L.A. Times sportswriter: I'm a transsexual

[Rock On]

Associated Press

LOS ANGELES (AP) - A veteran sports writer for the Los Angeles Times said in his column Thursday that he is a transsexual.

Mike Penner told readers of his struggle to embrace his gender, and said when he returns from vacation in a few weeks he will be known as Christine Daniels. He did not say whether he was having surgery or why he's changing his last name.
"I am a transsexual sports writer," Penner wrote. "It has taken more than 40 years, a million tears and hundreds of hours of soul-wrenching therapy for me to work up the courage to type those words."

The 49-year-old Penner said his brain has been "wired female" and he's tried to fight off the urge to change sexes. He called writing a story about his sexuality the "most frightening of all the towering mountains of fear I somehow had to confront and struggle to scale."

"How do you go about sharing your most important truth, one you spent a lifetime trying to keep deeply buried, to a world that has grown familiar and comfortable with your facade?" Penner asked.

Penner, who is married to another Los Angeles Times writer, said he started coming out about two months ago by telling his boss, his barber and a soccer teammate, and that he now feels happier and healthier.

"Mike Penner has been an exemplary contributor to the Los Angeles Times sports pages for over two decades and today's column is no exception," Randy Harvey, the newspaper's sports editor, said in a statement. "The decision to go public cannot have been an easy one and, while we do not make a habit of commenting on the personal and private lives of our journalists, we do look forward to continuing our relationship into the future."

John Amaechi, the first NBA player to publicly come out of the closet as being gay, said he read Penner's column Thursday after returning from a speaking engagement in Berkeley at the University of California.

"It's incredibly bold and far more courageous than anything I could have done," said Amaechi, who spent five seasons in the NBA. "I commend him."

Penner has spent more than 20 years at the Los Angeles Times and has covered the Olympics, the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim and has served as the Times' sports media critic

http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/67430...CP&GT1=9331


What next, the TNBA?

[ms.peachy]

Well, best of luck to her; I'm sure it's not been an easy ride and even tougher being in the media spotlight.

[Rock On]

"I'm going on vacation for a few weeks".
He should have said, "I'm going to need a few weeks to heal from self-mutilating surgery"

Seriously, how can you expect to ever conduct a serious interview with an athlete again? No matter how open-minded our society may be, I think it's sports reporting career is over.

[befsquire]

he did, only he used the wrong version and has essentially said "it is."

[Rock On]

Yeah that's what threw me off. Disgusting.


What would you call it.

[befsquire]

her.

[Rock On]

her.

What about that pesky Y chromosone? Can't get that surgically removed.

[Rock On]

People like you disgust me.


Yet another example of what a sick society we live in. Not so much that one guy would be so weak that he couldn't find a way to live through this pain without mutilating his body, but that society would hail this as courageous and even encourage this action is unconscionable.

When they talk about the fall of the West, the sexual perversions will be a bullet point, no different than how we talk about the ancient Greeks (or used to, anyway).

So the feeling is mutual, because people like YOU disgust me.

[befsquire]

no one said whether there is definitely going to be surgery, so you're making an assumption about whether anything will be surgically removed, added, etc. or "mutilated" as you put it. but even assuming that there is a surgery, what does it matter that the y chromosome can't be removed? you asked what we should call her, and i said "her" because that is how she wishes to be from now on.

[Bob]

Yet another example of what a sick society we live in. Not so much that one guy would be so weak that he couldn't find a way to live through this pain without mutilating his body, but that society would hail this as courageous and even encourage this action is unconscionable.

why is that unconscionable? why do you care what she does with her body?

[Rock On]

It took a lot of balls to go public with it, I'll give it that.

[Rock On]

Are you going to tell your children in the future that the earth is flat?

I was just wondering how much ignorance you were planning on passing down.


The climate of tolerance has given way to a climate of acceptance and even encouragement, which is a problem. And in this climate, courage would be to play the hand you've been dealt and not put your wife, family, friends, and yourself through this ridiculous behavior just to satisfy your sexual deviance.

But that's fine, he's free to do whatever he wants, to hurt whoever he wants and that's the way it should be. But we don't need to embrace it and hold his hand through the process. And we shouldn't.

Beth, you're right, the article didn't say he was having surgery. My bad, he may only be mutilating his psyche and marriage.
Whatever.

[befsquire]

who are you?

[Rock On]

Yauch

[Lo_Lyfe]

So it is you. Well.

