Talk:Catharina Margaretha Linck

Latest comment: 10 years ago by Bmclaughlin9 in topic 18th century... digital... boy?

18th century... digital... boy?

edit

Language like "transgender", "female to male transgender person", and "male assigned at birth" or "female assigned at birth" seems so contemporary to now (= early 21st century). Do we really know what happened at the time of this person's birth? And is the use of the "he/his" as the main pronoun justified on any grounds whatsoever (i.e. do we know that this was eir preferred pronoun, or was it rather the case that e was a woman who lived outwardly as a man, but nevertheless identified as a woman)? Assuming that we can know things like this, I think the article needs citations to demonstrate how we know. At the moment the article indicates things like this: He served (disguised as a man) for example, and this simply does not read very well. Arided (talk) 11:21, 31 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

I agree this needs a lot of work, simply rewriting so as not to impose 21st-century language when we know so little. I'll try to check some sources tomorrow. It would be especially useful to have the male name Catherina used. With just a few minutes research I've found several male names and a more complicated story, including periods lived as a woman and once when charged with desertion the soldier revealed biological evidence of female sex and was released rather than hung. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 03:25, 1 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
Overhauled. Could use more context, for sure. Anyone who's interested can read the one source and add/subtract/modify. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 00:50, 2 August 2014 (UTC)Reply