re: DU's resident "transphobes"

[MannyGoldstein]

I'll bet there's a few folks on DU who think negatively or dismissively about transgendered folks. And that's bad.

But let's not forget Hanlon's Razor:

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

My operating assumption is that I should call people whatever they want ("Bradley", "Chelsea", "he", "she", ...) and be cool with however they want to characterize themselves, unless they're hurting others. So Chelsea Manning, she is.

But as a complete noob to this stuff, I wouldn't be surprised if I say something stupid when discussing a transgendered person.

One thing that threw me a bit is discussing Manning's past history, e.g., "when Chelsea leaked the damning video...", because Chelsea was Bradley when she leaked the video, so in my brain, the person who was arrested was Bradley. (Sometimes I have very rigid thinking - a blessing and a curse.) So referring to Chelsea as Bradley when discussing past events is a mistake I could have easily made out of my (abundant, as many know!) stupidity. (To solve my problem, I thought about the precedent of Muhammad Al - I wouldn't refer to him as Cassius Clay when discussing his early boxing career. So Chelsea it is/was.)

In any case, let's save our rage for all the #$%& that's truly born of bad intentions, and be careful to not slam those of us who mean well but don't always have our brains in gear. Teach us, don't yell at us.

Mostly, I'm thankful that this kind of stuff can get discussed now, and that people with atypical (is that the wrong word?) sexual identities (is that the wrong phrase?) can be who they are in most parts of our country. When I was a kid - not so long ago - they could not.

Progress! Let's keep going!

(Sorry for the ramble.)

[leftstreet]

1. The majority here seem to want to do the right thing

Regardless of what they do/don't understand about transgender issues

It appears to be only a few noisy people boldly claiming they refuse to acknowledge Manning's preferences

One simply *shudders* to think how a change in Manning's personal and private identity could possibly have such an effect on total strangers

[xocet]

8. I don't know why people would object to the use of proper terms if those terms are known....

It is possible that they might be being defensive in some fashion, but time will tell who is steadfast in their disrespect.

This current situation reminds me of W and his mentality whereby he arrogated the right to name the people around him - regardless of their proper names, titles, etc.:

Karl Rove = turd blossom, Michael Brown = brownie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_by_George_W._Bush

[kelliekat44]

82. "A few folks" think bad about straights here also. What is the real point of this discussion? nt

[PoliticAverse]

2. I find it helps to just use Manning's last name. n/t

[Arctic Dave]

3. Good post.

CC to MA is a good example.

[TreasonousBastard]

4. Here I shall reveal my own "transphobia" by saying...

I have absolutely no interest whatever in Manning's gender. It has nothing to do with anything he or she was accused of, and is of about the same importance to most of us as the color socks he or she was wearing.

As far as one's self-identification goes-- where are the limits? Lots of good commentary about gender, sex, Y chromosomes, plumbing, and other related things here lately, but can one really just get up and say "Today I am a woman" and make it stick? Without even a notary? You can't change your name that easily.

You can't even become Catholic that easily, and becoming Jewish is really tough.

(Here it comes-- "What's THAT got to do with it...)

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Does it matter?

I think it's just a matter of respect for people's choices. As long as those choices aren't harmful, why not just accept them as they want to be accepted?

I can't know what it's like to be transgendered. So I'll assume that even though I can't feel that way, they can.

[TreasonousBastard]

6. Not really. It's just that it's having a slight appearance of fad about it...

and we tend to become the ones with the problem figuring it out while they are working it out.

Your main point is well taken-- look at the spirit of the comment, not the specific wording.

[nomorenomore08]

11. But how could something so difficult, requiring such profound life changes, have

"a slight appearance of fad about it"? I'm not mad at your comment, just confused by it, even as the cisgender (non-transgender) heterosexual man that I am.

[TreasonousBastard]

16. Over the years I have personally known quite a few people who...

experimented with gender identity, bisexuality, etc. and went back to the straight life. I suspect we all have known such people, and most of us think there's nothing wrong with them or their experimenting. I think it's at the least courageous and inquisitive.

