Very well written.
1 Like
An insightful therapist named Anne Vitale has questioned the disease
model of “gender identity disorder,” which suggests a problem within
an affected person. She has instead suggested the concept of Gender
Expression Deprivation Anxiety Disorder (GEDAD), where the real
culprit is the suppression of one’s identity and expression in
response to external pressures or self-hatred.
I found this a particularly useful part of this article and wanted to point out that the medical/pshychiatric landscape of the last 20 years has changed a lot for trans folk. It is still an incredibly difficult experience to navigate, and few people connect with resources when social pressures, whether that is puberty, parents, church, or “peers” that help them understand what is going on. Being transgender is not common, means you are an easy target for ostracism, bullying and worse. There are many good reasons to not expose oneself. But the pressures that occur when not dealing with transgender issues are immense and soul crushing.
Chelsea Manning is not Chaz Bono, and this is not an easy packaged story meant to entertain the masses (all tittering aside). I appreciate that Andrea James has put a thoughtful article together that addresses the complexity of representation and how Manning’s story impacts the media narrative of transgender. It isn’t drag, and the pronouns matter.
2 Likes
Changing ones mind is not the same thing as a conflict that existed all along.
What you’re positing as truth is pure speculation on your part, and I find it very inappropriate, and intentionally provocative. In short, please take a walk.
1 Like
So I’m going to go ahead and ask.
…people in Manning’s situation can drag you down with them emotionally if you engage personally
Is the tone of this article… denunciatory?
2 Likes
There isn’t a button for it but I ‘dislike’ this article.
6 Likes
Not everyone who has a trans history is enamored of the people who claim to be trans leaders. I disagree strongly with Andrea James and Autumn Sandeen and their facile pro-cia or pro-nsa propaganda.
Perhaps you would do better to look more deeply for people to write about trans people.
7 Likes
I am Spartacus.
2 Likes
“Changing ones mind is not the same thing as a conflict that existed all along.”
That’s what I’m saying. The folks I know didn’t “change their minds,” they were trying to escape something that they weren’t dealing with head-on, and it bit them on the ass at the end of the day.
Also this:
For good or bad, Manning has shown that transpeople can have a significant impact on the world, and not just within queer-rights circles.
As far as who gets to represent those seeking freedom of gender expression, and freedom of identity…well, after years of watching that discussion, I just want to cry.
So many scream “I don’t feel represented.” while also crying “no, don’t let the drag queens represent us…no, don’t let the crossdressers represent us.” Honestly, the hate within the gender-variant groups has been as heated as the hate heaped upon them from outside those groups.
It wears one down.
4 Likes
no effing way am I bothering.
You’re not wrong. James went out of her way to avoid using any gendered pronouns for Manning. I was wondering if anyone else had noticed that. Like you say, it’s odd.
4 Likes
I think it’s because it’s such a deeply personal issue. One wants to be represented and such, to have others like them that are going through the same thing, but also for the same reasons, with the same choices, and… it’s just not always going to be like that. I think there’s also a lot of judgment that gets passed around for all the varying gender stuff, like people hating on those who want to fit into the binary, to others hating on the ones that treat it all as nothing more than fun and a fashion statement, to others where it’s more of a performance art, and more still who do nothing because they feel no change can ever be enough.
It’s really sad and really frustrating. I’d like to say that it shouldn’t matter and that all the gender variant people should band together, but I don’t think that’s realistic. So I don’t have any solution myself.
I’ve often found a lot of the “leaders” to be dismissive of anyone who didn’t agree with their particular view of transness. I think other voices would be really awesome and a welcome addition.
