#tma is making me feel...... many things

[rinja-espurr]

i think tma is affecting me SO fucking much that i feel the need to change my entire blog theme once again

[vickozone]

Hey, TMA fandom!

Do you remember Sergey Ushanka?

No?

Well, he’s the guy that got his brain -> 🧠

coded and converted into a computer -> 🖥️

Then, he ate a keyboard -> ⌨️

[Season 2, MAG065 - Binary]

Well, we all know the upcoming Magnus Protocol, correct?

…

Unrelated, do you know that thing going around about how Jon and Martin are mentioned in a line of code?

If you’ve already seen the released episodes because you’re a patron, LEAVE. 👉🚪

helpful visual aid

[asyipyip]

hold on everyone shut up im getting super emotional about jonathan sims

[jewish-jonathansims]

I have reached a point in my life that every single person I know has heard about The Magnus Archives from me, more than that there is a small community of people who found out about TMA because of me or because if someone I told about it. Like there is a small part of the fandom (knowing the size of the fandom where I live something like 5%-10% of the fandom here) that found out about TMA because of me. More then that one of the people on this list have met Johny Sims once.

[flowersfrombefore]

Listened to Mag 171-173 on a flight today. Unwell about it

[shhhimnothereiswear]

I think I'd be an avatar of the Eye (I LOVE learning new stuff) or the Spiral (im just funky like that)

I think I'd probably give a statement on the Corruption (I'm currently writing a fan statement on it B] )

ok wait im curious-

which tma entity do you think youd be an avatar of and which do you think youd give a statement on

[ghelgheli]

i would actually like to hear more of your thoughts on whipping girl, whenever you feel ready enough to talk about it. i've only ever heard positive recommendations for it. i was thinking of reading it. i've read one or two introductory 101 texts on transmisogyny as well as some medium/substack posts, and always looking to read more as a tme person. ty!

thanks for asking! I'm gonna try to be concise because I'm stuck on my phone for the month, but here are my thoughts on whipping girl:

serano is at her strongest in the book in three areas: manifestations of transmisogyny in media (e.g. how trans caricatures pervade movies), the history of medical institutions developing a pathology of transsexuality (like the diagnostics of blanchard et al. or how trans people seeking healthcare were and continue to be forced into acting out prescribed expressions and manufacturing memories), and the construction of her own transition narrative (telling the reader what it was like for her to grow up desiring femininity in a way that confused her, the experience of crossdressing, the effects of hrt for her)

whenever she's just sticking to this, I think she effectively communicates a lot that the unaware reader could benefit from—even many trans women/transfems/tma people who are otherwise in tune with the history of medicalized transsexualism and our popular depictions could probably benefit from her own personal narrative, by nature of how variegated our experiences can be.

unfortunately I think the book fails at its primary—stated—goal, which is to theorize about transmisogyny. in the big picture this is a bifurcated failure:

on one branch of her argument, she remains committed to there being something biologically essential/innate about gender. this manifests thru multiple claims: that we have "innate inclinations" toward masculinity/femininity and "subconscious sex" rather than what I believe, which is that the latter are constructed categories imposed on different matrices of behaviour/expression/desire in different cultural contexts; that there is "definitely a biological component to gender" (close paraphrase) after a discussion of how she believes E and T tend to affect people (thus equivocating gender with dominant hormones!); that we have such a thing as "physical sex" which is the composition of our culturally decided "sex characteristics" (don't ask me how the dividing line is drawn) even as she says we should stop using "biological sex" as a term; that there is "no harm" in agreeing that "sex" is largely bimodal with some exceptions; that social constructionism is necessarily erasure of transsexual experiences in early childhood... altogether she is unwilling to relinquish arguments about the partial "innateness" of femininity/masculinity and gender. this is at tension with her admission on several occasions that these are neither culturally/geographically nor temporally stable concepts! but that doesn't seem to be a line she can follow thru on.

