katiebranchwrites

[katiebranchwrites]

The Prestigious Ascension of the Tucute Argument; How to Help Gender-Queers

In the modern culture regarding gender, the average cis individual will view gender as a general binary, between male and female, with individuals identifying as one or the other. Some cis individuals- usually those who proclaim themselves, quite falsely, to be educated on queer politics- will also recognize the existence of non-binary or agender individuals. However, does the mere presence of these non-binary, agender, and transgender individuals already challenge the presence of a sole binary that dictates gender by genitalia and prescribed social gender roles? To tackle this question, one must analyze three main components of gender-queer politics: the phenomena of gender dysphoria [defined usually as a disconnect between one’s gender assigned to them at birth (especially one which causes extreme distress) and the gender they experience or identify with) and gender incongruence (the same disconnect as described previously, but without the intense distress) is the chief area of these to be discussed and brought into contemplation. Two other areas of main concern are the relations of gender roles to a capitalist society and mode of production, and the commodification of gender, and gender-related products.

Among the gender-queer community is two main ideological combatants, in terms of the contemporary politics of said gender-queer community. These combatants are the TruMeds (those who prioritize gender dysphoria as a key point to the trans experience) and the Tucutes (or, those who do not recognize dysphoria as a key point to the trans experience or identity.) To clear up first a very common misconception, one must note that among tucutes, a very firm majority are not people who deny the existence of dysphoria itself, and in addition, many tucutes actually do experience dysphoria themselves. It is therefore a straw man argument to paint tucutes in general as “science deniers” or, as many trumeds will say “transtrenders”. This clash between ideas, it is important to consider, was in fact spawned by the labeling of trans and non-binary identities as mental illnesses, by cis scientists and psychologists in the early days of the queer movement. These “medical professionals” began to produce falsifications of scientific research, which are to this day used as false evidence of “transgenderism” as a form of illness which can be combated. To rationalize this diagnosis and their false research, members of the cis-dominated medical field isolated one common experience of the trans community to claim as a symptom: dysphoria. To this day, trans and cis transmeds have aligned themselves with these teachings. Tucutes, on the other hand, tend to view gender itself as a broad spectrum of identities, not a mental condition which must be “treated” as such. Tucutes acknowledge the existence and wide presence of dysphoria, but also paint into the picture the evidence of a mere gender incongruence. This incongruence is a vague term, which is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, the vague nature of this term is also found in dysphoria, with a massive difference, however, lying in how they are used. An incongruence is a mere anomaly from the forced social gender binary, whether that incongruence is brought on by choice, nature, or environment, and this simple misalignment is enough to differentiate any trans, non-binary, or gender nonconforming individual from a cis, passing person. Thus begins the sinking of the metaphorical ship on which the medicalists base their entire argument. Dysphoria is a distress brought on by the social and material conditions of the society around a trans or nonbinary person, whereas incongruence is that which shapes an entire identity and experience for a lifetime.

The identity of every gender-queer person is what they choose to make of it, do not allow falsified medical findings fabricated by cis hatred allow your mind to mold over hatred for the very communities to which you may lay claim to membership or alliance.

[katiebranchwrites]

The Adverse Effects of Voting to "Reduce Harm"

With the 2020 elections kicking into gear as soon as 2019 began, self-proclaimed "progressive candidates" have thrown themselves into our faces through media and conversation with neighbors. In the current mainstream political climate, it's all but impossible to avoid mentioning the likes of Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. What is, however, the communist approach to such candidates?

It is an imperative mandate for leftists and persons of all social standing to analyze the policy and personal stances of these politicians. Are they change, or are they a faux friendly continuation of imperialism, capitalism, and the endless war that the world has grown to live with. To begin such an analysis we must obviously look into how reform for the supposed betterment of the people has resulted in the past. In the early 20th century, Theodore Roosevelt moved to break up large monopolies across the industrial board. As he closed his second term, though, we see the near instantaneous return of monopolistic power and assets. The second of the Roosevelts- Franklin Delano- made a move to ensure economic basics for the lower classes with his New Deal. In reality, this was a political play meant to subdue communistic rhetoric in the Americas, especially in his own United States.

How then, should we consider the progressives of the 21st century to be any different than these figureheads of a hundred years back? The framework of the system they operate within has not changed, and the rhetoric is the same, showing no shame in how it mirrors the false concessions of the bourgeois democracies in recent memory. The truth is, these candidates will not reduce harm amongst impoverished and marginalized communities. They will tell us what they need us to hear to prevent what they fear- the delay of the historical inevitability of a proletarian upheaval.

[katiebranchwrites]

An Introduction to Myself

Hello, and welcome to my blog. My name is Katie Branch. I'm based in California, and have been talking with a wide array of people from wildly different socially sects since my youth to develop my opinions based on real life experience, and not external observations. I am a trans-femme, going by she/her pronouns. Queer issues and the politics behind them are a radical fuel for my intellectual pursuits, as they manage to drag their effects into my day-to-day life. Politically, I am environmentally minded with a strong emphasis on societal progress through scientific and dialectical methods. I recognize the pressing need of a society to move beyond industrial modes of production, and rethink how we produce our best works while maintaining our best biospheres.

Any other questions about my politics or myself personally can be directed to my email ([email protected]), or sent to my inbox, where I will answer to weekly questions in their own dedicated post.

I wish you all a good night with love.