I don't live in those worlds any more, but I get a glimpse of them from time to time, and as it becomes more accepted, there seems to be more experimenting.

Again, I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but somewhere along the line a distinction might be appropriate to tell the weekenders from the real thing.

[nomorenomore08]

18. I'm sure a whole spectrum exists, like in most other things.

Though for a lot of the people who "experimented," I'd suspect that to them it was more than just experimentation.

[justiceischeap]

67. Or it could just be that people have more freedom now to exist in a way that

wasn't available before. I think some folks are genderqueer, some are into gender fucking and you're right, some may just be trying to figure things out.

"...but somewhere along the line a distinction might be appropriate to tell the weekenders from the real thing"

Why do we need a distinction? Is it really going to inconvenience so many people not to label others that are outside what society considers the norm? I don't think so.

[uppityperson]

26. I am not sure how gender identity or sexual orientation is a "fad".

There is a wide spectrum and some do not occupy the same spot continuously, or their "spot" may be partway along the line allowing a wider degree, but calling it a "fad" gives the appearance of not accepting people for who they are.

[liberal_at_heart]

12. wow. you really need to educate yourself on transgenders. Most of these people have been the

opposite gender their whole lives. When they decide to come out and ask everybody to call them by the gender they identify with, they have often already been that gender in their mind for years. And what is wrong with calling someone the gender they want right away? If someone you knew told you they were gay would you go on saying that person was straight? People claim to be making these natural mistakes and if they are willing to admit it and try and change that is fine, but people shouldn't try and justify or defend these kinds of attitudes or mistakes.

[TreasonousBastard]

15. Educate myself? You have no idea what my past life has been and what...

relationships I've had with transgendered people, to say nothing about some things I've gone through myself.

Of course it's a lifelong struggle for many, but these are real people I have known, and none of us fit in any of the boxes anonymous posters want to build around us.

People do come out, they also experiment and work their way through things and make the occasional strange choice along the way. And not all of them are are 100% one way or the other and not all of them are that serious.

[liberal_at_heart]

17. Well Chelsea asked people to start calling her Chelsea. There's no more experimenting on her end.

She wants to start homone therapy and wants people to start calling her Chelsea. Again, how many people forget to call people gay once they come out. Once my daughter told me she was bisexual I immediately starting identifying her as bisexaul. I never once addressed her as straight after she told me she was bisexual. She is dating a guy right now. She has never officially dated a girl, but is attracted to girls sexually. But just because she happens to be with a guy right now doesn't mean she is straight. If Chelsea has asked to be called Chelsea that is what people should call her. I don't know why I aswered this post. There is a reason I have been using the trash and ignore button. I should just stick to doing that.

[chervilant]

19. Now see,

there ARE more DUers finding both 'ignore' and 'trash thread' functional ways to limit the sexism, racism, misogyny and other forms of intolerance that seem increasingly evident on this 'Democratic' forum. Calhoun's iconic work regarding overpopulation notwithstanding, we are witnessing a sad proliferation of bigotry among us. My ignore list has increased accordingly.

(For me, "occasional strange choice" was the big clue about the barely disguised intolerance of the person whose defensive blustering prompted your response...)

[hfojvt]

31. seems like that is quite a bit of intolerance

so it is okay to be intolerant of some people, but not others.

[TreasonousBastard]

33. "Barely disguised intolerance"? Not only don't you know the first thing about me,...

but you are claiming here that the transgendered, presumably among others, never make a bad or questionable choice.

That would be an absurd claim-- tantamount to saying that these people have judgment superior to the rest of the population which often makes "strange" choices.

If you are using "ignore" so often, and presumably have me on it, you are limiting comment to only that to which you agree. Not a great way to grow or understand.

It has you admitting to what you accuse me of.

[chervilant]

55. You aren't on my IL.

Your 'intolerance' seems like that which afflicts most of us who have grown up in this society. I suspect that, like me, you've learned about your 'isms' as you've aged, and had experiences -- particularly interactions with individuals who put the lie to a given ism -- that help enlighten you, and those with whom you interact.

