#will I put this under transandrophobia: yes.

[demuredeadbeat]

Why tf are ftm chasers/-oriented posts usually just detrans fakeboy girl shit when mtf chasers are all about girlcock and womandick. Like maybe I'd be more down for fetishization if it was actual fucking fetishization of my actual fucking identity and not just a different way to say you like another type of woman.

[nothorses]

I think one of the ways that tranandrophobia seems to distinguish itself from the other forms of oppression it is connected to is in the way it attempts to convince you it is indistinguishable and that transmascs are always just collateral damage to everyone else's "real" problems.

One example is the very blatent tirf claim that transphobia on its own isn't real, that it is all misdirected transmisogyny, and that transmascs only experience oppression due to our association with transfemmes.

But there is also the insistence that anti abortion laws and similar things are targeted at cis women and therefore are "women's issues" - transmascs shouldn't complain about being excluded because it "isn't about us". Same with homophobia and butchphobia. Even the terf talking point that they are just protecting "little cis girls" from making irreversible mistakes pretends that actual the transmascs being harmed is just an accident and not the goal.

Trying to talk about transandrophobia is a constant stream of "It's just transphobia. It's just misogyny. No, you can't call your experiences misogyny because that isn't about you. You can't call yourself a lesbian or a butch or compare your oppression to lesbophobia. It isn't about you. Yes, terfs hurt you, but you aren't their main target. This isn't about you. Yes, you need abortions and experience medical misogyny, but you can't talk about it because this isn't about you. You were sexually assaulted because of misdirecred misogyny. Don't make it about you. You've never contributed to the history of gay men, or lesbians, or the trans community. It isn't about you. Those cross dressers weren't trans. Stop trying to make women's history about you. You can't reclaim cunt or faggot or dyke because those words aren't about you. I don't care how many times you've been called a tranny. That word isn't about you. Why must you make everything about you?"

Because sure, transmascs exist, and we might be impacted by everyone else's oppression, but it is always thought of as a theoretical consequence of what is really going on, if it is thought of at all. Transmascs are not considered to be oppressed in our own right.

This idea gives the lawmakers plausible deniability, allies an excuse to ignore us, and feeds into transmasc erasure. If we are never the actual target to begin with, then clearly, we can't be uniquely targeted. The law makers don't need to be held accountable for their transandrophobia because it isn't like they are trying to hurt transmascs, right? We need to let the real victims speak, the ones being targeted on purpose.

Nobody ever sees the way it all piles up, and even if they do, they think "well it's just an accident, right? If we fix the main problem, then this fringe issue will go away on its own" without ever considering that transandrophobia isn't as rare, fringe, or accidental as society wants it to appear and that actual effort needs to be put into dismantling it.

It isn't that they actually believe that transandrophobia isn't real. It's that they just don't believe it is about transmascs. Because even if we are the common denominator, we are still just collateral damage and could not possibly have anything of value to say. Because as collateral damage, our issues are never our own and thus never need to be discussed on our own terms.

100%. And I think this is exactly what this sort of cycle of erasure depends on.

We are erased, our problems are erased, and our oppression is erased, which means it's easy for people to ignore us, our problems, and our oppression. There's so little evidence, so few people talking about it, and they never really see or hear anyone name us in this violence, so surely, it isn't about us at all! It must be about the people they know about already, the problems they know about, and the ones who are always readily named in these conversations.

If we're speaking up, there's no reason to believe us; if anything, we come under scrutiny for trying to talk about these issues nobody else can see. We must be crazy, hysterical, whiny and overdramatic, or perhaps malicious. We're stealing attention, stealing space, and stealing help. We might be victims, but we are incidental and unworthy victims.

And ignoring us, our problems, and our oppression means we continue to be erased. Which makes it easier to ignore us, and erase us, and easier to perpetuate violence against us. And so on.

It's understandable, in a way, for people to ignore us; most people don't know about any of this in the first place, and when they do, they're not inclined to take any of it seriously. Even if they do see convincing evidence that our problems are real and worth talking about, it's easy for that to be a one-off that they eventually forget about. Everyone else is talking about everything else, so we sort of fade away.

It's not their fault; they're not trying to ignore us. They just haven't learned to recognize violence against us, and they just don't seek us out, and can they really be blamed for that? Can they really be blamed for the violence that continues because they and others don't see or try to stop it? We're so hard to find in the first place. You know, because we've been so thoroughly erased.

There are a lot of people who've been fighting this for a long time, and even more we don't-- and probably won't-- ever know about, who've been fighting for even longer. I think it's getting better; the organized backlash against us is, imo, a sign that our reach is getting stronger and wider. But it's a hard cycle to break.

[transmascpetewentz]

i meant wrapped not trapped, I do not blame you for misunderstanding me, thats entirely my fault

I think you seem to believe that my issue with transandrophobia as a label is the idea that trans men face oppression (which they do), when instead its the idea that the oppression transmasculine people face is something completely unique to them, instead of being the underlying current of tranphobia

I literally spent the first paragraph explaining my issues with the *concept* of it before segawaying into my issue with it as a conterpart to transmisogyny due to them not sharing an underlying ideological framework

And to touch on some of doberbutts points, trans women are also correctively raped and have suicide rates, and the issue of access to abortion is for every person with a vagina, not just trans men

A frustrating thing that he does there is that instead of giving a counterargument to one of my points (what i personally believe to be a misnomer about the purpose of the label of transmisogyny, were you (nonspecific) view it as a threat to the validity of the trauma we face, and not as a way to describe their own, and what others believe to be just attention seeking) is to bring up severe (often sexual) trauma as a way to put a landmine on that specific point, because any attempt to explain why they are wrong becomes a personal attack on the traumatized parties

this got quite long, so response under the cut. @doberbutts this is the same anon you responded to (by reblogging my post) earlier.

ok

no form of violence experienced under an oppressive system is truly "unique" in that i don't think there are any experiences of violence or oppression that apply to only one specific group, but the motivations behind the violence can differ depending on the demographic it's being done to. i do not think that any specific example of transandrophobia is something that no one who isn't transmasc has experienced, but transandrophobia is the oppression specifically targeting transmascs. i and doberbutts have already pointed out how this works, so i don't feel the need to reiterate that.

you do not understand the concept of transandrophobia, and you regularly demonstrate that your understanding is surface-level and comes from people who have an interest in making it seem less credible. instead of asking people who theorize about anti-transmasculinity (including me and doberbutts!!!) you immediately become hostile and make many incorrect assumptions about our beliefs. i find this highly disrespectful and encourage you to stop getting all of your information about transandrophobia from people who misrepresent it to argue against the concept of anti-transmasculinity.

