WearyWalker

Okay well fair warning that line of thinking on gendering people’s past is not welcome on here for future reference, so if it comes up in another thread you are expected to gender people correctly when speaking in past-tense

The mod did a surreptitious censor without inquiry. This implies they aren’t interested.

removing something doesnt mean disinterest in nuance. it means something seemed off and worth removing.

I would favor singular they in the context of the past.

degendering someone’s past entirely isn’t really a solution

Manning was a man at one point in time.

this is really the disconnect here.

Chelsea Manning presented as male.

trans folk generally (excluding genderfluidity and other things like that) do not change their gender but change their gender presentation

we don’t do that here

The title is extremely confused but i think i understand after reading

Did you message the mod to discuss? Transphobia is a field where a lot of people use technicalities to normalize poor practices

also, would that mean that you would use male pronouns for Ms. Manning when talking about her actions at the time? Most people would say that’s unacceptable and so would i. I think that would put into focus why the imperfect solution of retroactive nomenclature is preferable to deadnaming

Ms. Manning did request during her trial that her new name be used so i think probably she’s fine with her deadname not being used for her actions in that period.

but putting arguable decisions out on the public record is why this community exists, so thank you for posting!!