I find it quite revealing that you leaped to the conclusion that I am "claiming here that the transgendered, presumably among others, never make a bad or questionable choice." You might want to examine your conclusion to understand more about your own intolerance. I have found that the harder I work to push something away from me (denial), the more I should grasp it closer and examine why I'm willing to invest so much energy in pushing it away.

The people on my ignore list are verbal bullies, sexists and misogynists. Having grown up in pernicious abuse, I find it healthier for me not to experience those types of interactions. There are still lots of DUers with whom I disagree -- they typically don't bludgeon me with their words. Someone on my IL HAS responded to my post herein above, and I'm confident I'm not missing a thing by having said individual on ignore.

[treestar]

24. This is the kind of jumping on people that is just wrong

How many transgendered people are there? I've never met one in my life. So sorry I don't know all the ins and outs. And if you can't tell people and give them at least one chance without calling them transphobic, then I'm sorry that's just wrong.

[uppityperson]

25. Serious Question for you, how do you know you've never met one?

[treestar]

28. OK you have a point

I haven't met one who told me about it.

And on second thought, I have known one person who was going into the therapy and had changed from his birth name to a female name. A young person who did not talk a lot and was just attending a family function, and didn't give us a crash course or complain about anything anyone there may have said, at least not to my ears.

At least give people a chance to hear about it before labeling them transphobic is a reasonable thing to ask IMO.

[bluestate10]

80. You likely have met Transgendered people but saw them as the sex that was obvious to you.

I know transgendered people personally, I saw them as the sex that was obvious to me until I got to know them and their situation. I think the crowd that is ripping people for not calling Manning "she" because Manning wants that are missing the point. My experience with many of the critics is that they routinely display intolerance about a lot of people and topics, regardless of whether their intolerance is justified or not, the only condition that I see of them is that they view THEIR views more important than any other view on an issue or person. If Manning walked into any business as Manning now appears, Manning would be addressed as a male. The person doing the addressing wouldn't do that out of hate or ignorance.

[Jim Lane]

21. I agree there are limits.

You ask, &quot C)an one really just get up and say 'Today I am a woman' and make it stick?"

There could be rare cases in which this is not a sincere gender choice. A burly, bearded right-winger wants to troll all these ostentatiously PC liberals, so he announces that he's a woman, and wants his birth name of Gus to be abandoned in favor of Petunia. He has never dressed or otherwise presented as a woman, he has no interest in hormone therapy (let alone surgery), and he doesn't even shave off his beard. He figures that, if we call him Petunia, we look ridiculous, and if we don't, he can accuse us of being inconsistent. In a case like that, I would say that we aren't required to respect his choice. I would keep calling him Gus and using masculine pronouns.

Back in the real world, though, virtually everyone who says "Today I am a woman" is doing more than just saying it. Yes, as you stated below, some may start down that road but at some point decide not to pursue it -- but someone hiking the Appalachian Trail is indeed an AT hiker even if he or she doesn't make it to Mt. Katahdin.

[enlightenment]

7. Manny,

Nobody is saying that it's easy to compute a transition, particularly when it seemingly comes from nowhere. My kid was 19 when he told me he was transgender (FtM) and it took me a number of years to keep my pronouns straight. Now, more than a decade later, I still occasionally stumble if I'm relating a story about him as a child. The point is that if you care, you try not to make the error.

I don't think that anyone on DU is deliberately attacking those who are making honest mistakes. The problem is that there are a handful who are deliberately spewing their crap every time the opportunity arises. If they haven't done it in this thread yet (and I didn't look before I hit reply) then I suspect they will.

They're not saying things that are terribly overt - they are using language that could well be construed as "honest questioning". But they use it over and over and over again.

Fool me once, etc, etc, and for those of us who refuse to tolerate that bigotry, words start to look very suspect.

