Skip to main content


I like this picture of Chelsea Manning.

I think she exudes energy from both genders as it captures a moment in time mid-transition. For some people this could be an unsettling image and yet I find there is something captivating and almost noble about it.

Regardless of what you think of her she has a right to treat her dysphoria which no doubt has been gnawing at her for a very long time. She is just one more transgender person in this world trying to fit in and find a comfort zone so she can live in peace.

She will look different again in a year or two but this moment in time is worthy of capture on film because it speaks directly to the discomfort that many people who shun us have regarding ambiguity of gender and how it manifests itself.

To them I would just say take a long hard look. She doesn't bite.


  1. C.M. simply has too much baggage to be a poster person.

    1. She doesn't have to be a poster person and neither does Caitlyn Jenner for that matter. We are as flawed as the next person and my point is specifically that. We don't need to be remarkable we just need to be ourselves.

  2. She doesn't have to be a poster person but she has chosen to become a poster person by doing the photo shoot and allowing her image to appear in Vogue, etc. For many people it isn't a question of how she presents but what she has done. A presidential pardon doesn't negate the serious nature of her past dishonorable behavior.

    1. Again Kati that is not relevant to the question as to her transgender nature and magazines cover the famous as well as the infamous. Many people will criticize the exposure and that is their right.

  3. I also have real concerns about what Chelsea did but regardless of my opinions she's served her time, and it's time to move on for her and us. Yes, her photo shoots and articles and so forth harken to Caitlyn Jenner but it's much different, I think. Chelsea has a story to tell, about her being trans, about her crime and punishment, and about her life, which is just getting started again. I'm keeping an open mind.

    I agree, I love this photo. It reminds me of Jamie Lee Curtis' photos with gray hair, no makeup. Chelsea is unapologetically there, a trans woman, just being herself. The image speaks volumes.

  4. I would have to conclude that I am completely missing the point you are trying to convey. Having spent my adult life dealing with confidential information I very little sympathy for individuals who betray that trust. Perhaps this mindset is blinding me from seeing what you see.

    It's time for me to get back to being a reader and not a commentator.

    1. Kati you are always welcome to comment but you are reading far too much into this. Just look at her photo outside of the context of her history. I think it is a very interesting photo of a trans person.

      There are plenty of trans people I am not overly fond of and that would include Jenner, Boylan and a few others and yet they all have a story to tell whether we like it or not.

    2. Indeed, Kati, I'm sorry if you feel that I'm challenging or denying your points. I'm just expressing my own for what they're worth. I also feel strongly that what she did was very wrong, as was Snowden's, and whoever else judges themselves to be the noble patriot who releases secret information to make their point. There is no excuse for it.

      I hope you keep commenting.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

how times change

How times have changed.

Whereas transition was something not to even contemplate for us, here is a young trans person who felt the opposite pressure. She looks and sounds extremely passable but decided it wasn't for her despite the social media presence of young transitioners potentially inspiring her to.

We are all different and I happen to think she's rather a smart cookie as well...


As transgender people, organized religion hasn't really been our friend however on the other hand it has often had little to do with true spirituality. I needed to learn this over time and much of what I was taught growing up was steeped in the judgmental superstition of society instead of what some creator would demand of me.

Regardless of your belief system, you are a child of the universe and have been endowed with uniqueness and goodness of spirit. You have probably never wished anyone ill will and you have tried your best to live within the absurd coordinate system of humanity. Yet somehow belonging to the LGBT community was entirely your fault.

As I have grown older this inherent irrationality became increasingly evident to me. I knew I was a fundamentally good person and yet I was different in a way which was not of my choosing. Hence with this comprehension my self appreciation and esteem grew in proportion.

Religion for me today seems forever trapped in the misinterpretat…

let's please read carefully

This post is prompted by a recent comment I received to one of my older posts and I wanted to address it.

I used to wonder why some transgender people accepted Blanchard’s work until I think I figured out why: they may not have examined it closely enough. They would experience cross gender arousal and then accept it was Autogynephilia without properly understanding what the term meant and what the theory said: it is an invented sexual “illness” which makes people transition. In other words, it is the arousal itself which causes this desire and not a pre-existing gender identity which does not align with birth sex. Of course, Blanchard has no explanation for the origin of his proposed “illness” only that it is a form of sexual deviance.

My counter proposal? we transition despite this arousal. In other words, the transgender identity is pre-existing and the arousal is the result of the mismatching of burgeoning sexual feelings towards females and this misaligned identity; it is not per…