yes, abortion access is something that everyone who can get pregnant has to deal with, but trans men face unique discrimination wrt abortion access and access to reproductive healthcare that trans women do not. this is because there is a fundamental misogyny component to anti-transmasculinity that you and others who deny it because "it's transmisogynistic!!!" seem to have a failure to grasp. transandrophobia is transphobia, misogyny, homophobia, and the specific modifier of maleness on this oppression all at once. i wish there was a better word for how maleness adds to and modifies oppression in an intersectional way that wasn't associated with mras, but alas there is none that i am aware of. also: anti-transmasculinity never says or implies that trans women don't face some of the issues that trans men do! you are treating this like a pissing contest for who has it worse and that is an attitude i'll need you to drop.

denying transandrophobia is a sentiment that is directly hostile to transmasc survivors of sexual assault, abuse, hate crimes and other things that arise from living under a patriarchy that systemically excludes you from both the male and female classes. the reason why we use this rhetoric is because these types of things arise from the specific intersection that trans men face, and how that can further intersect with sexuality. you are simply making up what we believe on the spot and not actually listening. if you want to come off anon and have a conversation in dms, i'd be willing.

talking to people like you is frustrating because you make these claims about what transandrophobia theory is as if we're a monolith or a homogenous group instead of hundreds of trans men on tumblr dot com all contributing to a larger conversation. no matter how much you claim to be in good faith, you continue to disregard actual transandrophobia theory in favor of some bastardized version you got from someone with "white tme/tma" in their bio. i hope you take this criticism and reflect on how you may be wrong.

[2-kamikou-1]

woag it's an intro post

hi I had my writing list as my pinned for so long but it didn't have the desired effect so I'm making an actual pinned

( dividers & layout by me!! ☆)

pls look at this (no pressure tho) 🏳️‍⚧️

hi m'name's adrien (+ aux names) I'm a minor I'm transmasc & autistic & suspected bpd & ocd I use he/it and some neos listed in the pronouns.page link below. I strictly do not use they/them. this is my main so you'll see just about everything here. I'm also anti-psych I didn't know where to put that but I feel like it matters. i am also alterhuman !! (catkin/vampirekin/jr. high rui fictionkin)

pronouns.page! :3

buddymeter! :3

my primary special interest is project sekai so you'll see a lot about that here. my favs are Rui, Ena & Shizuku, my favorite units are N25 & W×S, and I am a massive shizuruikasa & mizuena shipper (there are plenty others I like though) but some other non-media ones are etymology, alt fashion, & drugs (yes you are reading that right, no i am not abusing substances i just like to research them), I have others but I can't think of them rn.

I'm not really very active in fandom spaces of medias other than prsk, so if you want to know what other stuff i'm into, you just have to get to know me! :3

stuff I like that you should tag me in (no pressure lol): shizuruikasa, pandemonium, jr high rui fanart (he makes me insane/pos) cicadas, frutiger metro, alt fashion (especially scenemo prsk edits if you come across them they make me SO happy), tokidoki

I post vents here sometimes. I try to tag them or put them under cuts but I don't always remember. feel free to shoot me an ask about it if it bothers you, and I'll go back and tag it. I also do my best to keep mental health crises off here but you will probably see it happen.

boundaries:

- I'm in a closed relationship, please don't make genuine romantic or sexual advances toward me. Jokes are fine

- please don't call me cute, I won't do anything about it if you do but it just makes me really upset & uncomfortable

- please don't likespam unless we're mutuals (rb spam is fine no matter who you are), I will softblock you

- please do not try and drag me into shipping discourse, i will not engage. I think both sides are inconsistent and the entire thing is stupid

- please don't send me chain asks, they make me anxious! (tag games are okay though! i might not respond depending on my energy levels)

- this one's kind of complicated sorry. so please do use tone tags with me I like them, but avoid using /lh pls- I was around so many people that misused it that it immediately reads as passive aggressive to me even though it's definitionally not

- i am aware i am named in a certain tumblr user's dni. you are welcome to dm me privately to hear what I have to say on it but otherwise do not send me asks or tag me in posts about our issues with each other because the beef is so tired and has been dragged out for too long.

- please do not recommend me therapy. I am antipsych, I have been before, there was a reason I stopped, and I cannot afford it right now.

- do not follow me for my vent posts. I suppose I don't care if you like them, if you're scrolling through tags that's your business. But this is not a vent blog, and I'd appreciate if you didn't follow me after just liking 5 of my vents.

- more tba if I remember

- I am not always okay with jokes that are suggestive or sexual in nature - please ask first (just a simple "can I make a horny/sexual joke rn" is perfect)

- if you screenshot and repost a post of mine that has reblogs turned off, that's fine, just crop my username out please!

dni since I think it fits here:

queerphobic, racist, ableist, transandrophobia denier, "men dni" regardless about how you feel about trans men, anti-nontraumagenic, radfem at all, anti-palestine, trump supporter, antitheist, pro generative AI, exclusionist (anti good-faith & contradictory labels, anti mspec-mono, anti neos/xenos etc), anti self-diagnosis, demonize cluster b, if you actively believe in astrology, mbti, enneagrams etc beyond a little quirk, currently actively support shien/temu, in the harry potter fandom at all, transfem mizuki deniers, if you think shopping at hot topic or wearing baggy pants makes you a poser.

also if you complain about palestinian fundraisers youre on thin ice.

if we're mutuals please tag;

pictures of crickets (or similar bugs that are dark colored with lots of spindly extremities, like whipscorpions)

anything related to the movie "girl, interrupted"

specifically sexual innuendos related to hospitals/doctors (anything else is fine though)

hurricanes, tornadoes and other similar natural disasters (note: this doesn't count for things like fundraisers for people trying to come back from disasters like hurricane helene and milton. just for things that are detailed accounts, or for things in fiction)

child death (same as above, you don't have to tag fundraisers or other causes for me, just for detailed accounts or things in fiction)

(list subject to change as I remember more things)

you can use #adrien no look as a catchall tag if you want but I do have the tags for all these things blocked separately as well. ty 🩵

list of rp blogs

list of sideblogs

list of writing (← if you like this stuff, I take commissions! [open | 0/5] more info here)

other places you can find me (tell me you came from here so I don't freak out!!):

discord: adrien9174

prsk id (en): 557794736782815241

AO3: matsuu_u

tiktok: 25sho.enthusiast

depop: enashinonomesleftsock (you don't have to tell me you came from here for this one)

[velvetvexations]

That thread hurts, man. I’m nonbinary but I still had my mom try to talk me out of it too. She just kept saying over and over again “you’re just a tomboy going through a phase, you’ll grow out of it” even though I’ve been openly nonbinary for 8 years now.

Like, I get that cis people will suggest to binary trans people that they could just be nonbinary instead, and yes that’s transmisogyny/transandrophobia but it’s also exorsexism. We’re the ones who get thrown under the bus as the least acceptable “alternative” to being trans. It’s not because nonbinary people are more accepted than binary trans people, it’s actually because we’re less accepted, and thus it’s easier to not take us seriously.