As for your last comments - no, atypical is not appropriate. Consider that one of the synonyms for that word is abnormal.
No, sexual identity is not correct. Sex and gender are not the same thing - a transgender individual may identify as straight, gay, bi-, other . . .
Finally, I understand that you want things to settle down and you want to think that things are better for trans* people - but they aren't. Trans* individuals still face some of the highest rates for violent crime in the nation, and still have few legal avenues of protection. Even without violence, they face discrimination in ways that cis-people can't really fathom - from restrictions on how they can legally refer to themselves, with laws that vary from state to state. Depending on where they were born, they may or may not be able to modify their birth certificate - some states allow reissue, but almost all insist that the individual prove that they have undergone reassignment surgery ("bottom" surgery) before they will consider any change to the document. Some states even require surgery before an individual is allowed to change their gender on their driving licence. Students applying for student loans have to jump through extra hoops to prove their gender. Insurance rarely covers reassignment surgery - even basic surgery like hysterectomy.
Then there are the lovely day to day issues - and those are myriad.

We who are - or love someone who is - transgender are happy to teach. Look around DU and you'll see a whole lot of educating going on. But the call for education cannot be used as an excuse for the behavior of those who do not want to learn. No one should have to put up with the crap that's been floating to the top of DU for the last couple of days, not even for the sake of the well-meaning but unschooled.

[nomorenomore08]

14. +1

I think at least some of the people who plead ignorance or confusion are being disingenuous. The sheer vehemence of their comments, on a subject that doesn't even affect them directly, is a giveaway IMO.

[Heywood J]

22. Maybe they became vehement because every other poster is yelling at them.

I have no problem with Manning choosing to change genders but I can understand that some people don't like being screamed at, on general principle. I've purposefully tried to stay out of the main threads about this issue because it appears that there is no longer such a thing as talking about something calmly, a gentle reminder, or gentle correction. Even the simplest things lately have become attack and invective.

To me, there are fewer differences between a person who actively refuses to accept another based on identity or orientation, and a second person who constantly yells "PHOBE!" at people one day after such a transition. They both ignore human nature and are equally hard to be around.

[Bluenorthwest]

60. First, it is not possible to 'yell' on an internet board, it is silent. Second, being vehemently

bigoted will rightfully bring harsh criticism from good people. You offer no citations, no examples, you characterize any criticism of bigotry as 'yelling' and 'screaming'. But there is no yelling, nor screaming. You can't say what you mean because if you did it would be so clearly horrific that it would be hidden at once.
'Mommy they are yelling at me silently on the internet!!!!!'

[HardTimes99]

78. With all due respect, I think your language here shows a flawed premise. To wit, I don't

think people 'choose to change genders'. I think most of us are born with genitalia that match our genders and some of us are born with genitalia that do not match our genders. But I don't think there's much choice involved, at least as far as I understand the concept of gender and the distinction between gender and sex.

That sneering sort of smug dismissal of Manning's gender identification as a female got my ire up yesterday. Along with the quasi-misogynistic patronizing jeering that went (paraphrasing): She may be a female but she doesn't get to do what she wants while she's in prison. Too bad, so sad.

The whole attitude struck me as quite unbecoming a supposedly progressive board and made me go "Ugh" more than once.

[limpyhobbler]

9. I'm on about the same page

I want to do it right and be respectful, and learn a little bit more about this. But I could well make a mistake or two without knowing any better.

[Marrah_G]

10. Making a mistake is one thing

But there are people being very hurtful tonight and when told they are being hurtful, rather then apologize they double, triple, quadruple down. We have a bunch of posters with 2,3,4,5 hides Friday night alone...all on this topic and their absolute refusal to stop saying bigoted things.

So if you screw up and make a mistake, just apologize, no one is perfect

[bhikkhu]

13. 40 years ago when I grew up, bigotry on the topic was the norm

...so in spite of being pretty "modernized" in perspective, I find that I have some doubtful "gut instincts" (if we might call them that) from time to time. When in doubt, I try to keep my mouth shut, think, and grow a little more.

[Zorra]

20. I watched the film "42" last night. Interesting film. I recommend it.

Especially for anyone who has never been the target of serious hate, prejudice, and bigotry.

Off topic.

Sort of.

