#transmisogyny //

[abtrusion]

wait where are all the trans guys

Historical-anthropological research, especially the work taking place before the 21st century or outside the West, tends to focus entirely on transfeminized groups. So when reading these works it’s pretty natural to ask — wait, where are all the trans guys? This is a reasonable question with a few clear answers; this post is something quick I can point people to.

The central condition of transfeminized groups' absorption into feminist activism has been to accept a kind of symmetry with select TME groups through the understanding of trans femininity as "gender variance." Under this framework, transfeminized groups' social position can be understood as a consequence of gender variance and some abstract violation of cis norms; this was proposed by people like Susan Stryker and Emi Koyama [1], among others, and continues to structure trans inclusion today. It also fails when considering several basic aspects of these groups:

Transfeminized groups are associated with hyperspecific labor practices, most frequently sex work, but also hair styling, drag, makeup artistry, acting, and other forms of 'gender work.'

Metropolitan transfeminized groups appear in the archive as highly clustered and active groups connected with, but usually intensely split from, the masculine men they fucked.

Transfeminized groups become a kind of 'third gender' on an epistemic level; they are Known to wider society before and after “coming out” in a way that USAmerican transmasculinity has only recently vaguely approached.

Transfeminized groups are heavily clustered in labor practice, social organization, and epistemic position, although this is not universal -- certain strains of USAmerican transfemininity have become a bit more labor-agnostic in the last two decades, not-so-coincidentally alongside more general currents of gender-labor liberation. The messy strains of trans male identity recovered from the archive and from current practice tend to lack labor, social, and epistemic coherence. As Aaron Devor notes in FTM, his 1997 history of FTM men, trans men in the 20th century tended to transition out of cities and into the countryside, finding low-profile places they could exist in. These practices, and the earlier "female husband" practices described by Jen Manion, relied on the labor-agnostic nature of transitioned manhood in order to disappear from public life. Transfeminized groups, on the other hand, are categorically restricted from the main form of economic life historically available to women -- marriage. Their labor practices are heavily constrained and have almost always revolved around some form of 'gender work:' as Susan Stryker put it, you need to get people to pay you for being a trans woman. Transmasculinity pushes away feminized restrictions on labor; trans femininity is labor.

Because transfeminized identities are so often labor-identities, and because their specific brand of 'gender work' and hormonal/silicone/surgical embodiment usually requires both specialized training and community support, nearly every metropolitan center in the world developed highly centralized transfeminized groups over the course of the 20th century [2]. As Ochoa notes, this visibility is partially due to epistemic visibility (everyone knows what a trans is), partially due to group structure (people work and train each other), and partially due to the selectively visible demands of finding clients. Fledglings come in with a way of being that is always already visible to society, but changing the body to match and learning how to fully enact and slowly contest the third-gender labor-identity they've been given takes a lot of community support.

So as labor-identities, transfeminized groups tend to a level of labor/community/epistemic coherence that has no clear counterpart. The news archives we have of trans men (as seen in Manion) position them as singular and easily absorbed back into the female gestalt; the cisgender feminist/gayguy/AIDS researchers that form the bulk of historical-anthropological work saw them as unnecessary to their grand theories of gender; the communities themselves have been materially fractured and, for the groups that rise out of lesbian-feminist activism, only partially committed to their own existence. The result of all this is that there is no clear equivalent to the "transfeminized groups" of Jules-Gill Peterson; there is no symmetry to trannydom, and while additional work to unearth trans manhood in the archive remains extremely valuable, sometimes the necessary level of label-coherence and social existence just isn't there.

[1] Stryker, "My Words to Victor Frankenstein Above the Village of Chamounix: Performing Transgender Rage," Emi Koyama, "The Transfeminist Manifesto" [2] As seen in Namaste, Invisible Lives, Prieur, "Mema's House, Mexico City," Kulick, "Travesti," Newton, "Mother Camp," Ochoa, "Queen for a Day," Hegarty, "The Made-Up State," and plenty more. Most of these works came out in the late 80s and 90s due to a combination of the feminist "third gender" craze, the burgeoning field of masculinity studies, and AIDS.

[hemipenal-system]

anyway if you say “women” and “males” i instinctively dont trust you

[rabid-catboy]

If transmisogyny is actually the intersection of transphobia and misogyny, that would be something all trans people experience, not just transfemme individuals.

If it's just a word for transphobia faced by transfemmes, then it makes sense for transmascs to have an equivalent word.

If you say transmascs can't use the word transmisogyny to describe their experiences, and essentially just use it to mean transphobia against transfemmes, then it doesn't make any sense to get upset about the word transandrophobia

[anti-sexist-enban]

Being feminine, regardless of your gender, is not inherently adhering to patriarchal standards. Femininity is what you make of it.