They want trans people to be cis more than anything, but they’re willing to settle for all queer people being nice and easy to disregard, and it’s easier to disregard a nonbinary person than a binary trans person because we’re less accepted. The fact that we’re seen as a niche, made up identity and/or a stepping stone to being binary trans makes us easier to write off and treat poorly and be hateful towards with no consequences. That’s why bigots will pretend to be ok with us in order to deny binary trans people their identities.

I'm really happy to platform asks like these because they put it in far better words than I ever could.

[cardentist]

well ! I'm making this post to make a point.

for context, I made this post [Link] earlier, wherein I spoke first about my frustrations with cis people not considering the trans perspective, and Second about my frustrations with me doing so immediately being framed as an attack on trans women specifically Because my frustrations were tied to me being a trans man.

(I do Also consider myself trans fem, but that wasn't particularly relevant to the original post, so I didn't mention it at the time).

this was then followed by an interaction in dms wherein the quiet part was spoken out loud.

1: that trans men Are Not equal to trans women, and that it is taken as an attack on trans women to present them as such (it is not).

2: that the idea that any individual trans man could face harm within the trans community from any other individual is, itself, transmisogynistic because it implies that trans women are capable of oppressing trans men (it does not).

3: that it is Impossible for any individual trans woman to ever speak over any individual trans man, because trans women are women and trans men are men (it is not).

4: that trans women possess some Secret Additional Layer of oppression that no trans man could ever match up to no matter what their individual experiences are, even when that trans man is Also a trans woman (they do not).

5: and by extension, that every single individual trans woman has it worse than every individual trans man in every situation (theoretical or real) no matter what, thus making anything that a trans man experiences Lesser Than by default (do I even need to say anything).

I am going to put the entire conversation (censored) under readmore, but I need it to be understood that This Is Not Hyperbole.

when I say that trans men are singled out and attacked for the simple act of having a voice This Is What I Mean. it is considered by some people to be Inherently Transgressive, Inherently Bigoted, for trans men to consider themselves equals. for trans men to consider their experiences equal.

and so, it is Assumed by Default that a trans man speaking on his own experiences is harmful to trans women Regardless of whether trans women are being spoken on or not.

not everyone thinks this way of course (and the people who Do think this way aren't dictated by gender, this isn't trans mascs vs trans fems this is about bigotry, which anyone is capable of)

but a Significant Enough proportion of people Do, and people don't recognize or realize this fact.

if you feel that I am being hyperbolic, if you've never been exposed to this way of thinking before, if you find yourself Agreeing with any of the points I have listed above, I do suggest reading through this conversation and the posts linked to it.

content warning for a brief non-graphic mention of rape/csa within the linked posts and this conversation.

Me: I know odds are you don't want to hear it, and that's fine you can ignore this message entirely if you'd like. but I Do think you'd better understand what my perspective is if you were to read my response

I do think I Understand where your perspective is coming from, and I get it on an emotional level. but there's a disconnect here where intent is assumed when it doesn't need to be [Screenshot of tags written by anonymous that reads: transandbros (transandrophobia + bros) they think that they can’t be the most privileged in a group because they think trans women have privilege over them. End Transcription]

I am trans masc yes, I am also trans fem, and I don't enjoy assumptions like this being made about me.

Anonymous: i said trans women as in TMA [transmisogyny affected] people. not transmasc or tranfem which can be used by tme [transmisogyny exempt] and tma [transmisogyny affected] trans people

Me: like I said in my response, I want to go on testosterone, physically transition, and then present femininely. I want things like an audibly deep voice, facial hair, a square jaw. I also want to keep my breasts, I want long hair and feminine features, I want to dress femininely and be read as a feminine And masculine person

I also live in mississippi. 

now do you think that if I do that I will walk outside and never ever experience transmisogyny.

Anonymous: also trans men oppress trans women and benefit from transmisogyny. i say this as someone who benefits from transmisogyny as well. i oppress trans women. i experience misdirected transmisogyny as someone w [with] facial hair and a low voice and long hair and tites. And when people in and out of my community learn about my gender and transition, much of tht [the] MISDIRECTED transmisogyny disapears[disappears]. my experience is better in certain situations than it would be for a similar trans women. if tht [that] is a statement you cannot aggree [agree] with than [then] there is nothing to discuss here

there is no way for a trans women to speak over a trans women [I think they meant trans men?] if they are otherwise on [a] similar playing field (white, abled, class, religion etc) thats not what speaking over means. thats like cis men thinking cis women are dominating the conversation when they make up even 30% of the conversation

Me: the post I was responding to was written by a cis person, I asked people to consider the trans experience and spoke about how it was frustrating that people Don't do that. /I/ was the trans person speaking to a cis person, and then it was decided after the fact that I was somehow stepping on trans women's toes by doing so.

Anonymous: okay great. shouldve kept that context than maybe you wouldnt have also revealed u [you] think trans women can oppress trans men

Me: this is why I suggested you read my response, because I don't believe that and I also explained explicitly why I didn't include the username of the original poster (though part of it, of course, is that I didn't want anyone to harass the op) 

Anonymous: i did read ur [your] response thats how i know you think trans women oppress trans men as equally as trans men oppress trans women

Me: that's not really how oppression works? I believe that trans people are able to Hurt Each Other, because all people as individuals are capable of harming each other as individuals. this is not the same thing as oppression, oppression is a systemic power structure that puts one group above another.

what I've said is that I believe trans people are equals, and you think this is a bad thing? 

I didn't even say that trans people are equals In The World As A Whole (though I do believe that), I said they're equals Specifically Within The Trans Community made by and for trans people.

Anonymous: and i wholeheartedly disagree with that! its incredibly clear as a tme [transmisogyny exempt] trans butch lesbian in community with trans women, its incredibly easy to see how tme [transmisogyny exempt] people are privileged over tma [transmisogyny affected] people

including in lgbt and trans specific spaces!!!

Me: so your point is that from Your perspective you have seen the way that people within queer and trans spaces have made you feel othered and hurt people for being trans fem.

my point is that This Is True, I have seen this as well. but I have Also seen people take that exact same energy and point it at other trans people. I have personally been othered and torn down both for being trans masc And for being nonbinary at different points in time. 

I am telling you that you are right, but that people need to be more open to other people's perspectives to get a clearer picture on the over all situation. 

because when we look at Everyone is saying, the truth seems to be that All trans people are torn down for who they are.

why is that a bad thing? what does it hurt to consider that I have also experienced something similar to you?

I Really hope that your point isn't that I am privileged compared to other trans fems after I spoke in depth about being raped by a man and how that's affected me for the rest of my life

Anonymous: no im litterally [literally] saying that amab trans fems and trans women experience another layer of oppression from afab trans people. i litterally [literally] told you i am also an afab transmasc person. why do you transandrophobia truthers litterally [literally] always jump to trauma dumping ! if you want to put it in those terms, you are privileged in comparison to amab transpeople who actually have higher rates of sexual abuse and rape. you are not more privileged than cis people who experience lower rates rape and sexual abuse.

and fuck u for reading me call myself a butch lesbian and calling me transfem so it suits ur argument

Me: 1: I'm sorry I called you trans fem when that isn't how you identify, I thought you'd explained to me that you were tme trans fem like you consider me to be. we're both upset and this isn't really the best medium to hold a conversation with, so it's easy to word things in a way that can be misinterpreted as well as misinterpret things that would be clearer if you had more time to sit on and absorb the information.