[Marrah_G]

23. omg I watched it last night also

It was a powerful and heartbreaking film. I never knew what amazing men he and the owner were.

[wild bird]

27. I watched 42 last night also.

What an inspiring film, Branch Rickey and Jackie Robinson were amazing men for breaking MLB's color barrier and the shit Jackie Robinson had to endure to play for the Brooklyn Dodgers?

2 amazing men in the right place at the right time.

[Zorra]

39. Me, too. And the depth of hate and bigotry expressed toward him was horrifying.

He was a very strong human being.

The reason I brought it up in this thread is that, during the time Jackie was playing in the major leagues the 40's and 50's, many white people were in the frame of mind where they consciously wanted to recognize the equality of blacks, but subconsciously still regarded them as unequal, because "that was the way it had always been". They were learning how to be respectful of an oppressed minority culture they were not familiar with. Harrison Ford as Branch Rickey really did a great job of conveying this in the film.

Blacks are still struggling with this to a lesser degree. Conditions seem significantly better for blacks now, despite fairly widespread lingering racism.

The relationship of the LGBT community to the heterosexual dominant majority at this time in history appears to be a bit similar to the black experience in the late 50's - early 60's. Sincere cis/hetero people are trying to shed their ignorance and shake the bigotry and prejudice that lingers in their subconscious from the "way things have always been". They are making an effort to understand how to relate respectfully to an oppressed subculture that is in process of emerging from the closet.

But the hard core homophobic/transphobic bigots are still here, insulting us and expressing their hate any way they can get away with without getting tombstoned. It would be appropriate, IMO, if people who are asking for understanding recognize our ability, honed by long experience, to separate posted faux pas made out of ignorance from posts that were made maliciously. What we recognize as malice, they may shrug off as ignorance, because they don't have the experience that we have in discerning what is a faux pas and what is deliberate malice borne of homophobic/transphobic intolerance.

Like you said upthread:

"there are people being very hurtful tonight and when told they are being hurtful, rather then apologize they double, triple, quadruple down. We have a bunch of posters with 2,3,4,5 hides Friday night alone...all on this topic and their absolute refusal to stop saying bigoted things."

[Beacool]

29. The censorship police is out in full force.

I just saw that I had a message hidden because I said that not everyone sees Manning as some kind of hero. I was referring to his whistleblowing, not his personal choice to become transgendered.

I used to perform in NYC. I know plenty of gay, lesbian, bi and even a transgendered person or two. Some of them are still my friends. DU seems to have become a bit too touchy on this subject. I don't think that most posters have an issue with Manning's personal choices, but many also don't feel obligated to call him "Chelsea". Bradley is still his legal name. Manning is not a family member, friend or DU poster, where sensitivity to that person's wishes should be respected. I don't think that people should be browbeaten into addressing Manning as a "she" or as "Chelsea" in thread after thread.

You say tomato, I say tomato..........

[uppityperson]

30. Pronouncing the same word differently is very different from referring to a person as they wish

to be referred to. Manning's lack of being a DUer or family member or friend should in no way impact therespect given to her wishes. I find it odd to think only family, friends or DUers be afforded respect for their wishes.

[Beacool]

34. We are talking about someone who divulged his country's confidential data to a foreigner.

For that crime he will spend the foreseeable 10 years or more in Leavenworth. I'm not particularly concerned about this individual's feelings.

[MannyGoldstein]

36. How do you feel about what Daniel Ellsberg did?

Or about the NY Times reporting on Bush's top-secret warrantless wiretapping program?

Manning exposed some important things. Manning also leaked things that were dumb to leak, but which caused little or no harm.

[Beacool]

52. The Pentagon Papers?

"In late 1969—with the assistance of his former RAND Corporation colleague Anthony Russo and the staff of Senator Edward Kennedy—Ellsberg secretly made several sets of photocopies of the classified documents to which he had access; these later became known as the Pentagon Papers. They revealed that the government had knowledge, early on, that the war could most likely not be won, and that continuing the war would lead to many times more casualties than was ever admitted publicly. Further, as an editor of the New York Times was to write much later, these documents "demonstrated, among other things, that the Johnson Administration had systematically lied, not only to the public but also to Congress, about a subject of transcendent national interest and significance".

