Sure, we can disagree, but most US states it seems, (legally) disagree with you as well. I wouldn’t call it a ‘matter of personal comfort’ either, but that seems to be your adamant mischaracterization - despite all evidence of the contrary.
Birth certificates are commonly altered during adoptions, do you have a problem with that, as well?
Drivers licenses and birth certificates are generally considered identity documents rather than historical documents, so altering identity documents to accurately reflect one’s identity would seem quite apt.
Of course, it’s silly, so you should quit stating it that way. Changing one’s sex is not necessarily the same thing as changing one’s gender, particularly since the purpose of surgery/treatment is* to align one’s biological sex with their gender.*
The problem I can see from your ignorant, inflammatory speech and sloppy terminology is you view biological sex > gender identity. Or that a person’s gender should be solely determined by their biological sex. No one has said that gender isn’t associated with biological sex -* that’s completely your own misunderstanding.* (What would be the purpose of sex reassignment surgery/treatment then?) No, what is being said to contradict your bigoted statements is that biological sex and gender are not always congruent.
And since, as evidence supports, altering biological sex is more successful in achieving congruence than altering gender identity - why wouldn’t that be the best course of care? Yes, this is where the issue is for you, since you consider gender identity “a matter of personal preference”, no? Like wishing for bigger boobs or being a tiger, amiright?
There are others. This site looks like it’s trying to make an effort to list U.S. espionage cases. Oddly, I don’t think it lists Clayton Lonetree’s case. Life, with parole after some portion of the sentence, looks like the usual sentence for the bigger cases: the Walkers, Aldrich Ames, Robert Hansson. The Falcon and the Snowman spies ended up getting 40 years, IIRC. OTOH, people like Theresa Squillacote ended up getting 21 years. The Rosenbergs, of course, got the chair.
All of the above actively tried to sell or give classified information to a foreign power. Usually for money, although Lonetree was blackmailed into providing the documents he was accusing of passing to a Soviet agent.
There are quite a few differences between the garden-variety espionage case, and what Bradley Manning, (A.K.A. Chelsea Manning) did. Manning, AIUI, did not take any money, yet was very reckless in the compilation and dissemination of the data s/he stole. OTOH, it hasn’t been shown that Manning was intent on finding and divulging the identities of agents working for the U.S. (Which already puts him/her ahead of Philip Agee.) Manning was not working for another country while performing his/her document collecting. Manning did intend for the American public to see the contents of those documents, unlike many of the spies listed above. Other than the recklessness, all of the above factors should partially mitigate the committed crimes, and therefore, their punishment.
OTOH, Manning swore an oath to safeguard classified information and willingly broke that oath. Further, IMHO, the info divulged was not so shocking to the conscience that the public’s need to know outweighed the harm in breaking that oath. Unlike say, if Ronald Ridenhour’s information about My Lai was similarly classified to the information that Manning stole. What in the document dump was so horrific that the American public needed to know now? (This is a different question than, “Should it have been classified in the first place?”) Unlike Snowden’s revelations, I didn’t see anything with Manning’s stuff that shocked me. I’m willing to have my mind changed. The airstrike and helicopter footage looked like fog of war-type collateral damage. Re, the killings of Taliban sympathizers, is the charge that the U.S. was running some sort of PRU-Phoenix Program-esque operation in Afghanistan? If so, were they killing the wrong people?
Anyway, Manning could have divulged to a Member of Congress, if s/he felt that the information needed to be disclosed. Members have a lot of leeway in what they may say in debate on the floor. If the information was that shocking, like it was for My Lai, I don’t think we’re so far gone that it wouldn’t have gotten out. Finally, the size of Manning’s breach, if not its scope, is quite severe. Modern technology allows the comparatively easy compilation of vast amounts of information. I do not think that the Walkers would have shied away from divulging a million documents to the Soviets; it’s just the IT of the time did not readily permit such a vast disclosure. And what was the Army thinking allowing a PFC access to such a giant collection of data, to R/W drives, and seemingly no document controls or tracking?
So, I think Manning deserves punishment, not adulation, and not to be treated as a hero or prisoner of conscience. S/he sounds like a very confused person who should never have been in a position to safeguard nor access that sort of data. Hanging is ridiculous, though I’m not surprised to hear people call for it. Is 35 years enough, with parole after some undetermined date? Perhaps. I think it’s more punitive than it needs to be, but I don’t think it’s outrageously out of line, given the sentences for espionage-related offenses I linked to above.
What was outrageously out of line from where I’m standing, were elements of Manning’s pre-trial confinement. Stripping Manning naked, confining him/her to solitary, and practicing periodic sleep deprivation looked despicably punitive and retributive. Further proof that the one true crime is to embarrass the King. Given the confinement, I’m not surprised at the apology, nor the request for forgiveness. Three years of solitary, plus coping with a incipient gender identity disorder, will change anyone’s mind.
As to my pronoun usage, I do not know whether Manning actually suffers from a gender identity disorder, or whether Manning is revealing his/her condition in an attempt to secure a more lenient sentence or prison. If Manning actually does suffer from this condition, then, like any other health disorder, the prison should do what it can to ameliorate it, balanced with the cost of fully treating the condition. I do not believe the costs of hormonal therapy are so onerous that they should be denied Manning, if that’s what s/he needs, though I too would prefer that any reassignment surgery be performed on her own dime.