I didn't mean to hurt your feelings, but I am frustrated with you continuously jumping to the most negative reading of my intentions possible.

to rephrase my point:

"so your point is that from Your perspective you have seen the way that people within queer and trans spaces have othered and hurt people for being trans fem."

followed by the rest of it

2: that's not actually true, there are a few studies that have found that trans mascs over all face similar (and at points higher) rates of sexual abuse to trans women.

(this is a link to a tumblr post, but that tumblr post is a link to a study, I've included This link because it has easily accessible pictures of the relevant graphs).

though coincidentally I've recently made a post that relevant to this exact topic

the point I made there (and the point I'm going to make here) is that saying "This minority group experiences This Thing less than That minority group" isn't useful when speaking to individuals because those individuals have still experienced trauma.

individual people Are Not every statistic about their minority group, and they cannot have their Experienced compared based on those statistics

because Experiences are not dictated by statics. and treating people as if their experiences don't matter because their experiences don't match the statistics is cruel.

the other point being, of course, that using studies like this to try to hard measure the Amount Of Oppression between different minority groups is silly.

these are self reported with relatively small sample sizes of specific locations at a specific time. they're Important to prove that there is a problem, but there has never and will never be a measure of the experiences of every trans man vs every trans woman that we can then calculate and compare.

I'm sure there Are some statistics out there that show trans women with a marginal increase of sexual abuse compared to trans men, just like there are some statistics out there that show the opposite.

what this tells us is not that one group Inherently has it worse than the other, it tells us that trans people experience sexual assault, and that's a problem that needs to be addressed.

3: I find it incredibly distasteful to insist over and over again that someone is not oppressed, that they are privileged, that they haven't been hurt in a meaningful way. and Then refer to them speaking about their lived experiences as "trauma dumping"

if you can't handle frank discussions on the trauma and oppression that trans people experience on a day to day basis then you really shouldn't be commenting on that trauma.

[End conversation]

screenshots of the full conversation can be found here: [Link] I would've made a video to fully prove that these aren't doctored, but I don't want to out the person I was speaking to. they don't deserve harassment

[dunmertitty]

just gonna say, i don’t usually rb posts that have the #transandrophobia tag and i have it blocked. and i can make a whole post on what i think about That later, but i think regardless of its tags, that post is important bc why are you getting mad at trans men for doing something slightly bad rather than getting mad at a system that puts marginalized people in this situation anyway. you’re falling for the same divide and conquer categories that humans in power have been using for centuries to make the lower classes mad at each other rather than at the politicians and their systems that only protect themselves.

like i’m sorry but if you think one man receiving resources meant for women is more infuriating than the fact that there’s thousands of people regardless of gender that are unable to have basic necessities under capitalism then maybe you have the wrong priorities!!!

like yes it sucks that a trans man is in a women’s shelter but maybe if the government did something to address housing insecurity, then nobody would have to be in that situation. yes so sad that you had to see a dude with three facial hairs at the gynecologist but if we had better healthcare for reproductive health, women’s health, and trans health, then it wouldn’t be such a big deal.

you think the problem is “there’s not enough resources” so your solution is “let’s gatekeep more people from these resources” but the real problem is that these resources are hoarded by people with money and power so it seems like there’s not enough.

[t-cock]

We have male privilege just as any queer man does. Our male privilege doesn't take away from the marginalization (transphobia) we face in a cishetero patriarchal and white supremacist society. Transphobia is an extension of misogyny, just as homophobia is.

Saying trans men have male privilege should not be intended to dismiss trans men being subject to trans/homophobia, but should be about getting us to recognize the new space we occupy, at the very least in interpersonal situations.

There are all kinds of forms of oppression, and while we are not as a class systemically oppressive, we have the potential of being interpersonally oppressive.

We benefit from a transmisogynistic society because we are trans without being trans women. It’s true that trans men are more "tolerated" or even "favorable" -- but just like any marginalized man, that doesn't clear us of oppression. It doesn't take away from the transphobic violence we face under the same system, it just means we're not always aware of each other's struggles.

I would have agreed with your post before I saw the "transandrophobia" tag. I at first thought it was a post acknowledging our marginalized identity intersects with privilege, but this tag undos that reading. Please understand that androphobia isn't the actual problem going on. You are misdiagnosing a systemic issue.

As a trans man myself, I know there is a need in trans men to have language to discuss our oppression; how our oppression is uniquely at a crossroads between privilege and oppression; but we can do so without unintentionally claiming that misandry is a real issue in society. A cishetero patriarchal, white supremacist (as stated before) society does not hate Men in any real capacity. When men are marginalized by these systems, it is due to seeming adjacency to Women. That is why I say homophobia and transphobia are extentions of misogyny. Transphobia would not exist without misogyny; transphobia exists because of transmisogyny.

We can acknowledge this, acknowledge that in some ways we have potential benefits, and also discuss how the same conditions still/also oppress us. It's true that it is complicated to work through, and yes it can be frustrating when some people don't want to. We don't need to give up the work and go for menimist arguments because... well to be completely honest, I don't really understand why you guys do this, other than it being reactionary. I think being more involved with the history of marginalized queer men would really benefit some of you. I don't just mean from the last few centuries, like when you look into older examples of homophobia it really puts into perspective how deeply misogyny goes and how we got to this point. At least do that before fuming about feminists (which is what you're doing with "androphobia")

I hope my comment gets at least one guy to rethink androphobia trutherism. I know it feels uncomfortable and even insulting to be labeled as having "male privilege" -- but to be completely honest, the first time I ever heard that trans men have male privilege was from an elder trans man. So if you're thinking this is something only baeddels say online to silence us, please remember that some trans men have been saying this for longer than that. The baeddels weren't around when I started transitioning! This isn't a new idea, it's trans feminism!

"your transness doesn't intersect with your manness"

actually my transness IS my manness. they're the exact same facet of my identity. they don't just intersect, they are mutually inclusive parts of each other. one does not exist without the other

[strangestcase]

I think conversations about how transphobia impacts transfems and transmascs differently would go somewhere if "transandrophobia" or whatever you want to call it wasnt treated like. Transmysoginy For Transmascs.

like, yes, all trans people are hit with a combo of transphobia and good old mysoginy but it mixes and overlaps in different ways and it's disingenuous to assume it does so in equivalent ways for men and women. Transfems are treated like Schrodinger's Woman, misgendered as men (transphobia) most of the time but "miraculously" gendered correctly as women only when it hurts them (mysoginy), so they're simultaneously Men Who Are Bad At Being Men or Women Who Are Bad At Being Women. Transmascs are treated like delusional girls, hit with the brunt of mysoginy because their genders aren't aknowledged. While it stems from the same root (treating trans people as a secret bad third gender) (edit: this happens to all trans people btw, we're treated like our birth genders to be cruel until Suddenly gendering us correctly can hurt us- i could write an essay on how this also affects gnc people but uuuh this post is long already), it is put on motion differently.

so like, Yes, it's perfectly easy to point out how transphobia against transmascs can fly under the radar since it can be disguised as a concern troll- without dismissing transmysoginy or pretending we have it worse. idk if i've made myself clear here?