Shortly after Ellsberg copied the documents, he resolved to meet some of the people who had influenced both his change of heart on the war and his decision to act. One of them was Randy Kehler. Another was the poet Gary Snyder, whom he'd met in Kyoto in 1960, and with whom he'd argued about U.S. foreign policy; Ellsberg was finally prepared to concede that Gary Snyder had been right, about both the situation and the need for action against it."

I don't think that this amount of thought went through Manning's head at the time. I think that he, now she, was used by Wikileaks for their own purpose and is paying the price for it.

http://gawker.com/5987951/why-did-bradley-manning-do-it

[MannyGoldstein]

56. But what do you think of what Ellsberg did?

Should he have gone to prison for, say, 35 years?

[Beacool]

59. I would have to do more research on Ellsberg.

All this happened before my time. BTW, I have never said that Manning deserved a 35 year sentence.

[NuclearDem]

41. I don't care how you feel about Chelsea

Like her or not, she's brought trans issues to the front here. Consider it practice.

Besides, if you don't like a gay man, you don't get to call him a f**. It's hurtful to the entire community.

[Beacool]

48. Not calling Manning a she is not an offense against the entire transgender community.

Many people are offended by what he did by releasing confidential information to Assange. I just checked a poll on The Huff., outside of the LW world, most people disapprove of what Manning did. Therefore, they are not going to be too willing to indulge his request to be called "Chelsea". Legally, Manning is still male and his name is Bradley.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/24/manning-sentence-poll_n_3806025.html

[Bluenorthwest]

54. So only 'the good ones' get respectful speech? I'm thinking of Ali again, he was an objector to the

war and refused the draft and by your logic, those who were angered by that had the right to call him Cassius or perhaps even worse. The idea that if YOU do not approve of a minority person's unrelated actions you get to call them insulting things is fairly hard to defend. How about say, Alan West? The homophobic President of Uganda? Do you think folks can call them offensive race based names because they are vile people? Your reasoning in this post would suggest you support such things. If one does not care for Netanyahu, it is acceptable to hurl anti Jewish slurs at him? I am not fond of Pope Francis, and I have access to many slurs about Catholics to make use of. How about women? Is it ok to use misogynistic language toward Ann Coulter? 'Cause she's so mean and right wing all bets are off?
Please explain how you work this out when applying it to others.

[Beacool]

58. I seem to keep repeating myself.

I don't care that much about Manning. I was objecting to the many posts where any DU member not addressing Manning as "she" or as "Chelsea" is being chastised.

[CakeGrrl]

62. I agree with the above poster's recommendation: Just use the last name.

I agree with you on this.

The gender issue has - or should have - NOTHING to do with the charges for which Manning was put on trial.

[Laughing Mirror]

63. If you don't want to be chastised for calling Chelsea "he"

Start calling her she and you won't be.

[Beacool]

64. How about letting people address Manning as they choose?

Instead of browbeating them.

[Laughing Mirror]

65. How about addressing her as she has asked to be addressed rather than browbeating her?

Trains run in both directions, after all.

Ask yourself, what would Hillary say?

[Bluenorthwest]

68. How about you address any of the extremely valid points and questions? The dismissive attitude reeks

'I'm repeating my self ' you say because you refuse to discuss, ven one of the countered points like an honest broker.

[Morning Dew]

72. I disapprove of pretty much everything Ann Coulter says -

I also alert on instances of trans-hate directed at her.

Not because I think Ann reads here and would feel bad, but because it hurts people here.

There are plenty of Trans men and women here as well as family members and friends of those people.

Diminishing their humanity and right to self identify is selfish and hateful.

[noamnety]

73. The people who are unwilling to "indulge" (as you put it) Manning

by referring to her with the right pronouns because they are angry are using gender as a weapon and should be ashamed of themselves.

The people who view using the proper pronouns for people as "indulging" them should also be ashamed.

