Sports reporter to undergo sex change

You don't care what I think, yet you spent time typing a fuck-off post.

Interesting.

 

Blondebomber,
Can you at least understand that many LA Times readers might wonder what happened to Mike Penner? That he's been writing about a lot of different subjects and sports for more than two decades and then suddenly disappeared?
Or that some might even think, "hmm, this new writer Christine has a similar writing style to that guy Mike. Wonder where he went?"
Or that gossips would soon hear about Mike transitioning and the news would eventually appear somewhere, and maybe this was him taking control of his own story?
Or that doing it this way was easier than explaining to his hundreds of sources that Christine would now be calling them about articles, and not Mike?
Can you give him that?

 

A fine retort from Message Board 101.

 

Yes, I can. As stated above: In the features section or even the front page, have a reporter do a story on the guy and flesh it out with medical background and support. That way it's educational and enlightening. A first-person piece in the sports section comes off as nothing more than a guy using the paper to unburden himself. If the paper wanted to acknowledge the situation, it could have done so much more effectively and * gasp * informatively.

 

I'm not sure sports readers -- Mike's readers -- would necessarily see the story in features or news, especially if it didn't have his byline.
More than anything, I think this is how Mike has total control of his own story.

 

I stand by my opinion regrarding the topic, but on a side note for those who might think the LA Times owes it to its readers to explain the new byline: Whenever the LA Times has changed out its Dodgers or Lakers writers or even altered its columnists, do the editors have to publish a story on what went into their decisions? When a female reporter gets married and starts writing under her new surname, do we need a breakout box to alert the readers?

So the guy is changing his byline. Sorry to say, but we as writers overestimate the worth of our bylines. So few people notice. To think they do is arrogance.

 

All of those things you mentioned are normal. Someone having a sex change isn't.

And most papers do a little something when they hire a new writer, least every place I've worked at has.

 

Uh, she's not a new hire.

And the LA Times doesn't welcome each new writer with a story. A top two or three columnist might get a "Hello, how are you," but that's about it at a paper like that.

 

It will be the most talked-about story in the paper today.

 

To hell with political correctness, that shit is just weird.

 

To clarify: I'm happy for Penner. She seems very happy and at peace with her decision based on the story I read. It's the LA Times' decision on how to handle the piece that I question.

 

I'm confused about this.

I thought before they did the ol' sausagectomy, one was required to live in a woman's persona for a year. Since he is still writing as Mike, that hasn't happened yet apparently.

Anyone privy to his situation who can clarify?