[homophyte]

i think one of the things that really gets under my skin about the spread of the term transandrophobia (and its related discourse) is just how pernicious the myth that accompanies it is: that transfems talking about transmisogyny (both in general but especially within the queer community) are doing stupid useless insular discourse in a time where people wish violence against all trans people, and are thus on the side of those doing that violence because theyre trying to divide us, but that transmascs coining transandrophobia (and its ilk) are doing important community work, are focused on coalition and mutual aid and protection. the biggest projection ive ever seen frankly especially since transandrophobia only exists in response to transfems talking about transmisogyny--it is literally something born out of and to create division in the community, it IS the stupid useless insular discourse. in many ways discussing the transmisogyny that comes from other queers, yes even from transmascs, does far more for community and coalition because it (very undeservedly kindly, might i add) is attempting to bridge that gap between transfems and those w tme privilege, get them to recognize that privilege and work to better themselves to be better allies to transfems ESPECIALLY now when violence against trans people is becoming more acceptable! addressing intracommunity violence is and should be a priority bc we should not be stabbing each other in the back, especially not the most vulnerable among us, ESPECIALLY not now! (note: while im talking about transmisogyny in this instance this is similarly the case for, say, racism in the LGBT community and many other issues--queers of color arent 'dividing the community' by trying to address it, theyre trying to make us stronger BY addressing it, more able to help each other and, again, particularly our most vulnerable.) the insane thing is this discourse recognizes that fact--or at least cant not talk about it from an optics perspective--and will bring it up constantly but their solution is to do like. more transmisogyny and be more hostile to transfems driving them out of community! like. what! nevermind that the idea that transfems are 'sleeping with the enemy' and secretly are trying to hurt others (in this case via driving a political wedge between them (again: LITERALLY what the transandrophobia ppl are doing!)) is a hugely central tenant of transmisogyny in general? like its not even SUBTLE in how it replicates and acts out transmisogyny, theres so little difference between that and the terf fear of transfems putting on a veneer to hide predation. actually kind of boils my blood how hypocritical the whole thing is esp bc its literally enacting that same violence. WHILE also trying to paint themselves as the 'real victims' . i really have no sympathy for it and i absolutely cannot bring myself to hold it against the trans girls who go on to say 'actually fuck you guys i give up on being nice' bc tme people are fucking stupid as shit sometimes. gullible. the amount of otherwise intelligent ppl who fall for this shit and put fucking dobberbutts or genderkoolaid on my dash is just frankly disappointing and im having increasingly less sympathy for the ppl who fail to acknowledge their privilege and as such fall for it

[miseryonmymind]

There are a lot of people out there who seem to think that once a person chooses the label of "man" to describe themselves, that their former identity/what they were assigned to as children/what they are often still seen as in public suddenly stops affecting them. That the label of Man (derogatory) overrides all else. But that's just not how it works.

Putting this under a cut because I have quite a lot to say. This isn't directed at this anon specifically, just at the thought expressed here in general. I also don't speak for all trans men/transmascs. These are my own thoughts, though I see many of them echoed across various social media as well.

For those of us who don't, won't, or cannot pass, whether just for now or forever, it's very often anti-woman-based hatred that we suffer from because of our outward appearances and, many times, the parts we're born with. When many of us try to express that we're affected by this, and give examples and anecdotes (the same way that any other trans person does, to express feelings about their experience) to show what's happening, we're told that we can't experience misogyny because we're men.

Okay, I guess that's fair enough, but... There is most definitely an experience going on here that is directly related to being AFAB and/or perceived as women outwardly, and the word for being nasty to people who you think are women (whether it's true or not) is misogyny. Hmm... Oh! "Transmisogyny" seems to fit! Trans, because of course, and misogyny, because irrational hatred of women. That makes sense.

And then we're told we're TME. Transmisogyny-exempt. We can't be affected by transmisogyny, because we're not trans women.

...Okay, so, we can't say we're hurt regularly by society's hatred for women because we aren't women, and we can't align ourselves with other trans people who are also hurt by both transness and society's hatred for women, because we're not trans women. But, again, we are definitely affected by misogyny! So I guess we're meant to describe it with a specific, different word, despite the perfect one already existing in several different ways. Um. Well, I guess we can go with... Transandrophobia? A unique form of pain and oppression experienced by transmasc p—

"Androphobia doesn't exist. You can't be oppressed for being a man."

Right, we don't really disagree, but we're not allowed to say we're affected by misogyny of any kind, because we're not women. So this is a little more specific to what we're dealing with. It encompasses all of that, but makes it clear that we're men, so we're not claiming your space.

"Transphobia describes your problem just fine."

So we're experiencing transphobia and misogyny?

"No. You're not a woman. You can't experience misogyny. You're not hated for being women, because you're not women. And you're not hated for being men, because men aren't oppressed. You're hated for being trans."

Well, yes, we are hated for being trans. Same as you. We're also very much hated and hurt by the perception that we're women, and for the parts we're born with and how that's associated, on a society-wide scale, with Femaleness. So it's—

"You can't experience misogyny if you're not a woman."

...Even if a fair portion of the reason we're being hurt is because we're viewed and categorized as women?

"No one hates you for being women because you're not women."

And round. And round. And round, and round, and round...

I get what you're saying. Truly. I'm not trying to talk over you or argue with you about troubles you do or do not face, because that's absolutely not my business. I'm not trying to deny that how transfems are treated is barbaric and heinous. There are, no doubt, some bad transmasc actors out there, doing exactly those things. But by and large, transmascs just want to be able to express their specific experiences with words that make sense to use, and we're routinely told we're not allowed to do that because it steps on womens' toes.

I mean this genuinely: what are we meant to do? Not talk about how anti-woman rhetoric affects every person who is perceived as a woman as well as every person who is perceived as wanting to "invade womens' spaces"? Are we meant to only ever talk about how we can't get HRT or gender-affirming surgery because the state hates trannies (totally separate from gender as a concept at all, apparently), and totally ignore the fact that reproductive rights that affect us are gutted and used against us a weapons to deny our transness, that our population is at unfortunately regular risk for "corrective" rape and domestic violence, and that we're viewed as "failed/deviant girls"?

Transmascs aren't respected when we come out because we're labeled as poisoned by manly dykes, as stupid little girls experiencing Baby's First Feminism. Transfems aren't respected when they come out because they're labeled as poisoned by reality-denying perverts, as aberrant little boys who want to "pretend" to be women.