on another, intertwining branch, she engages in what I think is a deep and widespread mistake in the theorizing of transmisogyny: reducing it (mechanistically) to what she calls effemimania* or essentially anti-femininity. it is her stated thesis at the start that masculinity is universally preferred to femininity. she doesn't offer a definition of either term until one of the final chapters, where she defines them as the behaviours and expressions associated with a particular gender. but I think this reduction just misunderstands transmisogyny. it is even in tension with an observation she makes early on, that trans women are often punished for their perceived masculinity! but again, this is a thought she seems unable or unwilling to follow thru with.

my problem with the thesis is that masculinity and femininity do not float free of gender—it is not possible to speak of their valuation in the abstract. anyone who grew up as a masculine cis girl and never "grew out" of that "phase" can attest to the violence wrought upon expressions of masculinity from women. and this applies doubly so to the subjects of transmisogyny! not only are we punished for any perceived bleed-through of masculinity from our supposed "underlying male selves", those of us who are willingly masculine and thriving as mascs are punished for our failure to conform to the rules of the normative womanhood that is imposed on us (just as we are punished for any willing femininity as "false" and predatory upon cis womanhood—observe that transmisogyny is reactive degendering in every case!).

on both branches serano makes only perfunctory remarks about the intersections with race, class, and colonialism. "sex" as such was made to only be accessible to the "civilized", most of all the white european! for a racialized person and particularly a Black person navigating gender the waters are just not the same; the signifiers of sex neither available in the same way, nor granted the same medical legitimacy. what is the "physical sex" of someone who is de-sexed altogether? how can gender have a "biologically innate" component when its expressions between the bourgeoisie and the working class are at total odds with one another? this all goes for the masculine/feminine distinctions as well. what sense is there in the claim that we have innately masculine/feminine inclinations when globally (and transmisogyny has been made global!) what is feminine and masculine can be very nearly mirrored? nor is "masculinity is always considered superior to femininity" innocent of obviating race. transmisogynoir adds yet further degendering thru the coercive masculinization of someone as a Black woman—masculinization as punishment, again!

and as a final point, the account fails to be materialist. there is no attempt to place transmisogyny in its role as an instrument of political economy or, as jules gill-peterson might say, as a tool of statecraft. it is just a psychological response to the way the world is, as far as serano has anything to say about it. but how did the world become that way, and why?? serano's solution, the abolition of what she calls gender entitlement, is naive to the fact that gender entitlement is necessary to the maintenance of the capitalist state, which is structured thru patriarchy and built on colonialism. it is not possible to reskin this into something innocuous!

this is why I cannot recommend whipping girl as a work about transmisogyny except at the most shallow level. it could be a helpful critical read, but imo, it is just wrong about transmisogyny.

[jonnywaistcoat]

Hey, Horrormaster Sims. I have a wildly different question that barely relates to TMA (Sorry about that) but its about your own process. Please, if you could, can you tell me how your first drafts made you feel? I'm on the fence about writing my own thing (not a podcast, and again, not Magnus related, though I have a million little aus for that delightful tragedy you wrote, thank you for that!) But I'm discouraged by the collective notion that first drafts are always terrible, because there's no ... examples I can solidly use to help the dumb anxiety beast in my brain that tells me everyone who is in any way popular popped out a golden turd and not, well, you know. One of my friends said 'Oh I bet Jonathan Sims's first draft was nothing like what he wanted' and I got the bright idea to just. Send you an ask, since you're trapped on this hellsite like I am. Anyway, thanks for reading this (if you do) and if you'd rather ask it privately, I am cool with that. Alternatively, you're a hella busy man with Protocol (you and Alex are making me rabid, i hope you know) and you can just ignore this! Cheers, man, and good words.

To my mind all writing advice, especially stuff that's dispensed as truisms (like "first drafts are always garbage") are only useful inasmuch as such advice prompts you to pay attention to how you write best: what helps your workflow, what inspires you, what keeps you going through the rough bits. There are as many different ways to write (and write well) as there are people who write and so always consider this sort of thing a jumping off point to try out or keep in mind as you gradually figure out your own ways of writing.