Thank you, definitely an excellent point, and it certainly seems telling that the author here seems to have avoided pronouns when referring to Chelsea Manning, opting rather for the repetition of “Manning,” and it feels a bit like it’s leveraging the present pronoun avoidance of the media as a means of separating her from the trans* community. I have no issue at all with separating her actions from the community, but it really seems like an attempt to deny her the opportunity to identify as trans*, just because it’s not conducive to establishment acceptance of trans* people. It ends up being a microcosm of what happens in the general LGBT community, where trans* people, bi/pan people, asexual people, women, people of color, etc. get jettisoned because there’s a chance that a few wealthy white gay cis men can get rights by riding the image of the “cute” gay man. Just as “Gender identity distress does not absolve anyone of personal responsibility,” being part of a minority group doesn’t absolve one of the responsibility to be inclusive, even when it’s inconvenient.
4 Likes
I didn’t like this article at all. You’re obviously unhappy with the outcome of Manning’s actions but what, exactly, would you prefer her to have done differently?
Are you saying that she should never have joined the army and dealt with her issues in a different way? Those events were many years ago, so it’s hard to see the relevance of writing an article about it now, especially when the overall tone is so unsympathetic.
Or are you saying (and to be honest it really sounds like this is what you’re saying) that having joined the army, leaked the information, and stood trial for it, she should just suck it up and live as a man, as a kind of extra punishment beyond the 35 years she’s already been sentenced with? Because if so I find that attitude very hard to understand.
3 Likes
I find the accusation that this is some sort of neurotic attention-seeking behavior to be infuriating, for multiple reasons.
First, those of us who’ve actually been paying attention knew years ago that Manning had considered transitioning. There was a public statement from her relatives and lawyer that she was postponing a decision about transitioning until the court martial was resolved. So the announcement that she has committed to transitioning is no surprise at all.
Second, Chelsea Manning has legitimate reasons to seek public attention. The most “selfish” is that her survival is at stake: people who make trouble for the powerful face brutality and death, and Chelsea Manning is going to prison, an institution designed to hide the abuse of prisoners. It’s a tactical decision: going “John Hancock” means that the authorities will target you, but if you’re an advocate of a popular cause, you can hope that you will get some popular support and survive – and advance your cause. How many whistleblowers vanish, their revelations never making it to public attention?
Third, the accusation that activists are simply narcissists who are seeking attention for satisfaction of their own neuroses is a familiar and recurring one. It’s been used against Martin Luther King, Jr., and the civil rights movement; it was used against the movement to stop the Vietnam War; I expect it goes much farther back. The purpose of the accusation is obvious. The powerful – the state and corporations – have enormous resources to broadcast their views, but activists of any sort must overcome tremendous obstacles to reach the public.
I firmly believe that Chelsea Manning is the greatest hero we know of in the 21st century; her decision in exposing the secrets of the US government and military was the most important individual political action in decades. And I have always seen her political actions as continuous with her courage in confronting the challenges in her personal life.
5 Likes
As a transwoman myself, and I also fear how this will make the Transgender Community look.
Most of the transpeople I know, including myself suffered terribly before transitioning, and doing so probably saved our lives. Transitioning in my case gave me a second chance at life, and a chance to be “normal” like everybody else and it is a choice that I am happy I made.
Unfortunately, not everyone with gender dysphoria makes the decision to transition but instead choose more self destructive ways to end their suffering. Put in that context, Chelsea Manning’s leaks sound like the work of a person who didn’t have any regard to their own future.
Just like the author of this piece, I am happy that the press transpeople have been getting lately is depictions of transpeople as normal people just like everybody else. But the other side of the picture from the happy, well adjusted transperson, is the distraught and desperate in need of help and support.
Manning’s decision to transition and her crime are inextricably linked in the public’s mind. My fear is that it will stay linked after Chelsea Manning fades from the headlines.
1 Like
Then read what I posted again.
Or, hey, let’s try this: exactly what thing do you think Chelsea Manning is trying to gain by owning the identity that was outed against her will (“re-asserting old news”, FFS), and (more importantly) why do you think that thing is wrong?
4 Likes
Joining the army is probably not a good move for anyone who is a teenager or in their early twenties. But guess what? That’s who they like to sign up.
2 Likes
Booker T. Washington versus W. E. B. Du Bois, all over again.
2 Likes
