Posted on Feb 11, 2015
Thoughts: Chelsea Manning now writing for The Guardian?
8.28K
32
35
3
3
0
Politico reports Chelsea Manning now is going to write op-eds at The Guardian. From the article:
"[Manning] will write 'occasionally from Fort Leavenworth prison on the subjects of war, gender, and freedom of information' for the British newspaper's American site, [editor-in-chief, Katharine] Viner wrote in a staff memo. Manning will not be paid."
Questions: 1) What do you think of The Guardian giving Manning a platform? 2) Do you believe what she says will represent what most transgender service members and vets believe and value? 3) As a commentator, is she representing more than herself -- is she a true representive of trans community in general?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/02/the-guardian-hires-chelsea-manning-202383.html
"[Manning] will write 'occasionally from Fort Leavenworth prison on the subjects of war, gender, and freedom of information' for the British newspaper's American site, [editor-in-chief, Katharine] Viner wrote in a staff memo. Manning will not be paid."
Questions: 1) What do you think of The Guardian giving Manning a platform? 2) Do you believe what she says will represent what most transgender service members and vets believe and value? 3) As a commentator, is she representing more than herself -- is she a true representive of trans community in general?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/02/the-guardian-hires-chelsea-manning-202383.html
Posted in these groups: 
Transgender
Security
Transgender Security
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 14
5
5
0
The last I checked prisoners were not supposed to have a way to make money outside of jobs in prison and since she is a resident of the Correctional Barracks at Fort Leavenworth how is this possible.
(5)
(0)
CPT Zachary Brooks
SGT Jim Z. I think we should. Teach the prisoners how to be contributing members of society in some capacity (we always see the license plates cliche in movies) to help deter their costs and teach them to be a productive member of society. Explain to them the specifics of where their salary is going so they understand how their salary goes towards their bills.
It has merit for actual rehabilitation.
It has merit for actual rehabilitation.
(0)
(0)
(1)
(0)
PO1 Autumn Sandeen
SMSgt Minister Gerald A. Thomas, SCOTUS's decision in Turner v. Safely gives Manning the right to free speech. There's a four prong test, and it appears Manning has the right to write op-eds under that standard.
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/prisoners-rights
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/prisoners-rights
(0)
(0)
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
1) The guardian is a Private Press Organization. They are Profit based, and doing what they feel will make them money.
2) I don't think Manning has enough life experience overall to represent "most" of any demographic, whether it be Trans, or Vet.
3) There will be a perception that Manning is, which is worse. No one person can represent any demographic. President Obama cannot represent all Black Men, or all Men, or all people from Illinois, or all Americans, or all Democrats. Asking if manning is a "true rep of the trans community" is asking to fall into the "no true Scotsman" logical fallacy.
2) I don't think Manning has enough life experience overall to represent "most" of any demographic, whether it be Trans, or Vet.
3) There will be a perception that Manning is, which is worse. No one person can represent any demographic. President Obama cannot represent all Black Men, or all Men, or all people from Illinois, or all Americans, or all Democrats. Asking if manning is a "true rep of the trans community" is asking to fall into the "no true Scotsman" logical fallacy.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
This may not be a popular answer, but I think Chelsea should not be allowed to write for the newspaper that he/she gave all those U.S. secrets to. American authorities ought to clamp down on that, put a stop to it. She should not be a "commentator" from inside the Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth. I think that's just wrong -- whether it's about trans-gender issues, war, or freedom of information - whatever the topic.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
PO1 Autumn Sandeen, echoing the thoughts of others on this thread, I think the preemptive question is why is the Army even allowing this to take place?
(2)
(0)
PO1 Autumn Sandeen
I wrote a response, LTC Stephen C., to this same question when posed by Capt Christopher Mueller. Basically, the SCOTUS decision for Turner v. Safely gives Manning free speech rights in prison.
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/prisoners-rights
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/prisoners-rights
(1)
(0)
LTC Stephen C.
Sorry, I didn't read everything all the way through, PO1 Autumn Sandeen! Just makes me think that the Supreme Court is upside down like so many other things in our country right now.
(0)
(0)
PO1 Autumn Sandeen
Well, if SCOTUS is upside-down, it's been since 1987 -- that's the year of the Safely ruling.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Prisoners don't lose their constitutional rights solely by being incarcerated; however, those rights are certainly circumscribed to allow the prison to operate safely. For example, searches and seizures are permitted without warrants, or even probable cause. On the other end of the spectrum, prisoners are still protected from cruel and unusual punishment. Guards aren't permitted to randomly dole out beatings of inmates. I understand there are laws which prevent people from benefiting financially from their offenses, but without doing further research, I don't know whether that applies to military members convicted and sentenced by court-martial. But if PO1 Autumn Sandeen is correct, that doesn't seem to be an issue in Manning's case.