Being masculine, regardless of your gender, is also not inherently adhering to patriarchal standards. I have seen people agree with the first statement but disagree with this one, but they are equally true. Masculinity and patriarchy are not inextricable. Not all masculinity is toxic. It’s also what you make of it. It can be an aesthetic, a lifestyle, a performance, something you feel deep in your soul--anything. It can be just as beautiful and radical and queer as femininity.

Both these accusations of adhering to the patriarchy especially get levied at trans people. Trans women are accused of trying to appeal to men, and trans men accused of trying to exert power over women. Specifically, “gender-critical feminists” (TERFs) believe that sex is natural but gender is a patriarchal construction and cannot exist outside of that. They believe that any amount of intentionally engaging in gender is upholding sexism. Please don’t let them convince you of that. Gender is indeed a social construction--which means it can be anything we want it to be.

[catgirlforeskin]

I will say though the catgirl/catboy one is a poor example compared to the other examples you listed. Kemonomimi and like generally the idea of a person with animalistic features have existed for ages and have never really been a gender-exclusive thing? Unless there's something you meant that I'm just not getting? Fwiw I agree with you I'm just confused by that one.

Much like how “guy who is feminine” is distinct from “trap/femboy/sissy” which are a specific transmisogynist archetype, “catboy” is distinct from “guy with animal features.” The “catboy” is an iteration of the previously mentioned transmisogynist caricatures. It is not just “guy with animal features,” it is “‘trap’ with animal features.” It is always young, skinny, feminine, white, wearing women’s clothes (often specifically a choker, thigh highs, and a skirt).

When people started drawing popular streamer Jerma as a “catboy,” it was not drawings of Jerma with cat ears, it was Jerma as a “trap” with cat ears, and when he dressed as one on stream, it was in a woman’s shirt, choker, and skirt. Those aren’t things associated with animals they’re clearly invoking something else, and in both instances the goal is the hypersexualization, degredation, and caricaturization that comes with transfemininity.

[nimeowna]

Ohhhh you’re queer but being “AFAB” is an irrevocable part of your identity? You believe that not wanting to be around “AMABs” is a valid and reasonable boundary? Should we throw a party? Should we invite jkr

[0w0tsuki]

Huhhh don't you think it's strange that anti-transfeminists view us as simultaneously "the sole source of infighting keeping the entire community divided" and "hysterical bitches crying about made up issues that have no impact on the real world and should just go outside and touch grass"? It's almost like they view us as "strong and weak at the same time"...... probably nothing though. 😉🫴

[re-velogs]

i really want to believe people who say they have trauma around (people they perceive as) men but i am going to keep it a buck with y'all i don't think trauma triggers are a ticket to never having to deal with hard things. not even just about this, i really think it is your responsibility to handle your triggers so that you do not harm others for your own comfort. you cannot blacklist the world into revolving around you and taking that as a betrayal shows that you are not to be trusted with anything, ever

[baeddelilluminati]

why does this translate to transmascs too? maybe female socialisation is real and its just being transmisogynistic in the same ways. bleak.

[juney-blues]

people so desperately want to be heir to the martyrdom of trans women it's insane.

you can say "hey transfems have specific problems specific to us that people who are not transfem do not experience" and they will go "oh so my problems aren't real?"

tme people see transmisogyny-affected and transmisogyny-exempt language and bend over backwards to either make up some reason why they shouldn't be in the latter category, or why the distinction shouldn't exist at all in the first place. (as if we're the ones making the distinction, rather than describing structures of oppression that already exist and are enforced upon us every waking moment)

people just don't wanna comprehend that oppression isn't a binary, that you can be oppressed in some way, and still have a position of power over others that you benefit from. other people can and do have it worse than you and you benefit from that whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

call it "dividing the community" all you want, the community is already divided. insisting we're all equal isn't gonna change that. that doesn't make your problems less real, but you don't have to be at the top of the hierarchy to be above someone else.

[lovewritteninthestrands]

if ur gonna leave a transmisogynistic comment on my art, at least be creative. i am so underwhelmed with these dialogue tree tier canned responses from the “pretends to care about women’s sports” crowd

fucking yawn. you think i haven’t heard this nonsense before? i used to be a closeted powerlifter. this is nothing compared to what i used to hear in locker rooms, from people i considered friends. if you’re going to leave a hate comment, put your heart into it. make it memorable, at least.

[plutotheforgotten]

Something I think a lot of trans men need to understand is that the reason that transandrophobia isn’t real isn’t because trans men don’t experience transphobia. It’s because transandrophobia is an inherently nonsensical term.

