Today's LGBT phobic thread:

[joshcryer]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023467863

[joshcryer]

1. Got 3 hides in this thread so far.

Apparently I can't call the OP like I see it. A vile homophobic screed. Oh well.

There is nothing fucking "WTF" about Bradley being as he is as a human being!

[Th1onein]

18. Get real.

I'm sure you know better. ANYONE (besides someone with an axe to grind) can easily see the motivation behind the post to which you refer, and you are wrong.

[LuvNewcastle]

2. I have to admit that I originally rec'ed that thread.

It had nothing to do with any negative feelings on my part about trans people. I'm just scared for Manning. He's a little, frail guy and he's about to be sent to a tough prison, probably Leavenworth. They will already know that he's gay, and now this picture will be passed around the prison. Gay men already have a tough time in prison, but transgender people are considered the lowest except for child molesters. He'll simply be referred to as a 'bitch.'

If he spends any time at all around the general population, his chances of survival are slim. He'll either be attacked or he'll kill himself. The despair a person feels when he's looking at decades in such a miserable situation is overwhelming; it's just plain hell. If anyone thinks it's tough being transgender in the Army, it's a cakewalk compared to being in prison.

That's all I'm concerned about, Manning's mental health and his overall safety. The thread we're talking about was offensive, though. I don't think it was truly intended to be offensive, but that's the way it is. Catherina should either delete it or add some sort of explanation to the OP. I think deleting it would be best.

[joshcryer]

3. I think the original intent was offense at a smear.

But the doubling down and acting as if Mannings identity was a bad thing made me think, no, this was something more. The OP clearly thought it was a genuine smear to those who supported Manning and the American populace as a whole, and I think that is the offensive bit.

There's nothing wrong with his gender identity and there's nothing, as the OP title suggests, "WTF" about it at all.

[MadrasT]

7. Completely agree.

I could not follow the "logic" and then I realized the "logic" was actually due to some twisted phobic shit.

Once I saw it, the whole "WTF" drama make me want to

[joshcryer]

9. You'll note the "WTF" was edited out in the final edit.

Proving once and for all the OPs intent.

[Th1onein]

19. I'm glad you reminded me to rec it!

I almost forgot. And thanks to joshcryer for providing me the link on this thread to do it so easily!

[bravenak]

4. I read the whole thing from beginning to end and I was shocked!

I was like wtf? Ok nice picture, he looks comfortable n happy like that and I don't get what's wrong with the photo. Is something wrong with me? It must be hard to feel like you're in the wrong body.
If the picture is so wrong why post it again? The defense put it out there so we'd know more about Bradley Manning. Understand the issues he was dealing with and make us sympathize. It's working on me since he spoke in court.

[joshcryer]

5. Indeed.

The picture was horrific, insulting, dismaying, humiliating, to the OP.

But then it was clarified that the defense put the picture out there to put Bradly in a more sensitive light, and suddenly the OP changes their tune?

It is disgusting.

Bradly's identity, regardless, if the Army released the images without his permission or if the defense released the images by intent, is irrelevant. It is who he is. The OP made a big deal of it as if the images were released to "smear" him which makes me think the OP thinks the images are, unambiguously, insulting. It's a disgrace.

The fact that he spoke of his gender identity with his chats with Assange leads me to conclude the OP doesn't even understand him and who he really is.

[bravenak]

6. I dont think the op cares about him at all.

A photo of him being himself should not be considered a smear. He obviously was okay with us seeing it so maybe he knew he looked good? A man in a dress is not a shameful thing! We had cross dress days in high school in the late 90's and it seemed like the boys couldn't wait for it to come. They got together with us and painted their nails and got wigs and went to the MAC counter. We had transgendered people at school and they used the bathroom with us girls.
I'm glad I'm a part of my generation. We don't have it as hard as those that came before us.

[joshcryer]

8. It shouldn't but that's how it was characterized.

Read the edits, it was all about how he was being smeared, when in reality, that is who he is and how the defense presented him at his wishes. He wants to be known that way, and the OP clearly was offended by that. And I'm offended by any OP that wishes to smear Bradley by claiming, in effect, his own identity is offensive!

[bravenak]

10. It was wrong.

Did you know Thomas Roberts on msnbc was gay? He got engaged to his husband and several anti gay republicans congratulated him and he was like wtf? I'm sorry but I'm watching morning joke and I never knew that. He's so cute.

[joshcryer]

11. 4 hides now, I suspect I'll be banned soon.

Good luck.

[theHandpuppet]

12. They're crawling out from the woodwork like cockroaches

This is getting ridiculous.

[Neoma]

13. SHE IS NOT TRANSPHOBIC.

Aren't you forgetting this little part of her post?!

[hlthe2b]

14. I agree with you Neoma... I believe that OP poster's intent has been very much misunderstood.

As emotional as the subject, I wish we could all give each other a modicum of "benefit-of-the doubt" before jumping to conclusions. There are far too many homophobic, transphobic, racist, and otherwise bigoted people out there needing to be addressed, rather than misdirecting our focus on supportive, yet misunderstood targets.

[Neoma]

15. It's the protrayal that the condition is a mental health issue that is the problem here.

THAT is the outrage. Although, sad enough it's outrageous for trying to attach a different stigma to being transsexual. There's already enough stigma with being Transsexual without adding the horrendous amount people get with mental illnesses. It's a sad way to be against that mode of thinking, even though it's not originally meant as a comment about mental illness, things sting.

[Bonobo]

16. I agree as well and I think the author of this OP

Is being a disingenuous $&@!?$&.

Anyone that knows the history here knows that josh is nursing reactionary wounds because he and Catherine have butted heads over south and central American policies.

In other words, making shit up for a personal agenda and ignoring the actual intent of the op.

[Th1onein]

20. I agree with you, too, Neoma. She's not. And I can't BELIEVE

We're arguing about something that should be obvious to even tree bark.

[idwiyo]

21. +1. Catherina is NOT transphobic in any way shape of form. It's sick how her OP was misrepresented.