On first drafts specifically, I think the wisdom "all first drafts are bad" is a bit of unhelpful oversimplification of the fact that, deadlines notwithstanding, no piece of writing goes out until you decide its ready, so don't get too hung up on your first draft of a thing, because a lot of writers find it much easier to edit a complete work than to try and redraft as they go. It's also important to not let perfectionism or the fact your initial draft isn't coming out exactly how you want stop you from actually finishing the thing, as it's always better to have something decent and done than to have something perfect and abandoned.

But the idea of a "first draft" is also kind of a fluid one. The "first draft" you submit to someone who's commissioned you will probably be one you've already done a bunch of tweaks and edits to, as opposed to the "first draft" you pump out in a frenzy in an over-caffeinated weekend. For my part, my first drafts tend to end up a bit more polished than most, because I'm in the habit of reading my sentences out loud as I write them (a habit picked up from years of audio writing) so I'll often write and re-write a particular sentence or paragraph a few times to get the rhythm right before moving to the next one. This means my first drafts tend to take longer, but are a bit less messy. I'm also a big-time planner and pretty good at sticking to the structures I lay out so, again, tend to front load a lot of stuff so I get a better but slower first draft.

At the end of the day, though, the important thing is to get in your head about it in a good way (How do I write best? what helps me make writing I enjoy and value? What keeps me motivated?) and not in a bad way (What if it's not good enough? What if everyone hates it? What if it doesn't make sense?) so that you actually get it done.

As for how my first drafts made me feel? Terrible, every one of 'em No idea if that's reflective of their quality, though, tbh - I hate reading my own writing until I've had a chance to forget it's mine (I can only ever see the flaws). I suppose there's theoretically a none-zero chance they were pure fragments of True Art and creative perfection, but Alex's editing notes make that seem unlikely.

[velvetvexations]

Thank you for sticking up for transmascs while being transfem. Not a lot of folks would do the same. It really, really means so much

I have trans masc friends who deal with it a lot and it's really frustrating to see them have to put up with this kind of bullshit in my name.

But it's also at least a little selfish, because the 'in my name' thing really fucks me up. TMA/TME discoursers want me to be the biggest victim in the room and they actively prevent me from feeling like that's true. Trans mascs getting ran through the dirt to elevate trans fems feels like I'm the Bad class of person the same if I were a cis man or something. It is literally accomplishing the opposite of their goal lmao. So, I try push back against that, and hopefully make trans mascs feel like they have trans fem support.

And like, for all they want to say that believing in transandrophobia is a TERF dog whistle, it's like, hello? The narrative that the trans community favors AMAB trans people and walks all over AFAB trans folk is a huge TERF thing, what the fuck are you doing walking into this bear trap. Making this fantasy scenario TERFs made up to paint being trans as a patriarchal psyop a reality does nothing but invalidate me and cause serious damage to the entire community.

The weirdest thing is that a lot of it is usually trans masc or otherwise AFAB folk. I'm not saying no trans fems do it, obviously, some do and I truly, truly hate them, but so many are 'TME' folks throwing themselves off a cliff trying to be 'one of the good ones' and it's surreal and kinna disturbing to supposedly be done for my sake. But the plus side to that is that they usually need to take my voice seriously, if they don't just ignore what I have to say.

[ultramarinaa]

I love how now my thing is cat tma apparently, honestly incredible

On unrelated note I had random horrible vision at work and now I have literally worst possible ending for tma 200 stuck in my head

More below due to… you know spoilers

So I saw many people enjoy the idea of John becoming blind after getting somewhere else as his connection to the eye is permanently lost

But now picture me this

They are somewhere else, but it’s not a dimension

They are stuck in horrible place in between dimensions (bc of conflicting powers, one wanting its people to stay in their original dimension, the other trying to pull them with rest of the fears and tapes)

But the fears aren’t there, they can’t die either, John is blind.

