Name changes in Academic Publishing

[Xanthangum]

This isn't new - people change their name for all sorts of reasons, the most common being marriage I expect.

Consistency in academic circles, and specifically publications is really important, hence ORCID iDs and other tracking systems to make sure that someone's output and activity is all linked, irrespective of changes of name, institution and so on.

But apparently one academic publisher, the Association of Computing Machinery now only keep records of a trans authors works under their previous name in some sort of locked vault, in case they are required under a legal subpoena? Effectively erasing the work's authors previous name.

This feels like a very retrograde and confusing step.

Article here: www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02145-3

Extracts:

The board’s initial position, that name changes could be applied only to metadata (and not PDF files), was a non-starter. This would juxtapose a trans author’s correct name with their previous name, cause confusion about how to cite the work and disclose to any casual reader that the author is transgender. If my deadname remains associated with my scholarship, readers of my work could either misname and misgender me, or apply anti-trans bias to my work before even encountering my ideas.

The plan is for the ACM to update all publicly accessible digital materials related to an author whose name has been changed. The previous version would be retained in a separate repository, accessible only when a subpoena is served. The draft policy was circulated, vetted by lawyers and voted through late last year. It’s imperfect: it doesn’t update citations by other scholars and, of course, print documents cannot be changed.

I know people have a problem with 'dead naming' but fore this seems extreme.

Like Bruce/Caitlin Jenner, the achievements of Bruce are part of Caitlin as they are the same person.

In the case of academic papers surely they could add a name or write it as (previously known as) or something?

Just seems odd to me that you would want to forget previous successes.

It's a similar issue if you want a DBS check. Very dodgy ground.

We already have the Platonic ideal of this. Natacha Kennedy as a transwoman co-authored a paper with themselves in their male persona of Mark Hellen.

www.spiked-online.com/2018/09/11/it-is-now-a-thoughtcrime-to-criticise-transgenderism/

It just confuses me tbh.

Most people are savvy enough to work out that some people change their names at some point during their career. Noms-de-plumes, stage names, all that.

Your qualifications come with you when you transition I assume, no one is suggesting that you retake all your exams. That certification will be in your previous name. It's the 'we are special' argument again.

As an academic myself, I just can't get my head around this. Having sweated blood over my publications and devoted years to building a reputation in my field, I just can't fathom what would make anyone want to divorce themselves from that. I'd never have wanted to change my name for any reason, and in this profession women changing their names on marriage is definitely unusual.

The ORCID system mainly ensures your work is eligible for the REF (research excellence framework, for those who don't follow the endless frustrating H.E. acronyms). Otherwise it's published in usually subscription only journals as normal. In the process of conducting research in the relevant field it's generally the subject that is searched for as opposed to the author (unless said author is very well known). So it's only their own reputation, as well as the institution wanting to enter that work in the REF, that they're harming. As universities tend to be neck deep in allies I'd say they'd made the latter rod for their own back, and as a consequence should suck it up.

Judith, now Jack Halberstam, who doesn't disown his previous identity and isn't too fussed as to which pronoun is used is one who doesn't really buy into these extremities and has a healthier attitude to the whole situation. Pity there are not more like-minded people out there in academia. The whole deadnaming thing seems to me a curious combination of affirmation and denial: a desire to fight the trans cause, align yourself with trans identities and fly their flag whilst at the same time insisting that 'outing' can be deadly and denying you were ever of the opposite sex in the first place.

There's so much doublethink that just getting my head around it all tires me.

I’m fairly sure they will be okay with deadnaming when they realise that their academic career will be in tatters as they bin 20+ years of publication history when they decide to transition in their middle age.

does anyone ever wonder how all of this will be viewed 20 years down the line?

"If my deadname remains associated with my scholarship, readers of my work could either misname and misgender me, or apply anti-trans bias to my work before even encountering my ideas."

or

"If readers of my work know that I am a man they may receive my ideas differently, knowing that they come from a man with a man’s life experiences rather than a woman with a woman’s life experiences.”

apply anti-trans bias to my work before even encountering my ideas

In my experience, many papers authors are just initials, followed by surname. In the vast majority of disciplines, the sex of the author is really not an important aspect of the work.