#originally posted to @transmandrake

[red-6-ofspades]

Thinking on trans intercommunity issues and how utterly abysmal we are, like two brick walls we're both building leaving anyone who doesnt fit the narrative in the middle.

And I think one issue is the lack of clarity between genders as identities and as political, social structures.

I don't think it's real helpful to wax on about trans men being men, not being men, 'socialisation', misandry, etc etc without clarifying and understanding gender as not just like, an aesthetic, a personal framework, but as a vessel of societal structure.

I think, for trans women in particular, and transmisogyny as a (imo flawed but not baseless) concept, where identifying as a woman, presenting as a woman, is a political position of vulnerability, as well as an identity.

The reverse, and here is where I think a lot of hurt comes from, is that the opposite is laregly untrue for trans men, because... Well, the patriarchy and misogyny suck. We / they reject it.

Identity, and political social role, are incongruent for most trans men. Rejecting this paradigm is, to me, the source of (again flawed but useful) concept of transandrophobia- A type of man who embraces masculinity, manhood, identity, but rejects the corresponding structural role.

Conversely of course some trans men are misogynistic...? No, that's not right to me. Everyone is misogynistic because we live in a misogynistic society.

Some trans men embrace the structural role. They are not the focus of transandrophobia because they do not contradict the system. Presumably, they benefit from this.

This is I think where the source of 'misogynistic trans men' comes from...

But as detailed I think this is a systemic issue, not a trans or gendered issue. Women are plenty misogynistic where it benefits them- it is transphobic to suggest trans men are uniquely prone to this because of their gender.

Of course I think society pressures trans men into fulfilling their expected role- Specifically, with the intention that they will fail.

This is unique to trans men systemically (but not socially) as trans women are already seen as failing at their intended structural role- succeeding as a woman is seen as accepting their lesser status.

In a misogynistic society, you can fall, but not rise. (Socially however we are all pressured to perform- but I feel this is different.) and so a trans man, in a... less transphobic society, is accepted as a man if they check the boxes.

But as detailed, to check the boxes is to be complicit in patriarchy and misogyny as systems.

Trans men are uniquely discriminated against, even or especially by 'trans-friendly' spaces, because their identity is contradictory to their chosen role.

Trans men whose identity and role matches, pass the test.

Therefore... no trans man can pass *systemically*. It is not possible. Not without upholding the system. And the system is not our friend.

It does not matter how easy or hard it is for a trans man to pass *socially* or *perceptually* because they will never be accepted on these terms alone. The system does not allow them to exist- transandrophobia is the result. It is the pressure to either lower yourself to the status of woman, or betray yourself.

And betrayal is not final- just as cis men need to perform to the system, perform misogyny, trans men are still trans, are still subject to transphobia, and so no matter their 'sacrifices', they will never be free. There is always another checkbox.

To bring it around... Honestly? Yeah, I think trans women 'have it worse'. I worry about anyone who presents like that to society, as society is particularly and remoreselessly cruel to them.

But trans men are not unique forces of misogyny or patriarchy. The suggestion... is transphobic. When you say these things, you are actually *agreeing with the system* that they should fulfill their role.

There is no shortage of voices that want us / them to shrivel up and shut up so we / they stop being living contradictions.

There is also no shortage of voices insisting we 'man up' (a neverending pursuit) and fulfill the role we're expected to. Acceptance in the patriarchy is conditional, and the condition is self-annihilation.

Those who choose this are, while tragic and pitiable, fully culpable and complicit. But not monstrous either. It is after all what everyone wants and expects.

This dynamic is complex, and the concepts of gender, passing, presenting, sex... I think we are hurting each other because the system has been neglected in the conversation. I think this is what transmisogyny attempts to address, but... well, it neglects the unique systemic pressures on trans men.

So is transandrophobia the solution as a concept? Honestly neither works. I like transunity as a term but its still underdeveloped and evidently hasnt fostered much unity.

