The 'Chronicle' Should Be More Careful

RECEIVED Wed., Feb. 11, 2004

Dear Editor,
   I am boggled by Michael King's response to a letter ["Postmarks," Feb. 6] about the article "The Death of Ben Brownlee" [News, Jan. 30] wherein King says, "Ben/Tesía was not a transsexual."
   As the article's second paragraph quoted, "he felt that he was a female trapped in a male body." If that's not transsexual, then what is?
   I can only guess that King misunderstands the word "transsexual" and mistakenly equates it with having had sex-reassignment surgery. If this were the meaning of TS, then the notions of pre-op, post-op, and no-op TS would not exist.
   The Chronicle seems to be unduly dismissing the questions raised by letter writers about this article. I certainly appreciated the article's goal of raising awareness of how schools are letting down students who are struggling with issues like this, but especially when you get a slew of letters raising the issue of name and pronoun of transfolk, I would expect the Chronicle to be more careful. Claiming that "Ben/Tesía was not a transsexual" is absurd, based on what the article reported.
Sincerely,
Russ Williams
One click gets you all the newsletters listed below

Breaking news, arts coverage, and daily events

Keep up with happenings around town

Kevin Curtin's bimonthly cannabis musings

Austin's queerest news and events

Eric Goodman's Austin FC column, other soccer news

Information is power. Support the free press, so we can support Austin.   Support the Chronicle