Transmisogyny is not “transphobia that trans women experience that trans men don’t”. Transmisogyny is the intersection of transphobia and misogyny, and also the idea that trans women can experience misogyny while not being perceived as “fully women.”

There is no such thing as androphobia. There is to an extent a phenomenon in queer spaces specifically where masculinity is put down or feared, however this is not something that happens in wider society and I believe that that is a separate conversation to be had.

People are not saying that trans men don’t experience transphobia (at least not the vast majority of people. I’m sure, because this is tumblr, you could find someone saying that, but that is not what the vast majority of people are saying and if you think that it is, check your reading comprehension).

All of the things that I have seen people claim are “transandrophobia” are actually things that still come from some type of misogyny.

Trans men have trouble accessing reproductive health care because “women’s health clinics” are seen as places that need to be protected from men. (Or possibly because they are not seen as deserving that care, which would just be transphobia)

Trans men have trouble accessing gender affirming care because they are being seen as women who are therefore baby making machines, and most gender affirming care for trans men will affect your fertility.

Trans men are less respected than cis men because they are seen as women.

Trans men are seen as “delusional women” because of misogyny.

You are not experiencing “transandrophobia” you are experiencing misogyny.

I do think that there is a conversation to be had here. However I think that transandrophobia being used as a term to describe these things muddies the waters and ignores A.) what transmisogyny is and B.) the fact that what we are experiencing still come from bigotry against women, not bigotry against masculinity (as the term transandrophobia would imply).

I would also like to say that a lot of trans men need to get more comfortable with the fact that, when you pass, you do have privilege!

I am a trans man who is about 1 year on T, has long hair, hasn’t had top surgery, and has what would often be considered effeminate mannerisms and speech patterns. I pass about half the time at best and when I do pass, I’m more often passing as a faggot than as a man (which are often different categories).

My access to male privilege is restricted. Similarly to how men of other minorities’ (men of color, disabled men, gay men) access to male privilege is restricted*. But this doesn’t mean that I never experience male privilege. I do! When I pass, I experience male privilege.

You having access to male privilege doesn’t make you a bad person. It doesn’t mean you never experience bigotry. And it doesn’t mean you should feel bad about being a man.

It does mean, however, that you may need to check yourself sometimes. Make sure you’re not playing in to toxic masculinity as a way to affirm your gender. Make sure you’re not speaking over women.

I don’t have a good way to end this. But I guess my point is that, while there is a conversation to be had about the type of transphobia trans men specifically experience, I do not think that calling it “transandrophobia” is helping the conversation at all. And also trans men need to remember that they are not immune to being men. Just because your access to male privilege is restricted does not mean that you will never experience it.**

*obviously all these minorities have their access to male privilege restricted in different ways but the concept is the same.

**even if you are a trans man who never plans to go on T, never plans to have surgeries, and will likely never pass, my point first point about the term transandrophobia not making sense still stands.

[cutecipher]

Yeah no tumblr you may think a trans woman is just a crossdressing man but you shouldn't build that into your algorithm

[shinigami-social]

This is probably going to be massively controversial, but I just feel like it needs to be said at this point. I desperately need people to read this very carefully and approach this in good faith. General blanket warning for intersexism, transphobia, and intersectional misogyny with both of these I just wonder how many people in the intersex community just like… fundamentally don’t understand the way being intersex impacts your gender. I know that sounds fucking wild because obviously being intersex impacts your gender but like… it feels like a lot of people reach for comparisons to the binary over just, like, the label intersex itself. The thing on my mind in particular is the stark difference in what transfemininity seems to mean inside and outside the intersex community. This isn’t to refer to AMAB and/or CTM intersex transfems, but in particular people who were AFAB and/or CTF.

I want to clarify before I get into the main body of this post that I fully believe people can be AFAB and/or CTF and be transfem. This post isn’t to say that this never happens, no one ever experiences the combination of these two* things, or that people who identify this way are wrong for it. I just want to open up a discussion about why people are identifying this way, I guess. It’s not about invalidating anyone or their experiences, on the contrary, I really want to discuss the varied nature of the intersex experience.

I was AFAB, and I would generally consider myself CTF. I have simple virilizing classic CAH. I experienced many of the events which a lot of people talk about as why they relate to the transfem experience or consider themselves to be transfem. I grew up with a tenuous connection to girl/womanhood at best, I had the locker room harassment, I was widely rumored to be a hermaphrodite and transgender (no one could decide in which direction), I was put into situations specifically to attempt to uncover my “real” sex/gender. Even when I was seen as a girl/woman, I was Wrong about it. When I was seen as a boy/man, it was before I had ever come to terms with that identity for myself, and it was instead something thrust on me against my will for being a girl/woman Wrong. I was, for much of my life, locked out of womanhood in various ways.

