar with trans communities are equipped to cover this topic without causing harm and spreading disinformation.

Oh, gutted "Transmedievalist" was an auto-correct failure. That one really had legs for a bit of Friday entertainment.

But hey, "transmedicalist." After all, who would want to listen to actual doctors and psychologists about the best way of supporting people with gender dysphoria? And whoever would want to question the notion that including within the trans umbrella occasional cross dressers who get a sexual frisson from the feel of stockings and suspenders might in fact be doing a disservice to people with genuine gender dysphoria? Bigots, the lot of 'em.

What is a "trans medievalist"?

Immediately thought of the serf scene in Holy Grail since John Cleese is also topical.

The whole concept that journalists should avoid deadnaming goes against accuracy in reporting to me.

• when other sources deadname or misgender a transperson this group's advice is to skip that source's quote or if it is an audio format 'You may also let the listener/viewer know the person is being misgendered/deadnamed and bleep those words out, as you would with a curse word or protected personal information.'

• 'If a trans person contacts a newsroom or reporter asking for a story to be updated with their new name or to remove information that outs the person as trans, newsrooms should always make those changes when possible.' ie. rewrite history

• 'Don’t ask about someone’s deadname. ' 'Don’t ask for or publish a person’s criminal history unless it’s completely relevant. You may need to find a different source or give the source anonymity if you cannot proceed with the story without publishing their criminal history. Publishing such information is rarely in the public interest. Consider killing a story if you have no alternatives. '

This really does seem to be a playbook for what we have seen happen and what is in action. The ability to rewrite history and why should ANYONE get to hide a criminal history unless that person has since been found innocent.

It is ridiculous that actual dysphoric trans people are told that aren't real trans by people (mostly white, hetero adult males) with no dysphoria or body issues.

Hi everyone. I appreciate I'm popping up in loads of threads out of the blue (not even been a lurker) but jkr has revived my feminism! Thanks for posting this link. My partner teaches on journalism/media/pr esp critical thinking and whose voice is being put forward at uni, so I really hope I can persuade him to persuade his team to include this in their teaching next year. It'd be great to get another viewpoint over to undergraduates and get them out of their echo chamber! Sadly it might be a bit late for the coming year, but everything is worth trying.

TLDR:

Don't tell the truth.

I hate the term "deadname." It's just another element of drama that suggests trans people are constantly teetering between life and death (either through suicide or murder or being literally killed by words).
And almost suggesting that the life they lived before transitioning wasn't a real life. As though they were a ghost up until that point. Really winds me up.

Transmedicalists are what the general public believe all trans people to be!

The trans people FWR finds areas of agreement with are all trans medicalists (aka truscum). Buck Angel, Scott Newgent, Mars, Rose of Dawn, Fionne Orlander, Blair White etc.

They are the ‘out group’ in trans circles, the in group are people that believe a penis can be a female sex organ

Seriously, this document must be written by a misogynist.

While there’s no good data, a Swedish study found only 2.2 percent of participants who sought gender-affirming medical care regretted their transition. This is lower than the rate of people who regret their abortions. This is also much lower than the rate of people who are dissatisfied with their nose jobs and other cosmetic surgeries, according to various studies. Unlike many elective plastic surgeries, transition-related care is lifesaving.

My italics.

I cannot imagine a feminist writing this. It is a disgusting comparison. It is like Bergdorf writing that GC feminists believes only women have uteruses and because a lot of women can't have children and does that mean that they're less women because they're no longer of use? (Projection much?)

@Collidascope

I hate the term "deadname." It's just another element of drama that suggests trans people are constantly teetering between life and death (either through suicide or murder or being literally killed by words). And almost suggesting that the life they lived before transitioning wasn't a real life. As though they were a ghost up until that point. Really winds me up.

Yes. And then they try and stop transwidows naming themselves as such!

Like, if you call it a dead name, what do you expect? ¯\(ツ)/¯

Holy shit what journalist worthy of the name could read that and not realise that the people who wrote it are trying to hide something?

It's weird (/s not really) how they use all the issues of "transmedicalists" - dysphoria, suicide, self harm to say how oppressed trans people are...

... and yet in the next breath say that's not really got anything to do with being trans. So not dysphoric, suicidal, self-harming. So why do they need the special treatment and endless validation exactly?

Wahhhh I'm so different and vulnerable! Wahhh don't say I'm different and vulnerable!

“Detransition” narratives often feature people who thought they were trans or experiencing gender dysphoria and later figured out they weren’t without medical treatment. These stories should not be used to question established medical standards that give trans people bodily autonomy, which are laid out by the internationally recognized World Professional Association for Transgender Health.

ie. I read this as these people are obviously not worthy of mentioning nor is the abuse and rejection they receive (because just knowing that to desist would mean loosing close friends could never be a reason some people who are questioning their transition don't desist). They are certainly NOT worth tracing and talking to for the purposes of studies that review the current treatments or to get an understanding of misdiagnosis or anything really in this group's eyes. All they do is spread misinformation and make people think that not all is rosy in the bubble.