Update: Jules Crittenden brings a newspaperman's perspective to the point. Notice I didn't say person.
I've never noticed this before. Journalism writing tends to rely on standard conventions. While reading up on a possible NJ serial killer, I found this:
"There is some deranged psycho out there killing people," said Samantha, an Asian transvestite prostitute who said she knew all four victims.
Presumably, the Reuters style book calls for a male transvestite to be indentified as a "she".


Hahahaha.....that's a good one....a transexual calling someone else "deranged". Hahahahahaha
Posted by: JD | Sunday, November 26, 2006 at 08:23 PM
In matters of style, you usually* go with how the person wants to be referred to. It's like "Miss"/"Mrs." versus "Ms." Or the way a person pronounces their own name. If someone called Beaulieu says their name "Bewley," the reporter doesn't insist on calling them "Bo-Lyoo," even if that *is* the "correct" pronunciation. Since the guy (or gal) is being referred to as "Samantha," it would sound even more odd, perhaps, to use "he," don't you think?
Anyway, why should you care?
*There are exceptions, as for example when a person asks to be referred to by a professional honorific like "Doctor," when s/he is not in fact a doctor.
Posted by: Nancy Irving | Monday, November 27, 2006 at 03:50 AM