There's no coincidence in the fact that the transmasc problem is Denial, Downplaying, and Insults to Intelligence/Understanding of the "Real World", while the transfem problem is Aggressive Forbidding, Shaming, and Labels of Perversion.

(tw of possibly triggering language.)

They're teaching their "daughters" what they're meant to get used to: You don't know what you're talking about. Sit down, shut up, listen to the Men and grow your hair back out so he has something to hold you by. Welcome to your future, little girl. You get black eyes for talking back and saying no.

They're teaching their "sons" what they should be emulating: You get women you don't become women. You wanna be a woman so bad, I'll show you what it's like to be a woman when I beat your ass. Put that girly shit down, you're not going to shame this family with that pervert stuff.

(tw over.)

It's misogyny all the way down. They don't want their girls to be men because they don't believe girls are anything more than their ability to give birth and act as objects to be used by Real Men. They don't want their boys to be women because they see women as lesser creatures, and they think their boys should be subjugating women, not imitating them. It's all misogyny. We're all affected by misogyny, cis and trans alike. Every person is affected by the worldwide hatred and oppression of women. The reasons why and the outcomes of this are almost opposite, depending on your designation of "boy" or "girl" by society, but it's is always. Misogyny.

Trans men and transmascs can't suddenly divorce themselves from those experiences en masse and become Un-Women in an instant. Some manage to not be as affected by it by being in the right place at the right time, or passing well, or being surrounded by decent people, and I'm genuinely happy for them! But I'm not one of those guys. Many of us are still affected, and may always be affected. We may not be in the news all the time, and we may not be at the epicenter of Why The World Hates The Transes, but it's back to that same stuff again: Denial. Downplaying. Erasure of our issues entirely. (As opposed to the Hyperbole, Shaming, and Insistence Upon Danger that trans women receive on the world stage.)

We get denied as men at all by Outward Society, and we're relegated to the back with all the other failed/deviant women that will never live up to Female Expectation. The "real world" doesn't care about us because they don't deem us a threat, just a mockery of attempted masculinity (read: power) and a waste of an unused uterus and Testosterone injections.

We're denied as being affected by the things that we see and experience every day by Inward Society, and we're relegated to the back as Men Who Can't Be Harmed By Anti-Woman Rhetoric. The online world has begun telling us that we are a threat, specifically to trans women/transfems, because by explaining that we're having problems that stem from the exact same issue that affects them, we're MRAs and transmisogynists.

I must ask again... What do we do, then? How are we meant to explain and describe the unique oppression we face? Are we meant to advocate for human rights and rightfully call it for what it is—a denial of rights in many forms because of society's particular hatred/subjugation of women, femininity, and specific combinations of body parts—without allowing ourselves to say that it's hurting us, too? Why should we be asked to deny an aspect of our suffering?

Just to utilize an example, and by no means to claim it as a perfect analogy... A white-passing black person is still affected by racism; the denial/erasure of their blackness isn't a favor, it's a white-centering thought process that might be argued to benefit this person in some ways, but it absolutely does harm them in others. No one would or should deny that. Obviously it's not the same, but it's not overall dissimilar to what's happening here, with regard to relative privilege.

The relative privilege of being dismissed, as opposed to being highlighted, doesn't erase the things that do harm us. The relative privilege of "being seen as male" (only sometimes; only by already-cool people, or when we're denied entry into a space) doesn't stop us from being seen and labeled as female just as often and with malice. We're told that we belong with "The Queers" by ignorant cis people, but we're told by fellow queers that we can only relate to the type of oppression and pain that is deemed Reasonable For Transmascs if we want to stay.

I hope you understand what I mean with all this. I mean no ill will toward trans women or transfems in general. Not at all. Trans men on the whole don't want to hurt (the royal) you, or deny your experiences, or try to claim that we're More Oppressed, because it's not a contest of oppression. We have so, so much more in common than we have differences. It just starts to feel like no matter what we do, how we say things, what labels we use to describe what we go through, we can't win, and we don't belong.

It gets brought up on this blog because Salem is at once trying to claim that he's directly hurt by peoples' misconceptions about his non-HRT, non-op trans male characters (and himself), while also echoing Wis' sentiments that transmascs on the whole are horrible, nasty people and absolutely all of them hate trans women. Yet, somehow, Salem manages to dodge that label himself despite being transmasc...? It's very hypocritical, and it feels so... Fetishy and othering to trans women, to go on and on as though they're Creatures Beyond Humanity (positive) and not just Regular Women. Putting the people you claim to care about on a pedestal isn't a display of love, it's self-deprecating and borderline worship.

Thanks for reading. Sorry for doing this on your blog, Mx. Mod.

I do appreciate what this blog does, and I understand how important it is, but I’ve gotta say it sure loses credibility every time a post crying about “transandrophobia” gets published with no criticism. Like. That’s not real. Trans men get punished bc they’re trans not bc they’re men. The word transphobia is right there.

The reason the word transmisogyny exists is because it talks about the intersection between transphobia and misogyny, two real axis of oppression. It’s also why the word misogynoir exists, the intersection between misogyny and racism. If transandrophobia was a real thing, it would have to be the intersection of transphobia and misandry, and misandry is not and has never been a legitimate axis of oppression.

Whenever it’s raised as a legitimate concern here when it very much is NOT, all that’s happening is people giving WIs and Salem more ammo to prove that the people here are being transmisogynist bc transandrophobia is coined and used (whether this is conscious or not) to turn a conversation about women’s struggles into being focused on men in order to preserve their feelings. The fact that the men and women in the conversation are trans doesn’t change the fact that it’s distracting from legitimate discussions about misogyny, and therefore bringing harm to trans women. And so, in using this language uncritically and allowing it to flourish JUST bc Wis and Salem are involved is just damaging this blog’s ethos. You don’t fight people spouting bullshit by spouting bullshit right back.

(And yes, I understand that you, the blog runner, do not personally agree with every anon that sends shit nor do you agree with all of what they have to say but letting things like this slide and publishing them anyways without speaking up against it just makes a hostile, unproductive culture in what you, yourself maintain is meant to be a safe space to air out grievances. I ask, why is it noble to not stick up for women when a man is diminishing their oppression just because that man is trans? Or is it just a coincidence that we get an ask from a trans man airing grievances every week and yet very few trans women feel safe to speak here?)

tbh. 90% of the time. if i disagree with an anon, unless it is explicitly. i often do not bring it up, as a way to mitigate the inevitable flood of anons, that will directly respond to that single anon to disagree. it happened several times in the past, enough i felt unless it is topical, i should keep my personal opinion to a minimum. and it will definitely happen to this post too. but leaving it unaddressed personally, would sit wrong with me.