[ms.peachy]

Wow. Just wow. I know that ignorant people abound out there, but it's still shocking to me when confronted with one who is so proud of themself for being so. Blimey.

[Rock On]

Penner, who is married to another Los Angeles Times writer, said he started coming out about two months ago by telling his boss, his barber and a soccer teammate, and that he now feels happier and healthier.

Do you think perhaps he should have started by coming out to his wife?

Maybe he just figured her being a fellow journalist at the same paper that she'd have the opportunity to read about a few minutes before it hit the streets.

[zorra_chiflada]

i gathered his wife already knew

[Rock On]

Wow. Just wow. I know that ignorant people abound out there, but it's still shocking to me when confronted with one who is so proud of themself for being so. Blimey.


I guess you're referring to me.

Step into the 90s Ms.peachy, the only ignorance being applied in this thread is against me for being non-PC because I didn't know which pronoun to refer to "it" as.

I don't think the guy is sub-human. I think he should be able to do whatever he wants, but it's not disrespectful to tell someone that I disagree with their opinion, meaning I think they're wrong.

Understand, what I take issue with is not his decision. He needs support and love from the people in his life, whether his choices are right or wrong or even right or wrong for him. What I take issue with is the institutionalized acceptance of the rightness of his decision.

If I subscribed to the LA Times, I'd cancel my subscription. As it is, I don't. But I can express my opinion on this MB that it's not ok for the paper to give him a forum for expressing his deranged idea of sexuality, nor is it ok for the editor to follow up with statements about his courage.

Those are my opinions, I'm simply stating them.

[Schmeltz]

What I take issue with is the institutionalized acceptance of the rightness of his decision.


Why, though? You're saying this person should be free to make their own choices, but it should still be officially frowned upon and shied away from and hidden under the rug for shame? That's kind of a self-contradictory position, it seems to me.

[Bob]

Step into the 90s Ms.peachy, the only ignorance being applied in this thread is against me for being non-PC because I didn't know which pronoun to refer to "it" as.


referring to a human being as "it" is a little beyond non-PC, in my opinion. in...most people's opinions, i'd think. even racists use "he" and "she". i'm not buying that you're using "it" because you're confused about which pronoun to use, you don't just call a person "it" without some kind of animus, generally

[Rock On]

Why, though? You're saying this person should be free to make their own choices, but it should still be officially frowned upon and shied away from and hidden under the rug for shame? That's kind of a self-contradictory position, it seems to me.

HE decided to make it a public issue. I'm not saying he should be cast out of society, or that he should be "officially frowned upon". What matters to me is that the paper and society at large seem to think it's ok to support and encourage the decision and that it's not ok for people like me to say that it's wrong. My opinion is that what he did was wrong. You are free to feel any way you please, but I have the right to say that I think chopping off his penis was wrong.

I don't care one way or another about an individual choice to act on their own sexual predisposition. I care about our response to that as a society. Just because it would be wrong to stop someone from making that choice, it does not follow that it is right for society to justify/enable/encourage/hail a choice as heroic. This guy is making a choice, we as society should not have to bend everything in his direction because of it.

I'm not telling anyone how to live their lives. But saying that a psychological flaw must somehow be recognized as "truth", that to deny it would be "living a lie", and that me or society would be intolerant for approaching it that way is laughable.


Lets take it down a notch to something simple. Let's say I work at one of the big accounting firms, doesn't matter which one. I am an up and coming employee looking to make it into middle management. All of a sudden I dye my hair bright blue and tatoo my neck and face. I make a choice to do it. Should I be allowed to do so? Sure. Does the compnay have to keep promoting me now since they assume I am some kind of a freak when I am not at work? They don't have to. I make a choice to make myself look different, then I shouldn't expect traditional managers/companies to just allow me to progress up through the corporate ladder.

We can debate whether that is right or wrong but it's the facts. You aren't allowed to have facial hair if you play for the NY Yankees.

[Schmeltz]

I'm still not sure I understand your point. Maybe if you explained exactly why what this person did was so wrong, it would be clearer. As it stands you just come across as someone who doesn't like transgendered people, which is no different from someone who doesn't like, say, black people.


we as society should not have to bend everything in his direction because of it.


What does this even mean?