See it’s like this. He betrays his country, and thereafter has the balls to ask the same country to pay for his medication to change his gender. I could care less if he gets anything above the necessities of life. He’s in a military prison for crying out loud. It’s not suppose to be pleasant.
What about all the others who want to undergo transgender treatment but can’t afford it? Should we pay theirs too, or wait for them to commit a felony and give it to them when they are incarcerated?
Fuck him, he can do whatever he wants when he’s released.
What about all the others who want to undergo chemotherapy treatment but can’t afford it? Should we pay theirs too, or wait for them to commit a felony and give it to them when they are incarcerated?
Not a great argument, given the state of health care in the US. There are people who can’t afford to get cancer treatments. Does that mean we shouldn’t treat prisoners with cancer?
Anyway, regardless of what you think Manning in particular deserves, it doesn’t excuse the naked prejudice shown by Smapti towards transfolk in general.
Granted, I don’t know how ‘disinterested’ these particularly physicians are, but I recall evidence presented during the trial alluding to Manning’s gender confusion which all took place before the leak (the picture dressed as a girl, testimony from another transgender person Manning frequently chatted with online, etc).
I pretty much agree with** Gray Ghost’s** entire analysis (although I won’t quibble about gendered pronouns, nor am I opposed to SRS in prison), particularly the quoted parts. Manning’s pre-trial treatment was appalling and (I believe) even resulted with 112 days credited by the Judge due to “excessiveness”. Which is not the issue, the policy (or lack thereof) that allowed this type of mistreatment to go on needs to be addressed.
And the same could be said about inmates receiving health care, dental care (dentures, even!), psychiatric care, education, etc, that they couldn’t afford on the outside. The point of confinement is not only punishment and revenge, but also rehabilitation. Most inmates are going to be released back into society and it is in our best interest that they are released to be functional, contributing members – less likely to re-offend. And a big part of that is treating underlying mental health issues and assisting them in acquiring a skill that they can use to support themselves on the outside. I know some people may have a hard time with that, but incarcerating people and only focusing on punishment aspect incurs a big social and economic cost - aside from the obvious human rights issues.
I think what is happening quite a bit in this thread is conflating Manning’s criminal status/conviction with how gender dysmorphia is generally regarded or misunderstood by the public.* Defending gender dysmorphia disorder or advocating for transgender rights should not be mistaken for defending Manning’s crimes.* I have a lot sympathy for Manning, but I view the case very much like Gray Ghost’s analysis. I wish she could have found help before entering the military or that her deteriorating mental status was properly identified and dealt with whilst in the military, so perhaps this all could have been avoided. That doesn’t mean Manning isn’t culpable.
Try again. Pollard offered himself up as a spy for Israel for hard cash. That is absolutely not at all what Manning did.
I’d never be so stupid as to claim bona-fide espionage hasn’t been harshly punished. But at least you were in the same region, if not the same ballpark.
Perhaps you can show me which law Pollard was convicted of breaking, and which law Manning was convicted of breaking. If they are different crimes (like how first degree murder and involuntary manslaughter reflect different levels of culpability), then the seriousness of the offenses should speak for themselves.
So what, precisely, were these analogous cases you found of people being convicted for espionage for which they received lesser punishments?
No matter what you think of Manning, at least his actions let us find the secret bigots on this board. Well, at least, the stupid ones who couldn’t figure out they were giving themselves away by this thread. We can be happy that we never ever have to hear anything from these vile filthy scum ever again.
You have a problem with trans people? Why, exactly?
I’m not surprised that jingoes are also trans-phobic.
Manning, like Ellsberg, is heroic. Anything that shakes the Empire that much is truly wonderful. But to bring it down to Earth a bit, are people really sympathetic with the helicopter crew who were gunning down civilians, and laughing about it?
It wouldn’t surprise me if we could add anti-Arab racism to the list. Hollywood (which is supposedly so liberal) has been pushing that crap for years.
That was already done when we proved that there are murderers who get lower sentences. And none of them were deliberately tortured while in prison, either.
I mean, the Manning thing is a large part why I support Snowden. The military showed their true colors in how they treated Manning while awaiting trial. Before, I would have seen Snowden’s running away and trying to sell stuff as indicative of his true intent, but now I just think it’s what he’d have to do to avoid that cruel and unusual punishment.
I will always support people trying to get away from torturous thugs.
IANAL, nor did I really follow the case. I figure the state doesn’t usually imprison people for 35 years for no reason. Still, I am compassionate to Manning.
I hope Manning receives enough snail mail to keep busy. I wouldn’t mind if Manning received small amounts of estrogen (if desired) through the psych department- on the condition of good behavior. Maybe the dosage could be increased with good behavior. I know some people don’t want Manning to have any ‘treats’ at all, but I am afraid that imprisonment will be punishment enough regardless. Maybe the sentence could be reduced with evidence of rehabilitation, whatever than means in this case.
I’m not sure Manning is asking for any gender-specific medical treatment, I am only following so closely…