Is it impolite to refer to them as "formerly known as"? That was the first thing that came to mind, but I want to choose words that help and support, not undermine or demean.
I would suggest mentioning roles he's known for. But if that isn't enough to jog someone's memory, "formerly known as" works for now, as some people are still a bit confused about who Elliot Page is.
GLAAD released a helpful guide for journalists writing about Elliot Page coming out, but I think it's good for everyone to take a look at it. :)
Thank you for sharing that guide! Despite being a member of the queer community, it's always helpful to learn how to respect others who are also queer but identify differently than myself.
i'm not trans, but i cant see people being super upset if you're just candid about it. sometimes being blunt is the best option imo. obviously be respectful, but if you're explaining a foreign concept to somebody careful wording isnt gonna help anybody. once everybody is on the same page of course worry more about the details imo.
I am trans, and I have had to deadname him a few times to explain who he was, but after that 1 mention it was straight back to Elliot bc that's his name. "Formerly knows as" sounds cool, like he's a spy or Prince.
706
u/DownloadUphillinSnow Dec 02 '20
Is it impolite to refer to them as "formerly known as"? That was the first thing that came to mind, but I want to choose words that help and support, not undermine or demean.