Martin lies to John to make him feel better „we are somewhere else and we are safe”, he makes up stories he tells John to make their situation feel better. He describes the dark and miserable place they are in as full of color and beauty to quiet John’s concerns. John doesn’t question it, he wants to believe it and it’s not like he can just ‚know’ anymore.

Absolutely fucking horrible. I hate this thought.

[genderqueerdykes]

I just came across your blog tonight, and I gotta say, as a trans woman who only recently learned about the TMA/TME discourse, I’m really thankful to have someone put into words how I’ve been feeling over this in a much more succinct way than I can.

I’m just glad I’m not alone in feeling this way, honestly.

Signed

- a trans woman feeling steadily removed from her own community because I believe we should be trying to strengthen the trans community as a whole and that’s *checks notes* bad somehow?

hey i appreciate you, thanks very much for stopping by!

it makes me feel better knowing i'm not alone in this, either. it's just so fucked up that people are thinking that somehow driving a wedge between trans people is going to help us. it really sucks that a lot of transfem and trans woman infighting is happening because of this. you're not the only trans woman who has told me that you feel removed and alienated. like it's to the point where trans women and transfems who call out this behavior are getting misgendered, too.

what's the point of this behavior???

so many transfeminine spaces right now are filled to the brim with hatred and talks about suffering and nothing else. we really should not be tearing ourselves apart like this. like you said, we should be trying to strengthen each other, not tear each other down. it's okay to be frustrated but it's not okay to let that turn into violent hatred.

i'm glad to hear that you don't agree with this, either. i hope things improve soon so we can get back to talking about how we identify, and not who we hate. the trans community isn't about who we hate.

[dropoutconfessions]

I keep seeing things about how Dropout is failing transwomen and yes, absolutely, I fully agree we need more transwomen/transfemmes on the channel. And maybe I'm remembering wrong (I have not watched the full catelogue), but like...90% of the trans rep so far has been nonbinary people?? Ally Beardsley, Alex Song-Xia, Erika Ishii, Caroline Page, Vic Michaelis, et cetera.

We've had Persephone Valentine for transwomen but have we had any actual honest to god transmen anywhere?

And don't get me wrong! I love love love the enby rep. 100% here for it.

But every time I see something about how Dropout and the fandom are specifically failing transwomen and transwomen only, I want to beat my head into the wall. So, you're saying that enbies are just, what, girlies+? and get lumped into the same category as trans men because...? or just that they/transmen don't count at all bc they're ...what, exactly?

It's 1: hella confusing and annoying as a trans guy. Unless Ally Beardsley (who I absolutely love no matter what) comes out as a guy at some point, they are not my rep and won't ever be.

2: misses the point that over the past few years, as Dropout has grown, their representation has grown with it, and will (hopefully!) continue to grow. In the early years, all the trans community in Dropout had was Ally Beardsley. We owe them a lot for that tbh. It's not easy being the only different one in a sea of same.

Yeah, we need to keep the community accountable and try to keep the corporation accountable as well. 100% hands down, no disagreement here. Drag queens are great, but they're not representation for transwomen.

For the sake of all that is good in the world, can we stop acting like it's only transwomen not making it onto shows and that it's both transwomen AND transmen, and that Dropout has mostly been finding a "comfortable" middle ground with enbies?

Be upset about lack of representation, be vocal, call for change, push forward names of people we want to see, but please PLEASE don't start the whole oppression politics and who has the shorter end of the stick based on whatever gender people were assigned at birth. That shit is just gross.

yeah fair, not that many trans men specifically. personally, we need more TMA people on the channel. cause i am enby (demigirl), and i don't feel represented for shit.

dropout hasn't been finding a comfortable middle ground with enbies. dropout's been coasting with TME enbies specifically.

yeah dropout's representation has grown. it's grown with the amount of TMEs on the show. they're a company, not some independent webcomic artist, we're allowed to not be happy with amount of transfems on the show. they can go ahead and take their time and grow, but i'm still gonna dislike how slowly the inclusion of transfems has been.

yes, we need more trans men on the network, but like, we can agree there is a serious lack of transfems entirely yeah? idk, might just be me

[magpod-confessions]

I know sexism in fandom is a thing, but I mostly encounter a lot of very vocal love and positivity for female tma characters (not to say that's the case in all forums ofc). Which is good, obviously.