Misogyny is not the force at work here alone. Misandry is not the missing piece because it is not systemic.

But the patriarchy is. And no one is exempt from that.

(Additional reblog)

Not a fully formed thought but ohhh... Connecting this to the nonbinaryness...

By my thought pattern, if trans men cannot truly pass without adhering to a patriarchal misogynist system, trans men who do not or dont want to pass are inherently nonbinary.

(Not in an identity sense- but in a perceptual, Faggot-as-a-Category way)

And I think this approaches a difficult and very messy issue in that, it is inherently enbyphobic (exorsexist?) to treat trans men as men hierarchically.

This is why transmisogyny, to me, while valuable, is not a full model for the situation. It neglects the intersection of misogyny and transphobia by neglecting trans men's hierarchical pressure to conform to the system.

Trans men cannot be exempt from these forces. Any trans man who does not face misogyny is transphobic, because the system is transphobic.

You can't cleanly dissect trans men as a hierarchical phenomena untargeted by misogyny, without agreeing with the system that manhood is inherently and innately powerful and superior.

I want to say 'most trans men reject the patriarchy' but I don't know that. I'm an optimist, but it is undeniable that this stance is not universal.

I, again repeating myself, think this is a systemic issue, not an issue with identifying as a trans man. Its more akin to radical feminism ironically, whereby power is gained by aligning with the hierarchy, regardless of ones position on it. The status quo is maintained.

To try and wrap it up... Trans men face a unique intersection of enbyphobia and misogyny that cannot be separated. Chances are, there is also an intersection of this for trans women, but I don't have the voice to speculate on that.

Evaluating trans men as having privilege over trans women because men dont experiemce misogyny, is flawed. A trans man is a type of man that cannot both affirm transness and fill the role of man in a patriarchal system. Misogyny and transphobia is a package deal for trans men who reject the patriarchy, and this needs to be discussed and considered in the framework of transmisogyny.

Because I want to stress, this is not a 'trans men have it worse' argument- Trans men are not targeted by transmisogyny. This is a unique experience to trans women that *currently* has no comparable, systemic equivalent for trans men.

What I'm going to call 'intersectional transphobia' needs to be discusseed. Transphobia and misogyny are both gender-based forms of discrimimation, and so all genders are affected by it.

Transmisogyny is one part of this, (And so the insistence of its existence is not a threat to trans men) but there is more. However we need to consider a more complex dynamic, and a more nonbinary dynamic. Otherwise we will never agree with one another.

[red-6-ofspades]

I wrote out a longer version of this that made no sense but. Trans people arguing on whether theyre seen as their chosen gender by others is such a tiresome thing.

Like yeah I do agree that trans women arent seen as men and often are seen as women

But I do not think this is a good thing or that thats a core component of transphobia and transmisogyny specifically

Because

1. the corollary 'so trans men are seen as men' is simply not true. Trans men largely are not seen as men, or even women imo but often as women.

2. Transphobes, largely, when they see trans women as women... Do not. See women as people, or worthy of true personhood. Yes even if said transphobe is a woman.

Transmisogyny I do not like as a word because I think all transphobia is misogynistic. If it wasnt, trans men would be seen as men largely. But they are not.

All trans people are seen as women in typical transphobia, because 'woman' is lower on the ranks than 'man', and therefore are placed as low as possible, where possible.

More specifically, trans people are seen as inhuman, where possible. This often means being seen as women. Because misogyny.

This is also why, even though I, generally, really like the *productive* discussions the concept of transmisogyny and transandrophobia have fostered, I dont think they are useful terms, because all transphobia is an intersection of sexism of all flavours. That is what it is. If men were seen as lesser, trans people would be seen as men. And, while fringe, yes, and not systemic, people who see men as lesser see trans people as men. That's all.

Digging deeper into it, pretty much nobody has discussed enbyphobia as the real intersection of transphobia. Trans people are seen as outside the binary, and this does not contradict people who say there are only two genders at all... because gender is a piece of humanity. To these people trans people are not human enough.

