Bradley or Chelsea?
by Susan Estrich
August 27, 2013 01:44 AM | 2235 views | 1 1 comments | 26 26 recommendations | email to a friend | print
In a letter released on the “Today” show, Army Private Bradley Manning announced: “As I transition into this new phase of my life, I want everyone to know the real me. I am Chelsea Manning. I am a female.”

Actually, no. Manning is a criminal.

Before you jump all over me for being insensitive to gender identity issues, let me point out that this is not a “new phase” of life for the man convicted of multiple counts of leaking confidential military and diplomatic documents.

This is a 35-year prison term. There is a reason it is called punishment.

I’m all for helping individuals deal with gender issues and providing appropriate medical treatment. There are far, far too many people who suffer and get no help at all.

But if we’re going to provide help, and we should, let’s start with those who don’t betray the men and women they serve with and their country by leaking hundreds of thousands of documents.

And by the way, let’s not blame such criminal acts on gender issues, as Manning and his attorney have sought to do. According to testimony presented by the defense at trial, Manning decided to betray his country as a result of a traumatic breakup with a boyfriend, after which he sent an email with a picture of himself wearing a wig and lipstick to a sergeant, saying, “This is my problem.”

Actually, his problem was disloyalty, not hair and makeup.

It reminds me of the old days of the “Twinkie defense” and the “abuse excuse.” A traumatic breakup complicated by gender identity issues must be painful. Plainly, if that were all that were involved, it would be entirely appropriate for Manning to seek medical therapy. But no matter how painful the breakup, no matter how painful the gender issues, it’s not an excuse to betray your country — and then expect the military to provide the kind of help that plenty of law-abiding citizens need but don’t get.

You want to stigmatize people who are dealing with gender identity? Make Bradley Manning the poster person. Turn it into an excuse for espionage. That’s a sure way to build support and sensitivity.

“As she begins her jail term, it may help to shine the spotlight on the plight of transgender people in prison,” the Rev. Darlene Nipper, deputy executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, told the press.

I’m sure Nipper means well. I’m sure I’d agree with her on many things: I’d like to shine the spotlight on the plight of transgender people in elementary school and high school and college, and the challenges they face, and the need for sensitivity and appropriate accommodations.

I’d like to shine the spotlight on the plight of transgender people facing discrimination in employment and housing, and the need for greater understanding of the realities of gender.

I’ve written repeatedly applauding those individuals with the courage to come forward and educate the rest of us, individuals who have made clear just how real and painful these challenges can be.

But in my book, anyway, when you’re dealing with someone who betrays their country, it doesn’t matter whether it’s a he or a she or a he who wants to be a she any more than it matters what their race or religion or ethnic origin is. Manning is lucky that a prudent and wise military judge chose not to convict the Army private of the most serious crime charged — aiding the enemy — and chose to impose a sentence of 35 years, rather than the 90-year maximum.

Now is the time for Manning to get out of the spotlight and face the consequences.

Plainly, Manning has no intention of doing so.

In the letter released on “Today,” Manning concluded, “I look forward to receiving letters from supporters and having the opportunity to write back.”

“Supporters”? Excuse me. Supporters of what?

Susan Estrich is a law professor in Southern California.
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Elveto Drozo
August 27, 2013
To sum up

(1) you enjoin the public to align with the terms of the judgment

(2) except for what concerns speaking of treason

(3) that you assert despite the judgment of the court

Can you spell "double standard"?
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides