In an Interview with Diane Sawyer Friday night on
ABC, Bruce Jenner ended months of speculation by confirming he is in the process of
transitioning into a woman.
“I’ve
always been confused about my gender identity,” Jenner tearfully said at the
beginning of the two-hour special, which was partially filmed
inside of his home.
Bruce
told Sawyer he has always known he was different and believes he has “the soul
of a female.” At one point, the former Associated Press Male Athlete of the
Year was known for his chiseled physique, but he said his brain is more female
than male–and that his entire life has been lived as a lie.
“I am a
woman,” he stated. Although he identifies himself as female, Jenner feels a
woman can still “kick butt.” He also explained, “It’s not like I’ve been
dressing up like a woman, it’s like I’ve spent my whole life dressing like a
man.”
While
walking Sawyer through his childhood, Jenner described himself as a lonely
little boy growing up, who often cross-dressed in order to fight confusion
regarding his gender identity. He eventually grew up to be a “lonely big boy.”
The
reality TV star also made it clear that sexuality is separate from gender:
“I’ve always felt heterosexual… I’ve never been with a guy.”
He is
still unsure if his next relationship will be with a man or woman and explained
he considers himself “asexual” as of now, and at his current age is more
concerned with finally living under his true identity.
Speculation
about Jenner’s changing appearance has heated up over the past year, but the
65-year-old also revealed that at one point in the early eighties he started
taking hormones–but lost his nerve after five years. Due to the hormones, he
actually developed size-36B breasts.
In
addition to starting hormone treatment 30 years ago, Bruce also started
changing his face with a series of cosmetic procedures and removed the hair on
his face and chest with electrolysis. He claimed that two of his three
ex-wives, Linda Thompson and Kris Jenner, were both aware of his secret, and it
played a part in ending his marriages.
Jenner
explained he was also once caught wearing a dress by stepdaughter Kim
Kardashian and later by daughters Kendall and Kylie, after he was captured on a
computer spy cam in Kylie’s bedroom. After a talk from Kanye West, he said Kim
became more accepting of his transition.
Among the
more surprising revelations, Bruce told his guest he is both a Christian and a
Republican. He admitted he has at times been concerned his lifestyle puts him
at odds with the Bible–in particular, the book of Deuteronomy, which classifies
a man dressing as a woman as sin.
“I would
sit in church and always wonder, ‘In God’s eyes, how does he see me?’ … Maybe
this is my cause in life … This is why God put me on this earth… to deal with
this issue.”
When
asked about President Obama’s support for LGBT rights during the State of the
Union, the former Olympian admitted he is not a big fan of Obama.
“I’ve
always been more on the conservative side,” he said.
A puzzled
Sawyer asked him if he identifies as a Republican, to which Jenner answered,
“”Yeah. Is that a bad thing? I believe in the Constitution.”
While he
admitted he has at times had moderate suicidal thoughts, he now feels great
about ridding himself of the anxieties of hiding his identity from his children
and others.
His four
older children also spoke to Sawyer during the interview and all showed their
support. His son Brandon said: “I feel like I’m getting an upgraded version of
my dad.”
His son
Brody said of him coming out: “It finally makes sense.”
Jenner
has been taking hormones again for a year and a half now but has not yet made a
decision about full gender reassignment surgery.
“If this
is the only problem I have in life, I’ve got it made,” he told Sawyer. “In the
next house, I’m building a glam room.”
The
interview was a “farewell to Bruce Jenner,” according to Sawyer, but Bruce
explained he wasn’t necessarily saying goodbye but rather: “I’m saying goodbye
to people’s perceptions of me… I’m just doing what I have to do.”
“I’m
going to learn a lot in the next year,” Jenner added. “2015 is going to be
quite a ride.”
Sawyer
then teased that she may again catch up with the TV star for an additional
interview in a year.
While I don’t pretend to ‘get’ the many
concepts he/she talks about here and find the whole transsexual thing a bit
weird given that feminists have been working tirelessly to remove body parts
from a person’s identity and how they see themselves, I give Jenner due respect under the
constitution. Whether I would associate or do business with him/her... should still be MY choice, not his...
This must be blasphemy to both
the Christian right (who know that it is not for them to judge) and the holier
than thou left (who have claimed the preeminent right to be judgemental)….
TS Perhaps your choice is limited by the thinking of Jenner.What if he chooses to not associate with you despite YOU choosing to associate with him?. This leaves you with NO choice so I would be interested in your exposition as to the effect the constitution has on your respective choices.
ReplyDeleteFor the record, I have always lived by the creed that whatever people do in private remains their business. It only becomes my business if they try to involve me. Under those circumstances I may perhaps reconsider my opposition to the second amendment!.
Cheers from Aussie
Perhaps the question should be, who cares anyway. A 2 hour interview, who would waste 2 hour of their lives to listen to Jenner?
DeleteMaybe if you would listen to Jenner you would better understand the whole LGBT deal Louman. This is what he meant when he talked of being in a position to help the greater good with his struggles and change. Jenner talked of a lifelong struggle with his inner self not a wanting to be a woman all the sudden but an internal conflict that he has had all his life. It is this very conflict that allowed him to be the great male athlete that he once was. I found that to be quite interesting. With the notoriety of that olympic win and the notoriety of a truly ridiculous realty series Jenner is in a position to talk and be heard about the inner struggles of the LGBT community. He emphatically related that it was a feeling he had since he was a very young child that he felt more woman than man internally. He also emphatically stated that gender and sexuality are completely different that although he felt to be a woman, he was always attracted to women sexually, not men. I guess that would make him a lesbian when he gets done going through this I don't know and quite frankly he didn't know either. He also stated that at 65 he wasn't a highly sexual being anymore so he may never know.
DeleteLouman instead of being on your holier then thou bandwagon constantly why don't you "waste" an hour or two to enlighten yourself about those who are different for whatever the reason. LGBT in any form is rarely a choice. If you would have listened to Jenner you would have understood that. And by the way Jenner is a bit of a religious man and that is another struggle that he is going through
Rick.
DeleteI do not deliberately chose to disagree with you but surely this subject is something we need to experience prior to commenting on what is a purely personal situation. I cannot understand the rational for the story in the first place. Both Jenner and the interviewer had to agree to the interview and perhaps the Kardashian connection ensured publicity. I would prefer to read weather reports or a Railway time table for two hours. Louman can defend himself but perhaps you could consider his position just a little, maybe because I agree with him!!
Cheers from Aussie
King it isn't about agreeing with it or disagreeing, it is about taking the time to listen to someone who is willing to deeply tell their story and their feelings. Being a world class male athlete when younger this couldn't have been easy for Jenner but he is willing to talk about it. It is not for any of us to judge but what's wrong with listening to a man's story about what is going on inside something that most people don't have to endure. Instead we just want to shrug it off make our judgments and say it's all publicity or whatever. The Jenner/ Kardashian clan certainly wouldn't need to go this far to generate publicity they are quite good at it just living their sorry lives in front of all of us whether the scripted part for TV or the natural everyday part.
DeleteRick,
DeleteWho cares anyway.
If LBGT are stupid enough to want to get married, have at it, pay the marriage penalty and higher taxes, it's a win for government. Don't look to the rest of society to approve of your life style as it's all about them not me. I could care less. Don;t impose your views on me and we are good to go. If I chose not to do business with a LBGT person, that's my business not yours or the governments.
p.s. I care about Jenner as much as I do about you, not at all. What Jenner does is his business, don't seek public approval as it's his business.
The interview is all about ratings for Sawyer, sensationalism, acceptance for Jenner. I hate sensationalism and dislike people who seek approval for their decisions. Make your decision, live with it and move on. Until people like you realize it, this media trash will continue.
This must be blasphemy to both the Christian right (who know that it is not for them to judge) and the holier than thou left (who have claimed the preeminent right to be judgemental)….Well, what about the Christian right picketing military funerals? Not judgemental?
ReplyDeleteJudgemental they are.... yet they KNOW that judgement does not reside with them...
DeleteWhat a sick conversation ...
ReplyDeleteTotally.
DeleteKing.
ReplyDeleteI don’t see my position to be limited. The makeup of a society, its norms and customs, is or at least should be organic. Law ‘in a free society’ shouldn’t dictate to a population what behaviours are acceptable and which aren’t beyond those things that inflict harm or block the pursuit of daily life of another person. To be clear, I am not talking about limp wristed hurt feelings either when I talk about inflicting harm. One reason we have so damn many unhealthy fat people is that they got a trophy as a kid for coming in 30th place in a race run by only 30 kids… and it is of course bordering on hate to call someone fat when describing exactly how they look. If left to itself, though sometimes harsh, society looks after itself that way.
A side note: Australia has tended to follow or flow with the progressive movement and political correctness that has infected most of the west. While not as bad as the US, Australia now has obesity that is epidemic in proportion and yet, not to many years ago, you heard from people around the world about the Australian people being almost universally fit, with good health and vitality…. although that might have been tourism board propaganda .
The freedom of association flows in all directions. I have no problem with that… I have been around long enough and am opinionated enough to know that I don’t skip happily down the road with everyone… but that doesn’t mean that I shouldn’t have a right to express my opinion or provide rebuttal to someone else’s opinion. Of course if there are enough ‘me’s’ saying the same thing.. Perhaps it will create a new social norm. The problem I have is the legal barriers put up by some to prevent me from expressing my opinion. Of course allowing society at large to dictate the social norms of a country is threatening to some so they find ways to use law to protect them… and many times their egregious behavour.
An offhanded and organic example would be fashion… society will dictate what it likes and what it doesn’t. It will also show approval or disapproval of the wearer if the cloths are inappropriate or too far out of the socially accepted norm. Some people will still choose to wear the cloths(as is their privilege) and absorb the rejection they receive. It is their choice and anyone who attempts to make them stop with either force or coercion should then face the full weight of the police. (That is, or should be their primary job) It isn’t for a Saudi style fashion police to create and enforce a law based on some one else’s idea of fashion that puts people’s personal preferences in direct conflict with the state.
TS My thanks, your comments are interesting although if time were of the essence, the degree of loquaciousness would sometimes be unsettling.
DeleteYour assessment of the obesity problem here in Aust is spot on, it seems to involve mainly the kids but young adults and many in the economically and socially deprived group are also severely affected. Occupations and pastimes which involve sitting at computer desks and take away food joints are the biggest worry. Having agreed that we have a problem, I assure you the problem is far smaller(pun intended) than exists in the US at present. Government are making noises and schools are offering encouragement but little else. The eating habits of the population have changed inversely to the exercise routine of the general public.
We still have the sporting teams who mostly remain fit and healthy and we still excel at the sports we play both on a National and international level. In fact I believe, on a per capita basis Australia out performed almost all other nations in the Olympic games held post WW2. Perhaps the developed world is progressing towards another metamorphosis when we shall eat ourselves into extinction and the poor, starving and malnourished will ascend to the top of the heap and learn from the mistakes that we are currently making. It is because of this generational ability to make mistakes that I study America.You are about a century ahead of us and we must look to your history to observe your achievements and mistakes.
To continue my vision for the America I want to see. I want to see less emphasis on corporate profit and more on old fashioned loyalty both to and from employees. Cadburys, the chocolate people built villages for their workers and treated the workers as part of the family. I believe Henry Ford and other large manufacturers also did much for their workforce, often at the same time strenuously fighting against unionism. I would like to see an America where once again effort is rewarded, where a man can work hard and earn more than a man who produces less for his employer. I want the distinction between management and labour to be retained and I want to see every child taught the basic facts concerning the make up of an economy.
There are three components which enable a fire to burn and continue burning.Fuel,Heat and Oxygen are the components and removal of any of these will extinguish the fire. Any economy, other than the hunter gatherers and subsistence agriculture requires three components to survive even at the lowest family level. These are Raw Materials, Labour and Capital. The land supplies the material, the people provide the labour and capital is provided by those who need investment opportunities. This is the basic economic structure and all other models have their origins in this formula.
Cheers then from Aussie
Please excuse Aussie spelling, My US spell check is US at present!!
K,
DeleteIf you have access to books please read the Reckoning by David Halberstam. A comparison and history of the Ford Motor Company and comparison to Nissan. It was written in 1986. If you don't and are interested, send me your address and I will send you a copy.
From Publishers Weekly
Powerfully developing his thesis that the complacency and shortsightedness of American workers and their bosses, especially the automakers of Detroit, have led to a decline of industrial know-how so critical that Asian car makers, particularly the Japanese, have virtually taken over the market, Halberstam tells in panoramic detail a story that is alarming in its implications. Immediately ahead lies a harsh scenario that will see America's standards of living fall appreciably only sacrifices will restore our "greatness." This lengthy book with its skilled, dramatic interweaving of two little-known stories the inside struggles of the Ford organization (including the firing of Lee Iacocca) in the 1970s and the growth of the Japanese automotive industry, notably Nissan, since the 1950scompletes the trilogy Halberstam began with The Best and the Brightest and The Powers That Be. Here is fresh and crucially meaningful material researched with notable thoroughness, replete with graphic portraits of top American and Japanese industrialists competing blindly on the one hand and with brilliant cunning on the other. The book is among the most absorbing of recent years, every page contributing to the breathtaking picture of an America that is going to learn to retool
The real Henry Ford as exhibited in this book isn't quite so flattering.
Sorry for my writing skills… I write as I think and oft times my thoughts overrun my ability to translate it to written word… thank god for spell check, as my fingers have a mind of their own.
DeleteYour recollection of the good done by many manufactures such as Henry Ford take on a much different appearance when you consider the lyrics of Tennessee Ernie Ford in 16tons… many times what appears as benevolence is merely expediency in mask.
We are being pulled… or pushed in the direction of many things you say you want but clearly not as you envision… There is becoming a clear division between labor and management… a loyalty between worker and employer and our children are certainly being taught… unfortunately the depth and breathe of laws created grant government almost executive control of business in the decisions that guide it; from the people it must hire to the long list of specifications to make its product ‘acceptable’… Capital is now a function of fractional reserve absurdity… Oxygen it would seem is being rationed.
T.S." There is becoming a clear division between labor and management…"
DeleteYes and this is a trend throughout the developed industrialized world. Even in some of the one time USSR nations. It is this problem I would like to see addressed. Does your country, or mine, need the Jimmy Hoffa’s or Putty Nose Nichols of the Union movements? Both were crooks and in the case of Hoffa there were strong links to the Mafia. In the case of Nichols in my country he was the leader of the Painters and Dockers union and about as corrupt as it is possible to be.
Additionally, here in Federal Parliament we had a Labor member called Thompson who was convicted of serious fraud charges as a Union official. He was indicted while serving as a Federal Member of the National Parliament and the case has only recently been completed.
This is the present and immediate past and during the previous century, in both our nations we saw the growth of Unionism from being a necessary support mechanism for the workers into a major political force whereby "Labor" became a part of management and began to shape the political color of the nations. The situation is illustrated throughout history in so many of the worlds major economies. Great Britain was perhaps the birth place of worker solidarity and there can be no argument as to the need for such activity. My problem is in accepting the push by Unions into domination of industry. Conditions considered "hard won rights" have in many case brought the industry into a non profit situation. The short term solution is for the government to bail the firm out with taxpayers money and wait until the next crisis. GM would be an example in America at present. If the economic reality could be demonstrated in a non political manner, perhaps politics would have nothing to do with resolution of the difficulties.
Cheers from Aussie
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThank You for your comments... they are the root square of why I even bother posting on forums such as this...
DeleteNo disagreement here. This forum is a microcosm of the problems we face in America and from my many years of living and/or working in Britain and on the continent, what has occurred throughout Europe. This post on ‘American Politics’ was about a person, strange to the general population though he may be, that didn’t require the love and support of the LGBT world. A person who sees value and purpose in a solid foundational of law, a self-achiever… and going against the grain of the gay machine that just got done skewering a couple of business men for ‘talking’ to a potential future president, a self-identified republican yet little has been said about those virtues or their importance
The other post that I did at the same time was about the right of association between free people yet, no one engaged on the importance of that element and yet, it is the essence of a free society.
The right berates the left for trying to governmentalize everything yet will not waste a moment to pass a law to control a social behaviour for which they disapprove. While I agree that a society must have social order, it is not, at least in the ‘Great Experiment’, for government to dictate who people sleep with or the conscience of a pregnant women… it is however the right of every person to express their approval or disapproval of such conduct in the way they interact with that person… to whom they sell their home, to the communities they design around themselves to the businesses the run and the people they hire. Free association or the lack thereof, is and has been the root cause of a good many major problems in the US.. And no one what’s to talk about it.
When you talk about unions and their retiring benefits, the only thought someone else has in adding to the discussion is …. Citizens United and the greed of business. Regardless of how many times the conversation is steered to the many harms inflicted by them on business and society in general… the points made are never addressed. It amazes me that business is told who they must hire, how much they must pay, what restrictions they must conform to in making their product, what the work environment must be, which customers they must serve and the mountains of paperwork they must file that proves they have done everything to run THEIR business in compliance with someone else’s rule and they are still admonished for seeking profit and for having long sense given up on the idea of community.
I have tried to start discussion numerous times about how the medical system in the US got so expensive and never once was I engaged on, for instance, how we came to depend on insurance as a medical delivery middleman… or why doctors no longer treat a patient for free… or a fresh baked pie.
I may be wrong in my way of looking at things but I find few people who will take me to task on my beliefs… Plenty will try to shout me down with simple ‘Your Wrong’ but seldom do I get much detail as to why… It is in this frustration that I have stopped posting here twice before…
To your last point and a point which I and indeed William talk about daily… when you depend on perverse laws, grounding in precedence not foundational law, when some believe that the only true salvation of a country or the world is through an ever growing government with more laws, restrictions and manipulation… politics and how to manipulate it is the only game in town. Cut government out of the majority of people’s lives and you will find real solutions… until then, it is just trying to prevent an avalanche of governance from both he left and the right.
why doctors no longer treat a patient for free… or a fresh baked pie.
DeleteProbably for the same reasons you don't or didn't work for free. They have bills to pay.
A staff to support. Insurance to pay.
Government regulations that are costly.
Think they can digitize patient records for free? My doc got a quote for 120K to digitize all the records. Government was willing to reimburse him 60K.
Think insurance for malpractice is free? A certain requirement to stay in business.
Cost of rent.
The cost to obtain a medical license. Education.
And yes doctors work for free when people don't pay the bill.
If Doctors accept ACA patients, Doctors work for free and must accept ACA insurance for 3 months after people quit paying for their insurance and likely will not be paid.
Not to mention reimbursements for medicaid are less than the cost of doing business as is medicare. The governments idea of cutting healthcare costs is cutting payments to providers. Government does nothing to cut the cost of doing business and adds to the cost with more regulation. The ambulance chasers do nothing but line their pockets and add to the cost of heal care. Government adds to the cost of doing business when you have a flood of illegals using the ER as a doctors office then not paying the bills. Yes the cost of healthcare is high when the people paying for it has to also subsidize those with government insurance and illegals who pay nothing.
DeleteNot quite sure if you were disagreeing with my statement or just providing supporting fact but anyone who cares about their community, at least in the days where volunteerism was considered a virtue and not something to be attacked by government, people of all strips gave their time in many ways… I, on occasion, after the shackle of government regulation lifted over telephony, did troubleshooting, repairs, added new lines etc for folks that couldn’t afford to call Bell… I spent three years as a soccer coach and 2 as a commissioner… I worked on projects with parks and rec… So people do and did give of their time… even a busy doctor had the time to see a poor patient or receive payment in kind.. Charity hospitals provided a wonderful service until regulation closed their doors.. much like people who provide food for the poor, they found a cease and desist order courtesy our government. A government that is here to help…
DeleteYou nailed it.
DeleteGovernment intervention has ended the charity which was the norm of the past. Imagine if a doctor tried to help an accident victim the person dies. The relatives would be the first to seek a lawyer to for justice. The costs to provide care continues to mount as government regulations add to the cost of doing business.
My previous doctor is now doing research as he could no longer stomach government intervention. He did help patients that didn't have money to pay him and he accepted payment in kind. Home canned goods, etc. No one wanted anything for free and gave what they could. The same people helped him move all his records to storage at no cost when he closed his practice.
We have elected this government and then allowed them to take what we gave in the past to redistribute in the fashion they see fit.
It's all about control.
Lou and Rick…. It matters on many accounts… People on both sides of the political spectrum work tirelessly to put people in boxes. The right want to forbid (In Law) people from being one thing based on a moral code even though they fall short of providing any real moral leadership and the left in many cases rush head long in the opposite direction trying to force society (In Law) to accept ideas or values that my actually, in the long run, be harmful…
ReplyDeleteNeither side is wrong in voicing their opinions… I will never stop talking about the irresponsible actions of the destruction of family and the disregard for life pushed by the left but I still don’t see a place in the law to tell people how to make these decisions, right or wrong. These matters of right and wrong are decided in families and communities throughout the country… not by judges and lawyers in Washington… and not by a school system designed to steer social behaviour rather than the ‘3 R’s’.
What matters here is that Jenner believes in the constitution and we who believe in the document should be happy about that. Most of the gays and lesbians that I have had the displeasure of debating or conversing with are so self-absorbed and intolerant that they have little interest in the constitution, their country, other than what it can give them, or future generations of anyone else’s children and they certainly don’t identify with many moral precepts of the right… perhaps its because Jenner actually strived to apply himself to a very high level in an area that the government couldn’t just hand success to him by redistributing wealth or decreeing his acceptance that makes him a Republican.