[Bob]

Lets take it down a notch to something simple. Let's say I work at one of the big accounting firms, doesn't matter which one. I am an up and coming employee looking to make it into middle management. All of a sudden I dye my hair bright blue and tatoo my neck and face. I make a choice to do it. Should I be allowed to do so? Sure. Does the compnay have to keep promoting me now since they assume I am some kind of a freak when I am not at work? They don't have to. I make a choice to make myself look different, then I shouldn't expect traditional managers/companies to just allow me to progress up through the corporate ladder.

We can debate whether that is right or wrong but it's the facts. You aren't allowed to have facial hair if you play for the NY Yankees.

it's not the same thing. if you make a choice to work for a specific company or play for a specific team with a dress code, then no, they don't have to put up with whatever flamboyancies you choose to have.

but we're not talking about a company with a dress code, we're talking about society, something that everybody's a part of whether they like it or not. and we're not talking about a guy who wants to dye his hair blue, we're talking about a guy who's transgendered. why should his only option be "put up with it, faggot"?

[Rock On]

As it stands you just come across as someone who doesn't like transgendered people, which is no different from someone who doesn't like, say, black people.

NOT TRUE, I said nothing of the sort. I don't hate this person.

He needs support and love from the people in his life, whether his choices are right or wrong or even right or wrong for him.

I guess the PC Police likes to call people racist and ignorant.
Now thats some irony.

Here's another example to try to expain my point of view even further.
Let's say I'm an alcoholic, I was born that way. I have a genetic predisposition to become addicted to certain substances. I have a sports column and in the column I come out in the same way. I embrace my alcoholism; I tell the world that I'm going to be drinking every night and weekend from now on because I can no longer deny my true self. Even though I know that it will be frowned upon by society, I am who I am and this is the best thing for me to do. So here's to you, folks. I'm going away for a week and when I come back I'll be very hung over. And every night from then on out. And then my editor let me print the story. And then he came out with his own quote saying how proud he is of me, and how brave I am to embrace my alcoholism.

Would your reaction be the same in this situation as it is for the transsexual sports journalist?
Mine would.

Even better, this one is perfext actually.

What about a teenage girl who cuts herself? No permanent damange except a few scars. Not illegal. What if "society" started applauding her? I mean, why would someone intentionally choose such a stigma, right? She should be applauded for her courage in standing up and embracing her need to cut herself... Etc.

[Big Gus]

Just shut up Norcen?

[Rock On]

it's not the same thing. if you make a choice to work for a specific company or play for a specific team with a dress code, then no, they don't have to put up with whatever flamboyancies you choose to have.

but we're not talking about a company with a dress code, we're talking about society, something that everybody's a part of whether they like it or not. and we're not talking about a guy who wants to dye his hair blue, we're talking about a guy who's transgendered. why should his only option be "put up with it, faggot"?

I believe the newspaper's sales could be, and will, be affected.
That's the comparison I was trying to make.

Do you think the LA Times can fire this person now if their distribution declines as a direct result of this? NO. The PC backlash would be even worse.

Could our accounting firm fire our blue-haired, tattooed faced accountant if their customer base declined? YES.

Earlier you asked "why do you care what he does with his body"

I care because embracing one's homosexuality is as wrong as embracing your short temper, as embracing your philandering ways, as embracing your jealousy of people better looking than you, as embracing your desire to jump to take the last open seat on the bus before the little old lady gets to it, and many other things.

But it's still just fine if this guy wants to do that. People are and should be allowed to make mistakes - big ones and little ones, as long as they don't hurt other people. I care just as I would care if a TV show glorified a guy for jumping to take that hypothetical lady's seat. No, I care deeply just as I would care if everywhere I turned there were shows, articles, newspapers, and otherwise rational people saying "yes, what a courageous thing he did for taking that seat. He should be glorified for it, he should not be ashamed for doing it." Not for being the type of guy who wants to grab that seat. You can't control your urges (although you can hold them in check by developing habits to do so). But you certainly control your decisions to act on those urges and that's what I hope people try to do with all sorts of predilections.

But still, it's not the acting on the urges that I "care deeply" about. It's the thousands of people standing there in the media, in the streets, in this thread saying that it's OK. That just by virtue of the fact that it's an URGE, it would be unhealthy NOT to act on it, and furthermore anyone who disagrees with that is a bigot or racist.

[Knuckles]

I care because embracing one's homosexuality is as wrong as embracing your short temper, as embracing your philandering ways, as embracing your jealousy of people better looking than you, as embracing your desire to jump to take the last open seat on the bus before the little old lady gets to it, and many other things.