Basira, Georgie and Melanie are important characters, but they all come along later and honestly throughout a lot of Canon kinda feel like an anti-jon wall. If you happen to be a fan who doesn't vibe with that sentiment, its less appealing to engage with a big portion of the female characters. It's not wrong or right to find yourself empathising more with Georgie or Martin etc etc, none of thecharacters are all good or bad so it's personal how a listener is gonna feel. But to me it sort of unfortunately feels like, since the (majority of significant) women are kind of aligned in one group, youre more likely to either into all of them or none of them. I hope that makes sense? Like I'm very much not coming after anyone.

Also some other thoughts on sexism: sasha has less time, less backstory, and is less developed than say Tim. So she has less content. Someone saying "if you do an ao3 search for fics that include sasha but not Tim, there isn't many, so sexism!" doesnt make much sense to me. The workplace is the only context we have for sasha, and Tim is her coworker and friend. A fanfic featuring sasha but NOT Tim (or any other magnus staff!) would have to create a lot of backstory wholecloth, and not everyone wants to do that. I love her in fanon, but we gotta acknowledge it really mostly is fanon.

As for Helen vs Michael. Michael's backstory is more developed, he was played and manipulated, its pretty damn tragic. Helen is dope! But if you want that flavour of angst and tragedy, Michael has more to work with.

I think it comes down to the type of fan you are and what you prefer to engage with! I suspect jonny has tried to make this less of a factor in tmagp and is focusing on giving more background to female characters from the start. Not trying to insinuate anything shitty abt him either.

.

[certifiedsexed]

It's fucked up that apparently people are calling you slurs and I hope the actual harassment ends soon!!! And it sucks that people are making things up about you to malign you; things should never come to that.

But I do feel like it really would be good to address the genuine criticism instead of just painting everyone who has questions as being just harassors? Like. You started posting about how non-transfems always have a "trump card" over transfems (one post specifically mentioning "cis intersex women") very shortly after Imane Khelif got harassed over the mere assumption of her possibly being intersex and or secretly trans, where her AGAB didn't matter to the bigots one bit. In fact, the mentions of TMA/TME terminology ONLY started appearing on your blog immediately after the Paris Olympics. For me, that was extremely eyebrow-raising.

I appreciate that. It's largely died down for the moment but I'm not sure if that's just momentary or not. Here's hoping.

I wasn't painting anyone who had questions as being harassers, that's very extreme language to use and I'd appreciate maybe reading my posts thoroughly before accusing me of things like that.

I said the people sending me slurs and messages simply calling me names and intersexist were harassers, I also explicitly said anyone who had questions or actually wanted to discuss the issue should still feel free to send me asks or whatever.

I also was not asked even vaguely about what you're talking about. I was only told that I was intersexist for blocking two intersex blogs and then I was accused of claiming something to do with intersex people and autism.

I had two people in my inbox mention the possibility people were upset that I discussed transmisogyny, but neither of them were sure and only guessing, so I didn't want to throw guesses out. [I did get a more concrete mention of this late last night tho from an anon!]

But no one else said any of the shit you're talking about to me.

I don't remember mentioning cis intersex women in particular but I might've. I had a lot of questions from people about transmisogyny but I did definitely say that anyone who isn't TMA or transfeminized does definitely have leverage explicitly over people who are in the context of transmisogyny. That's true and literally how every type of bigotry works.

I'll address the Imane Khelif bit in a second but first, I do want to point out that my blog started around that same time, Anon.

I didn't start posting about transmisogyny because of the Paris Olympics. I started this blog around that time and transmisogyny is one of the issues I've reblogged posts about and afterwards, gotten many questions about, that's all.

It had nothing to do with the Olympics; I don't watch them and while I paid attention to some of the issues that arose from them [the blatant ableism, sinophobia, COVID issues, intersexism, racism, etc], I didn't make any posts on my sex education blog with the Olympics in mind.

