Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 9186362" data-attributes="member: 7026594">You've missed or misunderstood chunks of the discussion, then.Literally no one in this thread has disagreed with someone taking a stand on the use of their own name.&nbsp; Every person in the thread who's pushed back on the term &quot;Xandering&quot; has explicitly stated that Jaquays has the right to disassociate and to ask for her name to be taken off the idea, and we should honor that.&nbsp; Every single person.What some of us have observed, though, is that JA's original article stops short of actually saying that Jaquays wanted her name removed.&nbsp; That what it explicitly says is that she wanted the spelling corrected, which is what some of us who read the original discussion years ago also remembered.&nbsp; The way JA reports the events in the article IMPLIES that she wanted her name removed, but actually seems to SAY that she wanted it corrected.&nbsp; And that later he, in conjunction with his publisher, decided that while he was at it, he might as well not only correct the spelling but just remove her name entirely to obviate any theoretical legal issues (more likely ones of credit) around usage of the term, and instead use one based on his own name.And that because of JA's prior history first of deadnaming Jaquays, then of refusing/giving pushback on her request that he spell her last name correctly in the term (it should be Jaquaysing, not &quot;Jaquaying&quot;, and it's been thirteen years since she first asked!), we're a bit skeptical and concerned that his wording may be intentionally vague and a little misleading.&nbsp; Which led to a number of folks (particularly early in the thread) misunderstanding and leaping to conclusions.&nbsp; Whether that was his intent or not.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mannahnin, post: 9186362, member: 7026594"] You've missed or misunderstood chunks of the discussion, then. Literally no one in this thread has disagreed with someone taking a stand on the use of their own name. Every person in the thread who's pushed back on the term "Xandering" has explicitly stated that Jaquays has the right to disassociate and to ask for her name to be taken off the idea, and we should honor that. Every single person. What some of us have observed, though, is that JA's original article stops short of actually saying that Jaquays wanted her name removed. That what it explicitly says is that she wanted the spelling corrected, which is what some of us who read the original discussion years ago also remembered. The way JA reports the events in the article IMPLIES that she wanted her name removed, but actually seems to SAY that she wanted it corrected. And that later he, in conjunction with his publisher, decided that while he was at it, he might as well not only correct the spelling but just remove her name entirely to obviate any theoretical legal issues (more likely ones of credit) around usage of the term, and instead use one based on his own name. And that because of JA's prior history first of deadnaming Jaquays, then of refusing/giving pushback on her request that he spell her last name correctly in the term (it should be Jaquaysing, not "Jaquaying", and it's been [I]thirteen years[/I] since she first asked!), we're a bit skeptical and concerned that his wording may be intentionally vague and a little misleading. Which led to a number of folks (particularly early in the thread) misunderstanding and leaping to conclusions. Whether that was his intent or not. [/QUOTE]

Verification