That might sound like im contradicting myself but it isnt. Whichever gender is closest to inhumanity is what people will see trans people as. There are two genders, lesser, and human.

This is also why it causes so many arguments, and why they arent productive. If a trans man is insisting theyre seen as a woman, and a trans woman is insisting theyre seen as a woman, they are not at odds. They are in agreement that they are percieved as our current societies lesser category.

I don't think insisting a trans woman is seen as a man is transphobic, and insisting a trans man is seen as a man is decidedly not gender-affirming, because, while fringe, lots of trans people are, whether theyre aware or not, are in sexist circles, who do, in fact, see men as lesser in personhood. Sure, misandry isnt systemically a thing, but sexism is not purely targeted at women.

This is also why I think the 'Trans X are X' phrase is not useful or truthful. Insisting a trans woman is a woman to many peoples ears is affirming a trans woman's lesserness. Insisting a trans man is a man is often a weapon against them expressing their multigendered experience.

Trans men and women are not always men or women. They are always people. Worthy of personhood. Insist upon this above all.

I think more productive action can be done if all this is kept in mind, and we stop eating ourselves in finger-pointing.

[red-6-ofspades]

Deeper thoughts cooking but I do wanna say

I'm a lot more inclined to discuss hating men as an issue in trans spaces, versus discussing misogyny as an issue in trans spaces.

I do not think hating men comes with the same baggage. I think it is easier to tackle. It's not systemic. I do not think it has as much of a trans component. There's less pain behind it. It's simpler.

But misogyny, it's different.

See... We're trans? We all already have been through the wringer of misogyny in some form. I do not think it is very useful to lean over our crushed souls and tell us that it is bad to be mean to women. We know.

It's deeper than that. I don't talk about it because I do not think saying anything on it will actually make any difference. It's still worth discussing, but the problem is more deeply entangled and needs more delicacy than... whatever the fuck we are all doing to each other.

If you want trans people to be less misogynistic, we need to actually enforce the idea that being in a group does not give you any immunity from harming that group.

And for that, we need to untangle that... This is transphobia. We are all transphobic. The underlying, tangling writhing mass of pain that is being trans.

Trans men being uniquely critical of trans women are framed as misogynistic trans men, but more pertinent to me is that these men are transphobic.

Addressing their misogyny is just not the core of why they do this.

I think, and again I don't fully agree with the concept but it's *useful* to use, transandrophobia has come to the forefront of discussion because trans women are of course not immune to being transphobic- but of course the inverse of a misogynistic trans man is a... misandristic trans woman?

See the issue? I don't think it's relevant to make posts about how trans men should stop being misogynists, for trans women to stop being transandrophobic, when that is not the issue at its core.

We are all being transphobic.

We are all positing that our transness gives us some unique incapability to be transphobic or misogynistic.

Trans men are transphobic and misogynistic by using their transness to absolve themselves of doing harm. Trans women are transphobic and misogynistic by using trans men's transness as a weapon against them.

This is a fight with no winner. The only outcome of continuing to be transphobic, is that more trans people will dislike you. Being trans will not save you from this.

And if you continue to see it as a misogyny issue, then you will think that trans men / trans women do not like you because they are misogynists, and you will think they are misogynists because of their transness.

You will never solve the issue avoiding the root of the issue.

The trans community is rife with transphobia. That's the problem.

What do we do with that.

[red-6-ofspades]

Sometimes feel a bit alienated / left out as a trans person who doesn't agree with a lot of common 'good practices' for talking about trans people. Even my pedantry is trans.

I understand why people dont, but I love terms like MtF and FtM and the idea of being born in the wrong body. It doesnt really describe me but its closer to my self than the idea I was always who I am.

I still love my previous self. She was very brave and tried a lot. I wish I was kinder to her when I first appeared. But she is still here with me, and she is very happy to see me.

Not a deadname in that a name is dead to me, but rebirth as a new person. I do not recognise myself anymore by that name, that is someone else, who I still remember.