As for Imane Khelif, I do want to mention that what happened to her was not solely about the possibility of her being intersex and/or secretly trans, nor is it true that her AGAB didn't factor into what happened.

What happened to Imane Khelif was very explicitly intersexist but it was also extremely racist. I mention that because it's very important that's not left out of the conversation. It's a very common racist, misogynistic tactic that has been revitalized in current politics and to ignore the racism is to ignore a good part of the picture.

I also don't want to ignore your claim that her being not-transfem had no affect on what happened with her.

To ignore that transfems were largely disallowed from competing in the Olympics at all is absurd and to insinuate there's not privilege in being allowed to compete is not a claim that should be made. If not being transfem didn't affect Imane Khelif at all, she wouldn't have even been in the Olympics.

Nor would it have been as "controversial" as it was [because they likely would have had genuine evidence], nor would she have been allowed to compete afterwards, nor would she have the legal standing to be able to sue people for accusing her of being intersex and/or transfem.

I do understand being wary but absolutely nothing I said had anything to do with Imane Khelif or even vaguely denies or belittles what she and many other people have had to go through because of racism, misogyny, intersexism and transmisogyny.

Just to be absolutely clear, because the poor are absolutely drenched in piss from the way people keep trying to misinterpret my posts:

I did not make any posts on transmisogyny to argue that what happened to Imane Khelif was not awful, nor did I make any posts to insinuate cisgender intersex women do not experience oppression, nor did I start posting about transmisogyny because of the Olympics.

But if that's what people are upset about, I appreciate you letting me know, fr. It's absurdly convoluted and feels like a lot of assumptions were made but it's very kind of you to tell me and I always appreciate people coming into my inbox to discuss things.

Hope this helps! Let me know if you have any other questions. <3

[hopefully-inspiring-persona]

Hey all I Lowkey feel like we really need to keep the TMAGP vague…. Actually vague haha. Some of yall are just full blown talking about the episode and during TMA that was super frowned upon. Ik everyone is super excited me included but if we could just save the theories and in depth discussion until the full release it would make things more fun and keep folks from seeing spoilers (especially art which reveals specific points in new episodes).

Going through the vague tag I was like “wow if I hadn’t seen the new episode I know everything now”

(This also includes saying the episode name before official release just to be courteous of those who want to wait until just before they listen)

The vague tag is to tease what’s going to happen with jokes, images, or “the magnus protocol is a podcast”. The main audience for the tag should be people who haven’t seen the episode yet not fellow early access people discussion. Sharing so many spoilers that people avoid vague completely defeats its purpose.

[euniexenoblade]

I'm transmasc and I don't think I completely understand the discussion around TMA/TME.

I'm pretty sure I mostly agree with you. Like, "transandrophobia" is not a helpful or accurate description of the transmasc experience, and I can see how it could be used to belittle what transfems go through.

Transfems definitely get more attention from hate groups. Transmasc erasure sucks, but it can definitely be a blessing when the bigots are picking their targets.

I keep seeing posts comparing trans men to incels and MRAs. I haven't seen many transmascs who would warrant that comparison.

That's not to say it's necessarily an unfair comparison. On the contrary, it probably means that there's a lot of transmisogyny going around that I'm not seeing. And if I'm not seeing it, that probably means I'm inadvertently participating in it.

IDK why I felt the need to send this to you. I guess I was hoping you'd tell me how to do better, which totally isn't your job. Feel free to ignore me and/or tell me to fuck off.

I'll send you $20 for tolerating my bullshit. Have a nice day.

Ok I wanna answer this before I get too high (I'm honestly feeling it already). Thank you for the $20, when I realized I forgot to pack a lunch today that money helped me eat still so legit thank you.