Using racial terms, gendered terms, or terms for sexual orientation as a weapon, or a means to express hate, is hate speech - even when you use words which are polite in other contexts.

[bettyellen]

77. exactly THIS! - there is deliberate and willful intolerance here and it is hateful.

[Zorra]

43. It's totally your right to insult Chelsea by calling her Bradley if you wish to.

Forgive us for wondering why.

[Beacool]

51. Calling someone by their legal name is an insult?

Manning did something that, rightly or wrongly, goes against Article 133 of the UCMJ.

“Any commissioned officer, cadet, or midshipman who is convicted of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.” ("gentleman" is meant to include both males and females).

Not everyone views this person's actions kindly.

[Zorra]

76. I get it now. You don't want to address Chelsea by the name she wishes to be addressed by because

you don't like something she did.

Is that what you are saying?

[uppityperson]

81. Her actions and her name/gender are 2 seperate issues. Continuing to refer to her as "Bradley" you

do to insult her for her actions. Thank you for clarifying.

[Marrah_G]

45. Bea, ask your transgendered friends how they feel....

...when people insist on calling them by the wrong gender. It's hurtful. When you do it to Chelsea manning just because you don't like what they did it hurts the transgender people that are reading it. Please, just stop doing it. You aren't a mean woman, but right now you are being hurtful to others. To be completely honest I was very sad to see this come from you.

[Beacool]

50. Marrah, I'm not trying to hurt anyone, specially anyone on DU who might be transgendered.

What I object to is people who are browbeating other DU posters because they are not calling Manning "Chelsea".

I'm sorry if I hurt you, it was never my intention to hurt anyone on DU over this issue. I purposely stayed away from the many posts on Manning until last night.

[Bluenorthwest]

57. A performer who has issues with ANY name change is pretty surprising. Performers change names often

and many don't use their given names at all. But you have trouble calling people what they ask to be called?
I'd also like to ask that you post a link to your actual hidden post so we can judge the accuracy of your characterization of that post against the reality. I mean, telling us about it seems self serving when you could show the facts of the matter so easily.

[Beacool]

61. Oh boy, that's why it's always better not to touch these kinds of threads with a ten foot pole.

This is not about me and my personal feelings. My original sentiment was my objection to other DU members being criticized in a myriad of posts if they didn't' address Manning as a she.

Here you go:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3520855

I'm done with the whole issue.

Ciao

[randome]

66. And this, my DU compatriots, is how you DON'T win hearts and minds.

You're still cool in my book, Beacool, just for being honest.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Bluenorthwest]

69. Honest? Utterly evasive, dismissive uncommuicative and nonresponsive.

That poster refused to address any single question asked by others and would not clarify her own posts. About as dishonest as it gets.

[randome]

71. I'm only going by the posts in this thread.

But my central point remains: if someone doesn't 'get it', what is our objective? To help them 'get it' or to make them even more inflexible in their thinking?

I agree with Manny in this case about Hanlon's Razor. You can't counter ignorance effectively with dismissal.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[noamnety]

79. I don't think there's all that much to "get."

There are going to be a few people who screw up the pronoun or name just from habit, not intent. Hell, I may end up being one of them. Way way back, I did the typo of shame once on another forum of Osama when I meant Obama. People fuck up, sometimes spectacularly.

But if someone types Osama in a dozen posts when referring to Obama, you can be sure there's a message in it, and it's not a pretty one. Or if they make a point of calling him Barack Hussein Obama and say "that's his legal name" - yes, it's his legal name, but their little games are still transparent. It's the racist dog whistle.

It's pretty obvious that there are people here deliberately and repeatedly refusing to use the correct gender or name for Manning, and making a stand about it. At some point anyone believing that's accidental is just gullible or willfully blind. It's messaging.

In general, there's not a problem with people here "getting" what transgender means. They're just being asses, and I'm not gonna pretend otherwise.