I can very easily understand why people with experiences such as these would relate to transfemininity (and on a “relation” basis, yes, I would say I relate), and perhaps even identify with it based on how these sorts of things impacted them in particular. That being said… I have never understood why people think this is somehow not just being intersex. I’m not trying to say it can’t possibly be both, but sometimes it feels like people just refuse to acknowledge that this is a very common experience of the intersection of misogyny and intersexism. There are certainly transmisogynistic elements to it, I think transmisogyny and intersexism are deeply intertwined and always have been, but like… to act like this is solely transmisogyny feels like a denial of the intersex experience. For intersex people who were AFAB, are CTF, and/or likely some other types of intersex people depending on their circumstances, this is entirely par for the course because they are intersex. The things I described are, above all else, intersexist in nature. They happen to people for being intersex. There are aspects reminiscent of transmisogyny and perhaps even motivated by transmisogyny in many cases, but this distinct experience that I see many, many intersex people have experienced, it is to me such a classic experience of growing up intersex.

This is to say nothing of the appropriation of the transfem experience (no, I’m not accusing you or anyone else specifically of doing this, if it doesn’t apply to you, it doesn’t apply to you, but yes some people are objectively doing this). I am not focused on that. It is its own separate issue, but the thing I am trying to communicate here is why people struggle to find themselves in the word intersex when the thing that caused them these traumas is being intersex. The denial of intersexness and intersexism as explanations for the experiences directly caused by being intersex. The need to use terms broadly conceived of within perisex communities to describe perisex experiences of sex and gender to describe experiences inherently outside of the perisex view. To me, it seems like there is a very clear difference between using intersex transfem to describe “I have Klinefelter and also I am a trans woman” and “due to my experiences with PCOS, my relationship with femininity is deeply complicated and I use transfem as a sort of code for reclaiming my womanhood that I feel has been denied to me.” And like. I am not saying that these couldn’t possibly both be transfem experiences! I am not the decider of what makes people transfem, and it’s not really my business at the end of the day, but these are still just like, objectively different concepts being described. This is what I meant at the beginning of the post by the inside-outside usage of the term. It feels like transfem, in intersex spaces, is often used as a shorthand to describe a specific relationship to femininity and womanhood and this relationship is not necessarily “transitioning to femininity.” At the same time, it feels like it is being used this way because in some way, perhaps, the community is lacking in language that adequately communicates “my being intersex locked me out of womanhood, even though womanhood is what I was assigned and expected to conform to” which is, to me, a fundamental difference between most (not all, I’m aware we cannot ever make absolute statements when it comes to intersex experiences) AFAB/CTF and AMAB/CTM transfem experiences.

To me, I feel that intersex does adequately express these sentiments. Or, at least, it can if you let it. Intersex people pretty much inherently experience a complicated relationship to their sex and gender, and I wish we were allowed to talk about this without there being an obligatory comparison of how every intersex experience is always analogous to some equivalent transgender experience. Intersexism is intersexism, and intersex people experience it because we are intersex, and maybe we should fucking talk about that sometimes.

[sadhoglet]

These moments make me question if these people can truly, unconditionally, love others. It reveals just how much of conservatism and prejudice is about seeing the worst in others, and instead of trying to stop it, encouraging it because, in some twisted way, they think it's the "right" thing to do.

How awful it must be to live in their world. How sad and pathetic and lonely, to be so deep in a worldview that's based on hurting others into falling in line. I'd say I feel sorry for them but they make this choice hundreds of times, and they don't care that people hurt. The cruelty is the point.

Imagine laughing, loving, and growing together, while knowing that the moment you step out of line, you could lose everything. Until you're hurt so much that the only logical path forward, the only way to survive and keep what little you have, is to step over others.

Can transphobic parents, teachers, lovers, friends, etc., truly love unconditionally? I don't think so. And to me, that seems so, so sad. Imagine a love that shallow and weak and small, that it breaks at the slightest push. That someone daring to love and be true to themselves is the push.

Is that teacher's favorite student really a human being in her eyes, or are they just an object, a concept that fits into a pretty little box? What if that favorite student happens to be trans later in life? Does all that "love" just disappear? I don't know.

[st-chroma]

i've intentionally started following more trans women on here to work on unlearning what transmisogyny might be lodged in my brain from just... taking in the way the world is, which isn't a huge step at all, but it's made me realize how many transandrophobia posts are petty at best and pushing for infighting (via transmisogyny) at worst