(2)
(0)
CW3 (Join to see)
I'd say penning an op-ed isn't benefiting directly from the offense, but then again the notoriety might have opened that door.... I just don't know.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
All this focusing on the transgender status is taking away from the real issue. Chelsea Manning is a traitor, and she deserves to rot in prison for the entirety of her sentence.
And those of you insisting on calling her Bradley and insisting she is a man, if you'd do it to this traitor, you'd do it to someone who was serving honorably. I consider that conduct unbecoming. Get over yourselves. Trans is not about you. I'm cisgender, and I don't GAF what someone else feels they need to do with their gender identity. Others' gender identity is theirs alone, and not mine to judge, and most certainly not yours.
Chelsea Manning is a traitor to the United States, nothing more, nothing less. Shut up about the trans issues, whether positive or negative, as focusing on that takes away attention from the fact that SHE IS A TRAITOR!!!!!!!
And those of you insisting on calling her Bradley and insisting she is a man, if you'd do it to this traitor, you'd do it to someone who was serving honorably. I consider that conduct unbecoming. Get over yourselves. Trans is not about you. I'm cisgender, and I don't GAF what someone else feels they need to do with their gender identity. Others' gender identity is theirs alone, and not mine to judge, and most certainly not yours.
Chelsea Manning is a traitor to the United States, nothing more, nothing less. Shut up about the trans issues, whether positive or negative, as focusing on that takes away attention from the fact that SHE IS A TRAITOR!!!!!!!
(1)
(0)
CW3 (Join to see)
Oh, and for those too lazy to look it up in a dictionary, I'll tell you what cisgender means. It means that I appear as male on the outside, and I feel male inside my head. So what's in my head matches my body. That's pretty predominant.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I love the manner in which you asked the question: "What do you think of The Guardian giving Manning a platform?"
Ultimately, that is the most important question in the cultural war sweeping the globe in general, and America in particular.
There are an infinite variety of viewpoints, from right to left, liberal to conservative, radical to rational, sensible to scatter-brained. Everyone has a right to whichever they choose and we who serve fight to preserve their right to choose and give voice to them all.
However, the choice remains in the hands of those with the printing presses, with the transmitters, classrooms and theaters, to determine which voices will be magnified and amplified.
It seems in the popular media - the Internet and talk radio - audiences control and they have chosen quite differently from centrally controlled media.
I find this difference fascinating.
Do you?
Ultimately, that is the most important question in the cultural war sweeping the globe in general, and America in particular.
There are an infinite variety of viewpoints, from right to left, liberal to conservative, radical to rational, sensible to scatter-brained. Everyone has a right to whichever they choose and we who serve fight to preserve their right to choose and give voice to them all.
However, the choice remains in the hands of those with the printing presses, with the transmitters, classrooms and theaters, to determine which voices will be magnified and amplified.
It seems in the popular media - the Internet and talk radio - audiences control and they have chosen quite differently from centrally controlled media.
I find this difference fascinating.
Do you?
(1)
(0)
PO1 Autumn Sandeen
I do.
It's not that she, in a technical sense, isn't a talented writer -- as a journalist I can tell you she's a pretty damn good writer. Example of her work:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/opinion/sunday/chelsea-manning-the-us-militarys-campaign-against-media-freedom.html?referrer=
And, Manning is very popular among many who see a wide open, transparent government as a value. She'll definitely have an audience for her articles.
It's not that she, in a technical sense, isn't a talented writer -- as a journalist I can tell you she's a pretty damn good writer. Example of her work:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/opinion/sunday/chelsea-manning-the-us-militarys-campaign-against-media-freedom.html?referrer=
And, Manning is very popular among many who see a wide open, transparent government as a value. She'll definitely have an audience for her articles.
(0)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
Thank you PO1 Autumn Sandeen for the link to the story purportedly written my Chelsey Manning. (Forgive the "purportedly" but I rarely trust the provenance of anything emerging from a publication. Editors may have altered the final product well beyond any semblance of the original work.)
However, for the sake of discussion, let's allow that it is her work. That being said, it's well written.
Is it factually accurate? I wish I could tell. Sadly, I suspect that it may be.
It doesn't seem that Manning is a political prisoner, convicted on some trumped up charge as retribution for simply "blowing the whistle". She even seems to accept her fate. However, her observations about what is or was happening in Iraq are troubling. Sadly, there is cause to regard them suspiciously.
What I find more interesting is that she is allowed to write critically of the events unfolding in Iraq while in a federal penitentiary and officials allow them to reach The Guardian for publication. I could speculate there, but won't. Let's just say that there is a story in that...
However, for the sake of discussion, let's allow that it is her work. That being said, it's well written.
Is it factually accurate? I wish I could tell. Sadly, I suspect that it may be.
