Behind the scenes at CNN: How the media fails on Chelsea Manning’s gender »« An open letter to CNN on Chelsea Manning

Fighting for Chelsea, again

Access to transition-related healthcare for trans inmates, like Chelsea Manning, is an extremely pressing issue. I’m grateful that I was once again given the chance to draw attention to this injustice on CNN today:

Comments

  1. psanity says

    I admire your ability to be calm, informational, and very firm in this interview. I particularly noted your gentle, just slightly emphasized correction of the interviewer’s pronoun use — my take is that the reason he is flubbing his words toward the end is that he was subtly influenced into confusion about the words (he, Bradley) that he was supposed to be using about Chelsea. If I’m ever in the propaganda, excuse me, PR business, I want you on my team. I, too, am grateful you had this opportunity.

  2. says

    Once again, Lauren, you were fantastic. You kept your cool, you did not even break your stride, even when he tried to catch you off guard by calling you “Laura” at least twice. (Once might be considered an honest mistake, but the second is deliberate, and effectively bullying.)

    It was obvious who was the stronger party there.

  3. Harley F says

    I love how your erudite explanations left the interviewer stammering near the end. The public certainly seems to need some education… $100 for hormones? Did CNN only check the cost of Premarin and call it a day? In any case, you did great.

  4. Abdul Alhazred says

    Bravo!

    Lots of people who seemingly have no problem with the idea of prisoners getting medical care somehow don’t get this.

  5. Sassafras says

    Your interview has been posted to Towleroad.

    After reading that link I’m going to go reflect on my many gay friends who remind me that not all people in the gay community are vicious backstabbing transphobic asses.

  6. giordani says

    Both great interviews, Lauren, your a very good advocate.

    To some comments on Towleroad: Speechless about such ignorance from gay men about struggles of transgender. Expected more empathy…..

  7. says

    This was critical work at this juncture in history Lauren, thank you for engaging in it. It was the right thing to do, and very necessary at that. Someday you will be able to look back on this time in your life, and be so proud of yourself that you did this for her. This is such a very good thing that you’ve done. Thank you.

  8. felix says

    You were fantastic on CNN. (Haven’t watched the other yet)
    However, I do thing the term ‘co-morbid’ was a little too technical.

  9. km says

    “We sentence people to incarceration. We do not sentence people to untreated medical conditions”. Bravo! You were incredibly well-spoken and I am in complete awe of your absolute command of this interview. People: this is how it is done.

    • G D says

      Tiberius also your name is fictional, it is what your parents have chosen for you. Everybody can change that if they want because as babies they can’ t really decide if they like it or not. It’s legal almost everywhere. Now, do we need to change it because you disagree?

    • Sassafras says

      Odd … Natalie Reed got accused of dishonesty for using a pseudonym too, yet that’s rarely a tactic used on cis bloggers. How strange!

    • tiberiusbeauregard says

      I don’t have a problem with pseudonyms.
      What I do have a problem is people using pseudonyms, but pretending not to . THAT I find very irritating.

      • says

        I use my legal name in the media, it’s available on my Gravatar profile, and mentioned on my Twitter as well. I posted about it here when I had it changed in January. This is all pretty well known by now.

      • Sassafras says

        Most people who use pseudonyms don’t advertise that they’re doing so. That’s kind of the point of a pseudonym.

  10. rork says

    Yet another fan, just slower than most, to say:
    You were great.

    This can’t be news but here goes: Some gay men are biased cause in the conflict between them and the world, they decided the world needed changing, not them. They may feel righteous about that, and think acting otherwise cowardly. I’m not saying it’s right, in fact I think it’s an intellectual error, but an easy one to make. It’s true for them, and it sounds profound, so you’re tempted to generalize. I have to fight it myself. I don’t tell my 17 year-old daughter what it means to stick her toe in the river either. Not my toe, not my river.

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>