Talk:Catharina Margaretha Linck

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

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)

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)

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)