Man, I feel so sorry for people like you.

[Schmeltz]

I care because embracing one's homosexuality is as wrong as embracing your short temper


Holy fuck, dude.

Just, fuck.

[Bob]

I care because embracing one's homosexuality is wrong

why?

[Rock On]

why?

Why are you asking why?


Seriously though, I don't see how I can expand on the issue any further than I already have, nor do I desire to.

[Schmeltz]

Good.

[Bob]

Why are you asking why?


Seriously though, I don't see how I can expand on the issue any further than I already have, nor do I desire to.

because i'm not buying the "it's just my opinion" answer.

"the black race is inferior" is an opinion, i don't buy that either, because it's got major consequences for the parties involved, and it's gonna take extra effort to justify it.

i generally don't indulge the "you're born with it/it's a choice" debate in regards to homosexuality because at the root of it is an assumption that being gay's a bad thing, but for the sake of argument (hey, i'm gonna be a lawyer, that's about to be my job), i'll give it a shot.

i'm guessing that your distinction between "being black is wrong" and "being gay is wrong" is that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, whereas race is clearly genetic.

but so what? for one reason or the other, some people have homosexual tendencies. your opinion is that it's wrong to indulge them. your opinion is that the morally correct thing for them to do is to suck it up and deny their urges. your opinion (correct me if i'm wrong) of a morally correct society is one which condemns homosexuality, one which rewards homosexuals that live in denial, those which suppress their homosexual urges, whatever the consequences may be.

what bothers me about your "opinion" is how exactly such a society is justifiable? men have sex with men. women have sex with women. people are randomly born with genitals, yet they don't identify with their assigned gender, and they want to make a change. how is that wrong? how does that hurt you? how does that hurt society?

i'm not buying the "opinion" stuff because if you had your way, these people would become a subclass, and it takes more than an opinion to justify that kind of thing.

[Yeti]

I saw this guy on Larry King.

LARGO, Fla. – A city manager fired after revealing his plans to have a sex change said he will not sue the city that fired him and he will begin living as a woman full-time by the end of May.
Steve Stanton, 48, said Friday during the taped segment on CNN's “Larry King Live,” that he will be living as Susan within the next two months. He said he and his wife will separate.
Stanton had previously said taking Largo to court would be like “suing my mother,” but the city of 76,000 west of Tampa had expected him to sue.
“It is tempting to seek retribution in the courts, but after much reflection and soul searching, I just cannot find it within my heart to sue Largo – a city I have always and will always love. I do not want to punish the citizens of Largo,” Stanton said in the statement.

[ET]

Wow. To be doing this publicly... you gotta... have... balls.

[Yeti]

Men that have the sex change operation usually choose a female name beginning with the same letter. The former city manager is going from Steve to Susan. At least the sportswriter is going from Mike to Christine but his job lends more to creative thinking than Steve's job as a city manager.
My female name would be Contessa. Tess for short.

[Bob]

i think i'd pick "chastity"

for obvious reasons

[Yeti]

I think my female name would be Jessica.

Joel to Jessica...........see.

........and Bob, Chastity is good especially if you go with Chaz when you are out clubbing.

[zorra_chiflada]

i totally know what rock on's deal is. i just realised.

he was getting all hot and heavy with this amazingly hot woman, starts groping her around and stuff and HELLO THERE IS A PENIS. from there on in, he has felt uncomfortable about his own sexuality and judgemental of others sexuality - even if it has no bearing on his life whatsover.



another thing, homosexuality is not a "disorder" or an "illness" or even a fucking "character flaw." being an idiotic close-minded shithead is.

[ms.peachy]

Again. wow. Just wow.

[Lyman Zerga]

i totally know what rock on's deal is. i just realised.

he was getting all hot and heavy with this amazingly hot woman, starts groping her around and stuff and HELLO THERE IS A PENIS. from there on in, he has felt uncomfortable about his own sexuality and judgemental of others sexuality - even if it has no bearing on his life whatsover.



another thing, homosexuality is not a "disorder" or an "illness" or even a fucking "character flaw." being an idiotic close-minded shithead is.


death till love tears us apart (y)

[Schmeltz]

because i'm not buying the "it's just my opinion" answer.