re: transfems feeling unsafe speaking here. if this is true, i have not seen it expressed, unless you are meaning yourself. i have gotten many transfem anons, both via my messages, and via inbox, especially in reference to feeling heard about salem's transfem fetishism. the inbox is very diverse, and i appreciate the many viewpoints i get, on many different queer experiences. personally. i do not think the term transandrophobia is fitting nor makes much sense really. however, it is harmful to deny that trans men and transmascs do not face specific injustices and forms of transphobia, unique to being transmasculine, which i often see ignored or attributed to misogyny, or basic transphobia. for example, transmasc's pregnancy is often more dangerous and stigmatized than woman's pregnancy already is, and many transmasc parents reported increased abuse, both from the world, and from the medical field, that does not just boil down to simple "misdirected misogyny" alone. it is one thing, to highlight that trans women ARE unfairly targeted, are often the least supported, and are often the most stigmatized, of the entire lgbt community. and it is another, to mock trans men and transmascs, calling them theyfabs, using terms like "zipper tits", i have literally recently seen posts, saying that a trans man was only acting so standoffish because he was on t. parroting stupid bioessentialist nonsense, to put someone down for their transition.

i am tired of infighting within the trans community. i have seen just about every discourse post, every counter point, ad nauseum. there needs to be a come to jesus moment. where queer people realize we have far more common enemies, than any of us need. making the same stupid post about flag colors, or slur discourse, or how unoppressed a group you are not a part of, is (looking directly at lesbiphobes, aphobes, biphobes), is not fixing any of our issues.

[eldorr]

temp pinned

temporary pinned post until i figure out what to put here.

until then here's all of my blogs:

@eldorr = Main Coining Blog (you are here)

@mister-eldritch = Adult (18+) Coining Blog

@monsieur-eldritch = Triggering Content Coining Blog

@tucuteboything = Discourse/Vent blog (If you genuinely want to talk with me about something triggering or discourse related, please do so there)

.

Also with my DNI IDs, I opted into a more "context for context" approach, as I know some screen readers don't read dashes or slashes, so I opted into writing the ID in a way I hope won't come off as me being pro something and anti something similar lol.

Also if you're on my DNI you can still use my terms/flags, just don't interact with me outside of reblogging to hoard blogs.

.

If you're looking for my "Gendered Terms Archival" list for terms similar to Man/Boy/Woman/Girl/Enban/Enby/etc it would be [here]. I update it whenever a post with terms that fit what I'm archiving on it ends up on my dash.

.

Also some important things to note while clarifying about my DNI, under a read more since it's long:

The only "transid" group I'd be fine with interacting is trans species, because as far as I'm aware it's mostly just another word for alterhumans (mostly otherkin/therians), especially for those who want or acquire body mods to reflect that. The term didn't originate from TransID rhetoric so that's why the term transid is in quotations above.

I don't support the grouping of Mspec identities under "Bispec" under the guise of being inclusive. I view it as no different than calling Mspec identities "just Bi". I don't support the spread of BaB rhetoric.

I support KFF and the more casual use of alterhuman and otherkin language. I support those interacting with communities and exploring their identity in non-standard and non-strict ways. I believe anyone should be able to explore and have fun with their identity without being harassed by EITHER side, whether that's people harassing KFF (or other non-kin alterhumans) for the language they choose to use, OR KFF harassing or being ablest/sanist/etc to alterhumans whose identity is non-chosen. I believe folks shouldn't be forced to use highly specific microlabels if they don't want to, even if that language would "fit more."

To do with the above point, and before anyone throws a fit, I'm a reincarnate godshard. I use the term Kin and Kinnie casually to describe my nonhuman-hood as it was the first language I was introduced to and is the only terms that feel like it sticks. I do experience phantom limbs and shifts at times, however any identity (kin) I may take on typically fades at a certain point due to myself being basically a faceless shapeshifting void. I usually do identity as those past 'kins, in a state that may be described as "that was me" or in flux between is/was.

I will also ask if you're a KFF "factkin" to not interact. I'm fine with non-chosen factkin as a lot of the rhetoric against them have also been used against factives.

BIID and BDD are NOT the same as being Transabled or TransID. Don't conflate the two. I also believe folks with BIID/BDD should be able to coin and use terms to describe how they experience their disorder. Such as terms like Aldernic sublabels to describe a body one feels they should have.

Think that men of a minority cannot be oppressed for being (the "wrong" kind of) men. Likewise DNI if you support the phrase "transandrophobia truther" or you support Ba*ddel (e) rhetoric (the anti-nontransfem weirdos).

I'd also ask for folks who support the terms TMA/TME, or use the phrase "theyfabs" even in joking settings to not interact; yes, it's exorsexist and anti-transmasc rhetoric. I'm a Transunitist (Pro-Transunity) if that helps.

Pro-Contact Harmful paras in my DNI covers ANY para that involves any non-consenting partner, anyone or anything that cannot consent, or any involvement of a non-consenting third party.

There's quite a few things missing from my DNI that are mostly run of the mill "basic DNI" stuff, basically any bigot, bigoted belief, right-wingers, etc. I'm pro-choice btw.

[grublovequeue]

hi! i dont want to reblog this to my main because its really long.

this post is trying to discuss and explain some possible explanations for why the specific ways that i have watched transmascs participate in the persecution of transfemme people might have arisen. im not trying to claim that every transmasc person is somehow evil or that everyone in all transmasuline community is doing these things. but there is a lot of appropriation of or dismissal of transmisogyny happening and a lot of open hostility towards transfem people also occuring. so this is me trying to discuss the places that i think some of those behaviors might be originating from.

whiteness is not used here as a modifier designed to invalidate anyone or dismiss them out of hand, nor am i claiming that everyone participating in the behaviors i am trying to explain is white. i am adding white as a qualifier to my theory here because this is a tentative explanation of the behavior of people who are in my own demographic of white transmascs and is therefore based on my own white transmasculine experience.

this is me trying to explain why the transfemme people in my life have had patterns of transmasculine people dismissing, invalidating, or appropriating their experiences. a lot of those people did so under the banner of being 'anti-transandrophobia'. so i put it in the tag :) any specific things i am claiming happen in this post are things that have genuinely happened often in front of me in person and online to my transfem loved ones! yes even the one about "viewing transmisogyny as a privilege". that specific sentiment has been expressed to me and to my family several times in person and i've seen it repeated other places online. it is bizarre and an extreme example of the kind of behavior visibility-as-privilege thought can get you into but it is not a strawman.

overall i do not think you got my point in your initial reply. i can go point by point talking about these things if you would like more clarification but i think getting those points out of the way first will probably explain some of what you are seeing here.

my theory about this which is very constrained by my personal aka white experience is that one of the things that happens to u as a white baby girl and then as a young white woman is that bad things are happening to you, and everybody needs to convince you they arent happening (to make sure u are subjugated but still content enough to further the project of white supremacy). and also nothing you think or feel or want can be real or meaningful bc ur just a girl.

and so if ur going to be aware of ur own misery and oppression under patriarchy u have to like develop these repetitive cycles of validation of your own oppression and internal experience as Real and Valid. because everything is very invested in making you forget.

and then this cycle can continue when u transition: the overwhelming majority of bad reactions to transmasc people are based upon that previous reaction to girlness which is to infantilize u and dismiss you and treat u like u arent real. and so as a continued reaction to this many tmasc people become singlemindedly focused upon Realness and Validity. Realness becomes the Only Real Problem, the one Great Wound to be healed.

which to my tfem friends can explain a lot abt the weird way tmasc heavy spaces talk about gender: its a lot of reassuring yourself and others that you're Valid. that youre Real and Valid. youre So Valid. which for most of the tfem people in my life has been kind of bewildering because the truth is if ur tma nobody needs to tell you what youre doing is real because immediately people start doing transmisogyny at you.