So first off, "trans women get more attention from hate groups, transmasc erasure sucks but can be a blessing." (I can't copy and paste on this screen, so I'm paraphrasing) yes but I wouldn't call erasure a blessing, no matter who it's for. They're two sides of a very fucked coin, on the one side transfems get lots of attention and vitriol, and the erasure of transmascs makes it harder for some transmascs to understand they can be trans. But on top of that, the form of transfems we see are never real representation, 99% of the time it's a transmisogynistic ideal of trans women, it's the weirdo white boy spreading lipstick all over their face just before they smash the mirror in a fit of "dysphoria" kind of shit. Though transfems have extreme visibility, our actual selves are not visible, we are ultra violet rapist horn dogs or we're the super ignorant, super emotional crybaby.

And, a side tangent, cuz you sorta did a thing the transandrodorks do that is frustrating. It's not a measurement of what's "worse." That's not how oppression works, that's not what we are saying, we are talking about the forms of oppression.

Men are not oppressed for being men. They can be oppressed for a variety of things, racism, ableism, interphobia (is this the right term I forget), homophobia, etc etc. Masculinity is rewarded, masculinity is the desire, patriarchy exists so men get to be above women. Things like "misandry" do not exist, they are inventions of violently misogynistic men, your MRAs, your incels, your conservatives (this includes liberals btw).

The person who coined "transandrophobia" used to talk about wanting to correctively rape lesbians. I'm not gonna go at someone's kinks, but the blog was not presented as a kink blog, I literally went there myself and read the posts when this first popped off and they come off as true lesbophobia in the context of their blog and coupled with the misandry posting, this person literally looks like MRAs and incels. The defense the community uses is "it's a kink are you kink shaming?? It was on a private locked blog!" Which, the latter, no it wasn't, I literally went there and looked, and the former. Idk I think if you're saying you want correctively rape lesbians while also talking about misandry and counting "transandrophobia," you look misogynistic and homophobic.

The main writers people follow for transandrophobia related content are straight up liars, who make shit up, and one specific non horse entity consistently cites himself as his own "source" and when he doesn't, he cites terf blogs that are connected to kiwifarms and sites of the sort. They will take bits talked about in feminism and present it as a thing they discovered and present it as transandrophobia. Ie. "Men can't show any femininity and can't cry and that's misandry" despite things like this are discussed at length in feminist texts, men can't do these things cuz that makes them more "woman" in the societal lens. Yeah it's fucked, but it's misogyny, not misandry.

I am, consistently, misgendered by the transandrodorks, and so is every other trans woman that disagrees with them. And it's definitely intentional.

Then there are token trans women who don't know much of anything about feminism or transphobia and will straight up harass you for saying women are oppressed. They often weaponize transmisogyny against other transfems, they misgender, suicide bait, or in velvetvexations case, will stalk your blog for two days even though you ignore her and when she's sees you're on a date with your wife, she goes to your wife's blog and starts messaging her instead. Legit, this woman is one of the worst people on this website, the only reason she's not seen as communismkills 2 is cuz men like her.

On top of this, terfs consistently support "transandrophobia" as a concept and constantly say that transandrophobia is compatible with terf ideology. The transandrodork community is ripe with terfs and crypto terfs. Like that one who said he hoped a friend and I get raped, cuz saying "men arent oppressed" warrants wishing rape on people. Or the trans guy that outright said "trans women are male" and tripled down harder saying "trans women don't experience misogyny and oppress transmascs cuz they're really men," claims that were so wild that even velvetvexations couldn't agree with them lol.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: not every person that believes in transandrophobia is a bigot or a bad person. A lot are just young transmascs who are under read about oppression and history, and this terf/transphobe community swoops in and pretends to be representing them and sucks them in. For every disparaging transmisogynist piece, there's two more that are talking about the problems of transmascs. So when you tell these guys "that's a hate group" they don't remember the post calling trans women men, they remember stuff about T being super illegal. So they think we are attacking them for having a problem, not the actual bigotry on display.

Honestly, if these people would just stop misgendering trans women, they might have more trans women who'd be nice to em. But that's the consistent trend.

Transandrophobia is a violent, transmisogynistic ideology that is propped up by terf ideology. That's why they are compared to MRAs and incels.