[red-6-ofspades]

Conflicted sometimes because a lot of the characters I, I guess 'headcanon' as being trans guys, yknow, are pretty 'stereotypical': short, feminine or failing at masculinity, high pitched, yada yada

Yet I absolutely hate seeing other people headcanon characters like that as trans guys

And it feels hypocritical, but chewing on it more, its like... I'm viewing their traits as being like me, or other trans people I know. 'Theyre just like me fr'-esque feeling

But. If a non trans person is like "This character is short, squeaky, effeminate... he must be a trans guy!" then it hurts yknow?

Vice versa for trans women, if anything the issue is more apparent (So I feel I see it less, its more eyebrow-raising. But the eyebrow does raise)

"This character is tall, masculine, has a deep voice... she must be a trans woman!" Like, you see how that implies you think trans women are a sequence of masculine traits wrapped in girl flavouring, rather than. Just. A person. Who can look like anything. Yknow.

So I do not feel as ashamed for seeing myself in characters like this, because... I see myself. I do not pick out 'female' traits and tendencies, I do not see failing to meet a gender's expectations as a lack of that gender. I just see me.

[red-6-ofspades]

Hmmm... Want to write my thoughts somewhere more coherent and formal... But for now a thought bubbling is that there's a general impression I get that people think that oppression and discrimination are like. Fixed, natural states.

That dynamics like misogyny are. Like some sort of good vs evil fight where it will always exist so you need to fight against it forever against the Other Side.

Like, we've made great strides against homophobia. Right? It's generally okay to be gay as long as you aren't too fruity or wierd. That's, nice for gay people who aren't too fruity or wierd.

It becomes more and more distasteful and unhelpful to pull the whole 'ugh, the straights' sense of humor and solidarity when straight people are. Just sort of Whatever about gay people 80% of the time.

Like I haven't seen that sentiment in a while. It's juvenile, parroting an old phrase to seem like you fit in, when you haven't experienced the discrimination that those phrases were backed by.

For me, this is where man-hating is at. It's also in an odd limbo where some people are still terribly affected by misogyny and patriarchy and are venting a frustration with reductive, community-signalling turns of phrase to affirm your common eperience.

But it just isn't as common an experience. The slope is starting to lower. I've met plenty of people whose whole schtick is man-hating when their experience with misogyny is entirely just... men being cunts.

Now. To be clear. Being a cunt. Can be just as harmful. But this is how it goes.

Oppression is carried out and enforced systemically. You don't have to be a cunt to be an oppressor.

Being a cunt is often a response to *losing* systemic pressure over the oppressed group. You can lie back and relax when the system does what you want. When that system stops working, you need to do the work yourself.

I don't like men! I don't. 90% of them are huge cunts. But that is often because they are *losing*. That 10% grows. Even if that 10% is just indifference. If being a cunt is too much work for too little return.

The dynamic is changing. And so, the response, and tactics must too.

As more and more of the system is dismantled (and of course, this discussion is not relevant if the system is still in full operation for you.) you cannot treat an oppressive group or institution as absolute.

'Fuck all men' is not okay if being a man is no longer participation in an oppressive system. It is an identity that correlates with, not causes, unbelievable levels of cunt behavior.

If you insist upon this sort of behavior, then you are actively against *social* equality. These sorts of phrases are *systemic* rallying cries. Without a system, you are just rallying for hatred. You are a cunt.

To be clear, this is still systemic. Of course. But things are and have and will change. I do not automatically assume people who talk like this are cunts. But. It becomes less and less understandable and reasonable. It fosters an us vs them mentality outside of a dynamic of oppressed and oppressor.

It brings the system into your soul. And even when the external system is dismantled, you will still be under it.

[red-6-ofspades]

*leans back in chair*

Gardevoir is a great metaphor / way of explaining the experience of being a feminine trans masc / trans assumption fuckery in general

Everyone expects you to be a Gallade but you've already evolved and you are a Gardevoir, you're just male. You arent fighting type and quite frankly thats wasnt your idea of masculinity anyway?