It doesn't seem that Manning is a political prisoner, convicted on some trumped up charge as retribution for simply "blowing the whistle". She even seems to accept her fate. However, her observations about what is or was happening in Iraq are troubling. Sadly, there is cause to regard them suspiciously.
What I find more interesting is that she is allowed to write critically of the events unfolding in Iraq while in a federal penitentiary and officials allow them to reach The Guardian for publication. I could speculate there, but won't. Let's just say that there is a story in that...
(1)
(0)
PO1 Autumn Sandeen
Well, as I've written several times in the threads, the SCOTUS ruling in Turner v. Safely apparently gives Manning the free speech right. And, The Guardian is giving Manning a platform for that free speech -- a platform for Manning's opinions on three listed topic areas. Beyond that are our opinions.
(0)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
Heaven knows that although I'm a legal scholar, I haven't kept up with the twists and turns of SCOTUS decisions in recent years. (You may surmise I'm not a fan.) Once upon a time, felons surrendered the lion's share of their constitutional rights while behind bars. Correspondence was censored. I suppose I'll have to research this aspect out of curiosity.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
PO1 Autumn Sandeen
Can we please not call manning a she? last time I checked he was born a dude and is still one. Back on topic, I think that the people in charge of Leavenworth should cancel that privilege, manning is a convict and does not deserve this. When and if he gets out of jail, then he can write whatever he wants
Can we please not call manning a she? last time I checked he was born a dude and is still one. Back on topic, I think that the people in charge of Leavenworth should cancel that privilege, manning is a convict and does not deserve this. When and if he gets out of jail, then he can write whatever he wants
(1)
(0)
PO1 Autumn Sandeen
Hey SFC (Join to see), I'm a journalist for San Diego's LGBT Weekly. The Associated Press's Stylebook, considered the industry Bible on reporting style, says this about Chelsea Manning (now her legal name) and their stylebook:
http://blog.ap.org/2013/08/22/ap-editors-note-on-manning/
"The use of the first name Chelsea and feminine pronouns in Manning’s case is in conformity with the transgender guidance in the AP Stylebook. The guidance calls for using the pronoun preferred by the individuals who have acquired the physical characteristics of the opposite sex or present themselves in a way that does not correspond with their sex at birth."
In most mainstream media news pieces about or referencing Manning, almost all are going to use female pronouns in accordance with AP guidelines. Where one will media using male pronouns for Manning is in outlets that don't recognize trans people exist -- such as in socially conservative and Christian right press (WorldNetDaily, OneNewsNow, etc.) -- and when it's done in mainstream media outlets it'll be in op-eds/commentaries.
So for me personally as a journalist, I'm going to stick with the AP Stylebook.
http://blog.ap.org/2013/08/22/ap-editors-note-on-manning/
"The use of the first name Chelsea and feminine pronouns in Manning’s case is in conformity with the transgender guidance in the AP Stylebook. The guidance calls for using the pronoun preferred by the individuals who have acquired the physical characteristics of the opposite sex or present themselves in a way that does not correspond with their sex at birth."
In most mainstream media news pieces about or referencing Manning, almost all are going to use female pronouns in accordance with AP guidelines. Where one will media using male pronouns for Manning is in outlets that don't recognize trans people exist -- such as in socially conservative and Christian right press (WorldNetDaily, OneNewsNow, etc.) -- and when it's done in mainstream media outlets it'll be in op-eds/commentaries.
So for me personally as a journalist, I'm going to stick with the AP Stylebook.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
All other issues aside, I hope that Manning's views are not taken as representative of all trans service members. Manning broke an oath, is serving time in prison for it and shouldn't be anybody's representative.
I would hope that any serving transgender members of the armed forces would want to be just as honorable as their fellow service members and take their oath of service seriously.
I would hope that any serving transgender members of the armed forces would want to be just as honorable as their fellow service members and take their oath of service seriously.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Holy mackerel! I forgot all about Bradley/Chelsea Manning. So is he now a she (well can't change the DNA)? How did he get that work done? I'm guessing it makes him a lot more popular in prison.
I guess the Kinks were right Girls will be boys and boys will be girls
It's a mixed up muddled up shook up world except for Lola.
I thought you weren't allowed to make money when you were in the crossbar hotel. Isn't that why they stopped Charlie Manson from selling his hair sculptures?
I know I haven't answered the question but this is one of those stories that just leaves me with only more questions.
I guess the Kinks were right Girls will be boys and boys will be girls
It's a mixed up muddled up shook up world except for Lola.
I thought you weren't allowed to make money when you were in the crossbar hotel. Isn't that why they stopped Charlie Manson from selling his hair sculptures?
I know I haven't answered the question but this is one of those stories that just leaves me with only more questions.
(1)
(0)
Cpl Brett Wagner
TSgt J.D. Hall - it sure is a different world. Girls will be boys & boys will be girls.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google