[transfemstalin]

hm I think that's definitely not true on multiple levels. okay . I feel like you're going in the wrong direction so I'm going to break down this post

>"transmascs have male privilege."

yes, this is true, because they are men. all else being equal, a trans man will have power over a trans woman, because of male privilege. do we understand this?

>'so the same patriarchy that calls trans women 'predatory men', is going to give privileges to people who they see as misguided women?'

this is a deliberately bad faith read of what trans women say when we say that trans men still have male privilege. trans men are able to have male privilege because they are men-- even if they are not seen as men currently, that is a factor that can change, right? whereas a trans man will continue to be a man regardless of who sees them as one. they're also capable of oppression, just like anyone else.

transunion (the account), is about 'trans unity'. this is a dog whistle. I cannot stress enough that when you see accounts like this telling trans women to shut up and that they're not actually oppressed by men, that is transmisogyny, and that should not be tolerated. if you want unity in a community, let us talk about our oppression or at least stop being misogynistic to us.

they also fundementally misunderstand the problem of transmisogyny, dumbing it down to society thinking we are predatory men, when that's not actually the case, and again, as you love to keep bringing up, there's more nuance. trans women actually are treated like women, just women that people think it is socially acceptable to abuse. think about how many trans women, even before they come out, have eating disorders, or let men push them around, or when they come out, immediately face misogyny-- because they are women. the transphobia (and yes, it is only transphobia, not transmisandry, misandry as a concept is not real, this is feminism 101)

this also leads into: the misgendering

I am unsure how you were not able to see this? this post directly implies that trans women actually have power over trans men, by virtue of society thinking they're all 'predatory men'. the argument that trans men are oppressed by trans women is a fundamentally transphobic argument, and it's especially clear in this case. let me break it down so as not to be misunderstood:

they bring up the patriarchy, and then reference how "trans women are seen as predatory men". we already know that this is a straw man of what transmisogyny is. but the way this is said also places trans women, "seen as" males, in proximity to power, especially over trans men, who society views as "misguided women."

the basis of this argument relies on trans people being incorrectly gendered to make any sense, and for that reason, it doesn't hold up when you put it under scrutiny. trans people aren't just a monolith of clocky closeted pretransitioners-- a lot of them, I would say a majority of trans people even, actually do pass quite well.

now again, some critical thinking: this post was tagged with transandrophobia and transmisandry. these are not real things. however, trans men do absolutely face transphobia. when you look at the transunion account, it's virtually all posts about how "actually trans men can't oppress trans women because they're actually real women seen as women by society. please look through that account for me and tell me that post I screenshotted was being made in good faith. it's terf shit, those are terf talking points.

I admit I didn't mean for this post to get so much attention, and that things cannot be properly analyzed outside of their context. to understand one thing you must understand many other things. this account is dedicated to getting trans women to shut up when they say that they are being actively oppressed by their trans male counterparts. actual trans unity can only exist when people feel safe talking about their oppression.

what happened to trans men are men.. what happened to trans women are women.. are we just?? misgendering people now????

[magicisrealandsoismyally]

Right so defining socialization theory doesn't change shit for me. It's not about transmascs being "socialized female". It is about how people who are in social positions where they are oppressed but not the most oppressed + they do not interact with people more oppressed than them on the regular. It's not being a white AFAB that does this to people. Being south asian does it too. like i just said. And crazy thing, transfems can do this too. I've heard some ableist shit be said and defended by hella queer people before. No one is immune to feeling like they are the most oppressed group on the list.

To address your second point, the main issue with transandrophobia as a movement is that however you feel about the orginal theory, it's been warped by TERFs and MRAs to the point where the tag is basically 4 different belief systems under a trench coat. I understand that this was not a belief under the original transandrophobia belief, but I call it like I see it, and TERFs have done their damage to the movement.

It's not a lie, it's just a different side of the tag you don't interact with (and good on you honestly, watching transmascs argue for sex essentialism is the most confusing thing in the world because it sounds like they are 30 seconds from being detrans movement leaders)

A term can be coined by a POC and also every POC transmasc I know can hate the movement, these are coexisting statements, plenty of movements do not reflect the person who started them 1 to 1. And like I said, TERFs and MRAs have latched on to the tag.

And yes, transmascs get third gendered you are correct but TERFs think y'all can go back to being a woman it's why they're invading the transandrophobia tag because a lot of transandrophobia truthers argue the same sex based oppression shit as TERFs. TERFs don't try to detransition transfems. Cause we can't be men, not real ones, not in their eyes. They don't see y'all as men, or women, but they'll treat you like victimized women for long enough until they can make you into one "again". To be clear, this is very insidious and bad, but it is different treatment. Closeted transmascs do not get third gendered on an individual level, just a systemic one. Closeted transfems get third gendered on all levels. I mean there's a reason the dysphoria fit is formlessly masc. Because masculinity is viewed as the default. Because when a young "girl" wears masculine clothing like sweatpants and a sweatshirt, no one has a problem with that, they might tell him that "she's wasting her looks" but she's not getting physically assaulted for that. But if a young "boy" wears a skirt, people genuinely get violent over that. I've had people threaten to punch me after i wore pink. It's not because they hate pink, it's because femininity in amabs makes use targets.

Masculinity is seen as a default, as a natural state. It's why transmascs have complained about not being able to dress fun without their masculinity challenged, because everything expressive is dubbed too feminine, because to be masculine effort is not required (by cis men, i'm aware trans men have to put in effort, but it isn't effort that is obvious, male contour makeup isn't supposed to be clearly there for example). It's why stories about crossdressing male are stories like mulan, while stories crossdressing female play it off as a joke something to be ridiculed.

@magicisrealandsoismyally

You do understand that this is socialisation theory right? Just in pretty words?

'this group of trans people spent time occupying this social status and that left you with a sense of entitlement and shapes their behaviour as a whole'...

In case there is someone else who considers this an ok thing to say, let me give you an example of a similar statement which you may understand as bad:

'Transandrophobia deniers are some of the most ex-white men people in the world. Now I'm not saying they were men, but the time they spent occupying a social status where others viewed you as a white man shapes the way you act entitled and claim you're the most oppressed group (white man shit)'

Now. That is a horrifying and transmisogynistic thing to say, yes? We all agree? So we should all also agree that the initial statement was also horrifying and predjudiced against trans men (whether you call that transandrophobic or not).