So what's our intent? I don't think we need to "teach" people to be respectful of transgender people. There might be nuances of language to be taught, transgender as an adjective, not a noun, and so on. But for those who are willfully disrespectful of people's gender, the best we can do for objectives is make it clear that such bullshit isn't going to be tolerated here. It's like using racial slurs - this isn't an issue where we need to have a debate where each side has equally valid points to make. We draw a line and say this here is not acceptable.

What's fun is even when that message sinks in, they will still out themselves. I look forward to reading many posts about Chelsea Manning where DUers almost need medical care from all the semantic contortions they go through trying to construct their sentences without any pronouns at all.

[Beacool]

70. I have no problem with Manning's personal choices.

What I found disturbing were the many posts that I read in the last few days where DU members were badgered if they didn't use Manning's preferred gender and name. I don't think that people have a right to act as the enforcers of the PC police and browbeat DU members who may choose not to refer to Manning as a she.

I live across the river from Manhattan. People who are outside the mainstream are nothing new to me. I'm a live, let live kind of gal; but I don't like it when people act as if everyone should think and feel as if we were a collective.

[Ian David]

32. I have no problem with Bradley becoming Chelsea.

I'm much more troubled by Ben Affleck becoming Batman.

[Beacool]

35. Yeah, what's up with that?

Although I'm not understanding the thousands going on twitter to demand that he be removed from the project. There are far more important things to worry about than Affleck portraying Batman.

[Inkfreak]

44. Hey man, Affleck was da bomb in Phantoms yo!!

http://m.

[KinMd]

37. NBC news mentioned that Manninng will not get mail unless it's addressed to Bradley

[MannyGoldstein]

40. If there are any DOD-controlled personae out there

You know who you are - tell your overlords that their cognitive rigidity is even worse than mine.

[Boom Sound 416]

38. Great post

[MillennialDem]

42. It's more accurate to say Chelsea was treated as Bradley

[Bunnahabhain]

46. What we are witnessing is a form of one upmanship

There is no doubt that many folks experience real hurt, angst, and trouble from general society concerning their gender identity and sexuality divergence from the overwhelming statistical norm (before anyone goes off on me for using the word "norm" please go figure out the difference from the judgmental term of "normal" vs. using it in a descriptive stats way). I personally think it's fantastic that society is evolving and people are finding acceptance and being valued for who they are. What I am not finding so fantastic is watching people in the act of intellectual way-finding get attacked.

This game of moral/PC one upsmanship is disgusting me. I see people learning about something new or newish to them and getting brow beaten by people that are declaring themselves superior in their moral authority. I am unsure how cisgender and cissexual people were born with full knowledge of gender identity and sexuality issues regarding non-cis folks. I mean these people inhabiting their untouchable moral high ground here never had a learning curve over this? I don't think so.

So what I'm saying is I think we all need to cut each other some slack, and some of us, need to stop acting like they are the cis-police and get off their high horses.

[99Forever]

47. Many are confused and harber no malice.

A few others, however, are just plain jerks that aren't above saying ANYTHING, no matter how bigoted or hateful to sell their master's bullshit. Why these scumbags are allowed to keep posting here puzzles me to no end.

[lunatica]

49. Chelsea has been Chelsea in Bradley's mind for her entire life

I thought I'd just throw that in to show things and ideas that are nuanced, subtle and even confusing even to those who live the transgender identity crisis.

My philosophy is to go along with what they identify as. Cassius Clay also rejected his birth name. I always refer to that time as the time we knew him as, not the time he was Cassius Clay.

[shenmue]

53. People sometimes just make mistakes

I think there are people of good will who meant to say "She" and "Chelsea" and messed up because Chelsea was using the name Bradley up until recently. Some people are hostile but some are not. That's all.

[Demo_Chris]

74. I just think we need at least fifteen more threads discussing this...

Maybe twenty. Because fifteen or twenty people slow to adopt the pronoun SHE when referring to Pvt Manning is definately the most important fucking thing going on in the world today.

[bettyellen]

75. gosh Chris- is it me or do you like to put down other, less privileged peoples' concerns on a

regular basis? I'm sure you haven't seen a single fucking person claim this was the most important thing in the world, so why make that kind of crap up? We both know it's bullshit.