#tried so hard to be nice and charitable towards ppl who use the term i do not think it worked

[elftwink]

i don't think trans*ndrophobia truthers realize that they also make it Harder for some transmascs to talk about our experiences properly - personally it's become a lot harder to talk about my experiences with both transphobia and misogyny as a transmasc m+f multigender person bc every discussion inevitably becomes some form of justifying "trans*ndrophobia" as a term, or someone pulling the ~we ALL experience transmisogyny~ shit. people insisting on terms like "trans*ndrophobia" and etc

(2) really just feels like trying to establish another form of binary tbh; transmisogyny as a term exists bc there's countless statistics and years of evidence setting it as a form of oppression apart from other forms of transphobia, but now people are just scrambling for an oppression label for the transphobia every "type" of trans person experiences. it just doesn't sit right (sorry for the rant in your inbox btw, it's relieving to see smn else fed up w the "trans*ndrophobia" crowd lmao)

yes exactly my thoughts on it; the attempt to create some kind of universal transmasc oppression alienates people who don't fit that kind of framework. and it this point it's often difficult to even talk around it because if you try someone else hops onto your post and attempts to stuff you into that framework. admittedly this is often well-meaning but the fact that they don't view that behaviour as derailing the conversation to me is what has always indicated that they don't care about the nuances of that convo anyway, unless it can be used to further validate what they already believe.

one thing that really drives me up the wall about it is when you read posts about the term by people who use it, it feels like they're not willing to acknowledge that a lot of the pushback is from other transmasc people (or they don't realize, or whatever). instead it's framed really vaguely like "oh they're trying to take away our language" presenting 'trans*ndrophobia' as some topic that unifies all transmascs while only outsiders push back, thereby further proving how oppressed transmascs are and how much "we" need the term. i.e. "if it wasn't real, why would people hate us so much for suggesting it was?"

only that's not what's happening. this is a purely intracommunity debate that exists at this point almost solely online in primarily transmasc circles. most of the people who speak on it are transmasc, most people who form an opinion at all are transgender in some way. while i can't read anyone's mind and am not accusing anyone of intentionally misleading people, it does get a bit frustrating to have people act like i'm in the in-group (and therefore agree with them) while attributing my actual opinions to some nebulous "them" in an equally nebulous "us vs them" depiction of the situation. it allows them to feel like they're speaking for the good of all transmascs while ignoring whoever doesn't already agree with them. and it allows them to severely dramatize and play up what is, at its core, online tumblr transmasc discourse. which isn't to say it's not important but that i resent reading posts about how not using a stupid term many of us don't even like or find useful presents an existential threat to the transmasc community when really it's like some transmasc people said "i invented a term lets use it for xyz" and other transmasc people went "i don't like that and think it's bad for abc reasons" and that's literally where we are now. it's dishonest, regardless of whether it's intentional, and it demonstrates they're not really paying that much attention to any criticisms (but what else is new in this community lmao)

you're on the same page i am re: labelling although i think the establishment of any new binary is accidental and probably not even noticed because it's really buried in this idea of 'everyone deserves to have a label' which is then obfuscated by saying "everyone deserves to have language to talk about their experiences" (which. lmao. i guess we never were able to talk about our experiences before this term was invented, what, less than a year ago? a couple years ago? okay); at its core it's a deeply self-centred analysis of oppression. it's honestly frustrating to even bring up any facts or try to make a counter argument because it doesn't and will never matter bc they will never ever address these criticisms head on. bc it's simply so much easier to willfully misunderstand what transmisogyny (the term) means and the significance of it, and characterize any dissent as some kind of censorship or silencing or transmasc voices. if you can fold in any genuine criticisms of your views and behaviors and make them synonymous with the marginalization you face, you never have to deal with the substance of the criticisms. i have yet to see anyone give a satisfying rebuttal to any points about transmisogyny, and about 90% of the time they miss the point entirely and default back to "if trans women get a label we should get one too". which is both childish and also does not address literally anything anyone is (or at least what i personally am) actually arguing. like we're going "it's not necessary and is often harmful to make up terms for different 'versions' of oppression. the reason some people have those highly specific terms is because in general that language is used to describe power systems, not directly apply to interpersonal experiences (though it often can be applied that way)" and they're like "but i want a specific term for my oppression to indicate it is also unique and important" like. nobody said it wasn't and that is so beside the point i'm gonna explode