Everyone assumes male Kirlia will evolve into Gallades and they treat male Kirlia as eventual Gallades. When you say you want to be a Gardevoir everyone gets confused and wonders if you're really male, and why you want to evolve in the wrong direction.

Everyone sees you and, because you're a Gardevoir, and look like a Gardevoir, that you must be female, because why would a male Kirlia choose to evolve into Gardevoir? Is something wrong?

You literally always wanted to be a Gardevoir before you even ever saw a Gallade. No one minded until you evolved the 'wrong' way. You heard lots about male Gardevoir growing up, but it was mostly jokes or in the end it was revealed they were female the whole time. It still felt nice to know you could exist, but no one ever seemed to want to stay you, or become you, on purpose.

Lots of Kirlias become Gallades just because they're supposed to. You wonder how many really want it, or just feel pressured. You wonder if life would be easier if you just fit in.

But that wouldnt be you, would it?

[red-6-ofspades]

I have mixed feelings on the current chatter around 'Female Socialisation' as a concept

Second, like... Idk. As a trans person, was I really... socialised female? Not really. As soon as I hit like 6 I went into my tomboy I hate Pink and Girls phase and no one really fought against that.

So I agree somewhat that its a shit term.

But also like... I did grow up as a girl. I was perceived as a girl, I experienced the world as a girl, I was aware, to my dismay, that what I was affected how others saw me and treated me.

The beginning of my 'trans awakening' was when I moved to Ireland and was very confused as to why the boys in my class were oddly cold when I said I liked pokemon too, and wanted to play pokemon with them, and oh I play CoD too with my brothers and-

Oh. They see me as a girl. They don't want to be my friend, because people will make fun of them or me, or make jokes about us dating.

Nothing changed about me. It was the outside that came into view. I still feel this; I would not be transgender in a genderless world (Though I feel my body is Transsexual. Whole other tangent)

But I wasnt socialised in any way, really. Some people are but its not a replacement for 'afab', another flawed term (in its use not its intent) that just tries to hopelessly draw a line of girl trans and boy trans.

But undeniably I have experienced the world in a way that is not cis. The trans experience is not defined by your genitals, or how you were raised, but... The others. The perception. I can never unnexperience it. No matter how much I do or don't 'pass', no matter how much any of us do, we have an experience of... not been seen as what and who we are.

Transness isnt defined by presence, but absence. We do not get to be seen as ourselves, not for a long time if at all. And when we do, we cant erase that experience.

And thats why I hate these divides, even if I was 'socialised' in a distinct way; I don't feel unrepresented when something has a trans woman or man in it, because they're... trans. I know that. It doesnt matter who. The asethetics, the gendered traits, its all outer, irrelevant.

I grew up being perceived as something I am not. That is all that matters. The body is irrelevant. The dress. The identity.

Wolf in sheeps clothing. Sheep in wolfs clothing. Both disguised. It doesnt matter if the wolf is shot for being a wolf underneath or if the sheep is shot for looking like a wolf.

Who has it worse? Whose disguise fits better? Does the sheep lose privilege? Does the wolf gain it?

It doesnt matter. We all end up on the dinner plate or the tannery at the end.

Betrayed or hunted? Death. Always.

Stop shooting wolves. Only then will we both stop dying.

[red-6-ofspades]

Hello! Drake here. In order of preference, It / He / They (Plural).

This blog is an aggregation of my thoughts on being trans, the trans community, and specifically my perspective as a trans man.

However, I am not a man! I don't enforce it, and I often contradict my own identity, (It's easier to lump myself in instead of explaining the particulars) but please avoid calling me a man.

My gender is not binary. When I call myself a trans man, it is its own thing, not a combination.

Main blog (and origin of a lot more thoughts) is @transmandrake! I don't post a lot but my art is @infin-8-morphosis.

See this article by @judedoyle to understand my username!