"the black race is inferior" is an opinion, i don't buy that either, because it's got major consequences for the parties involved, and it's gonna take extra effort to justify it.

i generally don't indulge the "you're born with it/it's a choice" debate in regards to homosexuality because at the root of it is an assumption that being gay's a bad thing, but for the sake of argument (hey, i'm gonna be a lawyer, that's about to be my job), i'll give it a shot.

i'm guessing that your distinction between "being black is wrong" and "being gay is wrong" is that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, whereas race is clearly genetic.

but so what? for one reason or the other, some people have homosexual tendencies. your opinion is that it's wrong to indulge them. your opinion is that the morally correct thing for them to do is to suck it up and deny their urges. your opinion (correct me if i'm wrong) of a morally correct society is one which condemns homosexuality, one which rewards homosexuals that live in denial, those which suppress their homosexual urges, whatever the consequences may be.

what bothers me about your "opinion" is how exactly such a society is justifiable? men have sex with men. women have sex with women. people are randomly born with genitals, yet they don't identify with their assigned gender, and they want to make a change. how is that wrong? how does that hurt you? how does that hurt society?

i'm not buying the "opinion" stuff because if you had your way, these people would become a subclass, and it takes more than an opinion to justify that kind of thing.

(y)

[Yeti]

Bob is such a liberal bastard but I love him for it.

[Yeti]

Your nickname could be Jessie and since most male transsexuals continue to date women you could listen and relate to Rick Springfield's phenomenal song Jessie's Girl.

[abcdefz]

I though Transsexual was a new orgiastic railroad line.

[Dorothy Wood]

i totally know what rock on's deal is. i just realised.

he was getting all hot and heavy with this amazingly hot woman, starts groping her around and stuff and HELLO THERE IS A PENIS. from there on in, he has felt uncomfortable about his own sexuality and judgemental of others sexuality - even if it has no bearing on his life whatsover.



another thing, homosexuality is not a "disorder" or an "illness" or even a fucking "character flaw." being an idiotic close-minded shithead is.


ha! my thoughts exactly!


and to Rock On...are you really so upset about the sales of the LA Times? I mean, it's really that important to you? If anything, the sales will go up! we're living in a culture that loves tabloids. and besides that, los angeles isn't exactly the most conservative town in america.

let's be honest here, you hate this person because the whole thing just grosses you out. or maybe you're suppressing your own homosexual urges which has left you emotionally stunted and oh so bitter.

transgendered people make up a teeny tiny fraction of our society. You make it seem like there are thousands of trannys roaming the streets punching grandmothers and spitting on bibles. OH NO OH NO OH NO! did you know that if you read an article about a transsexual, you're probably going to start thinking you want to be a woman. I'm just warning you.


also, bless our bob, just lovely. *round of applause*

[Yeti]

You make it seem like there are thousands of trannys roaming the streets punching grandmothers and spitting on bibles.


If only we lived in a perfect world. Damn!

[YoungRemy]

two cents:

regarding the sales of the LA Times and the guy doing his (her) job..

this is the one thing that some of you havent noticed: he was a sports journalist for the last twenty years... I'm sure his knowledge of sports will not change, and his articles and columns will have the same style that they do now (I've never read any of his columns), but in a world of machismo athletes and homophobia, its not the LA Times that will shun him, but it will be the athletes themselves... How will this writer get the postgame locker room interview or the late night scoop from the game's leading scorer...

what will happen when he calls major leauge media representatives and they dont give him the time of day because

A. they dont know who Christine Daniels is
B. they feel uncomfortable with a TG running around their locker room doing post-game interviews

maybe it wont have an effect at all, maybe he writes from his desk and the only thing the readers will have to acclamate to is the name and picture of the new sports writer, but I would worry not about his employers, but the subjects in which he writes about...

[abcdefz]

two cents:

regarding the sales of the LA Times and the guy doing his (her) job..

this is the one thing that some of you havent noticed: he was a sports journalist for the last twenty years... I'm sure his knowledge of sports will not change, and his articles and columns will have the same style that they do now (I've never read any of his columns), but in a world of machismo athletes and homophobia, its not the LA Times that will shun him, but it will be the athletes themselves... How will this writer get the postgame locker room interview or the late night scoop from the games leading scorer...

what will happen when he calls major leauge media representatives and they dont give him the time of day because

A. they dont who Christine Daniels is
B. they feel uncomfortable with a TG running around their locker room doing post-game interviews

maybe it wont have an effect at all, maybe he writes from his desk and the only thing the readers will have to acclamate to is the name and picture of the new sports writer, but I would worry not about his employers, but the subjects in which he writes about...


Yup.