Dakota

1. Yaouri is racist because it was made by westerners and does not understand the etymology behind yuri/yaoi and is just a combination of the words

"transmasculine nonbinary people" and "transfeminine nonbinary people" with no mention of transneutral nonbinary people is creating a binary, actually.

This is gonna ruffle feathers, but I really believe this is the most nonbinary inclusive language that I think could accurate explain what is being discussed with this distinction.

Since our society is exorsexist, the patriarchy is exorsexist. It's built on a binary. Unfortunately, the genders we were assigned at births are binary and the patriarchy doesn't know how to account for our nonbinary genders and experiences.

Transmisogyny is the intersection of "misogyny directed at women who are trans" and "transphobia directed at trans people who are women." Since the patriarchy doesn't have room for nonbinary genders, nonbinary amab people often are seen as 'trans women' to the institution of the cisheteropatriarchy. Thus, identifying people as "transmisogyny affected" and "transmisogyny exempt" allows us to discuss the nuances of transmisogyny as it affects nonbinary people across the trans genderscape.

I have seen this said a lot, that it's exorsexist, and that primarily comes from what I've seen from tme people of all genders who don't understand what transmisogyny is and/or don't like what essentially amounts to the acknowledgement of our privilege in this area. I think part of the problem is that trans men don't have a good word to describe how the intricacies of how the transphobia they face interacts with the patriarchy, so it often feels like afab people getting told there's an axis of trans oppression that we don't have access to. But I really think we need to look at the actual terms and what they actually mean to give credit to nonbinary inclusion rather than calling it exorsexist because it's complicated.

Second of all, of course I know that exorsexism isn't just "unfortunate" but rather "intentionally oppressive in its reinforcement." What I'm saying is that I don't believe these terms are actually reinforcing to exorsexism. I think they respond to a need for language to discuss the impacts of the exorsexist patriarchy as it affects people in the directional transition from men to women in a way that is inclusive to all genders and does not force nonbinary people to misgender themselves in order to be included.

Your definition of transmisogyny is not accurate and is speaking over trans women on the subject of transmisogyny, who have repeatedly stressed the definition I have proposed in this post.

This terminology is supposed to be used in addition to other terms, not in exclusion. So I don't think that it actually "not only ignores other forms of oppression but ignores the nuance of intersectional oppression by only highlighting one kind."

Trans men have terms that are antifeminist and thus do not do a good job at explaining how they are affected by the patriarchy. There is no such thing as misandry in a patriarchal society, across any demographic. Marginalized men are not marginalized on the basis of being men, and this thinking is a line of thought that has further marginalized women across intersectionally marginalized demographics, including trans women.

I think the privilege that trans people hold over and around each other is complicated and not at all simple. Thus terms like this are useful because they give us a way to discuss these concepts in ways that are inclusive of nonbinary genders and don't force nonbinary people to misgender themselves in order to be included. I don't think that promotes a misunderstanding of privilege and oppression.

Not tme and tma do force a binary. For example, I'm afab however I'm still tma due to my intersexuality.

You can't say it used along side other terms then call some of those terms "anti feminist", when I identified as a trans man I had people yell at me for being a man. Transmisandry is a real issue and does harm people. Misandry is real.

My definition of trans misogyny that to include trans women and other trans people that are affected by the combination of transmisia and misogyny. Limiting this to only trans women is exorsexism and ignores the transfems and other genderqueer people who are affected. It also ignores the fact that there is not a fine line between affected and not affected.

Saying that I should listen to trans women claiming that me (as intersex transfem) has privilege over them and am tme based solely on what was my asab is bs.

Do you also realise that the creator of the tme / tma terms believes that afab trans people oppress amab trans people?

It's not transfeminism, these terms exclude and binarise intersex and genderqueer people. I'm not going use a label that says I am both applicable and exempt from one kind of oppression.

I really don't think that the terms actually reinforce the binary. What about your experience is TMA? I'm not trying to say i don't believe you, just that I think the use of this language might not be inflexible or maybe we need new language to what you are experiencing.

Misandry isn't real in any demographic. Marginalized men are not oppressed on the basis of being men and women in those marginalized demographics (including trans women) are further victimized on the basis of gender where marginalized men are not. I have already said that. You're free to disagree, but you're going to have to explain. Most of what trans men identify as misandry is actually frustration from other gender groups or transphobia. No one has made the claim that because trans men are not victimized for being men they are not victimized for being trans. The trans men, however, have made this a lynchpin to discussing their issues with them. They do not believe it's possible to separate "trans" from "identified gender" and that all trans genders are oppressed equally which is not reflective of what we already know about patriarchal structures or what the research shows is really happening in real life. Thus, these are antifeminist language structures. They borrow the language from literally the MRA movements and many of them spend a lot of time emotionally reacting to the idea that men hold privilege in patriarchal societies which means they have a responsibility to listen to and fight for people in gender groups below them in the cisheteropatriarchy's hierarchy. Some trans men interpret "trans men are men" as an attack which means we cannot actively meet "trans women are women" where it needs to be met as a response to the TERF claim that trans women are predatory men. This has created extreme social harm in the world and it stems from trans men's insistence on antifeminism because the language they're using hinges on the rest of us agreeing to their antifeminism.

My claim here is that that's not good language. Trans men deserve feminist language that allows them to effectively fight back all of their gender based oppression. They have never had good language. Prior to the current terms, we were using "transphobia+misdirected misogyny." Misdirected misogyny comes with a host of problems, as well, and we are LONG overdue for a revist to this to create language that is good, feminist, and doesn't fight against solidarity efforts. I firmly believe that once trans men have good language, we will see a lot of these community infights resolve as people feel seen and heard.

Yes I do know that about privilege, and I don't disagree with them. I don't think privilege is an attack and I think that trans people across the genderscape feel like it is because the TERFs weaponized it against the trans women. But privilege is not an attack. It's not a commentary on moral worth. It's not a statement that you don't have it bad.

The term's coiner, Peggy McIntosh, calls privilege an "invisible knapsack." In the knapsack, there are tools and opportunities. Not everyone within a privileged demographic is going to have equal opportunity to the tools and opportunities in the knapsack. Even the same person's access to the knapsack will change situation to situation. The fact that the knapsack is there though, is a privilege. She also discusses that it's easier to see the ways we are disadvantaged than to see the ways we are advantaged. A lot of times, seeing the knapsack's existence at all requires talking to people who don't have access to the knapsack. That's why I said you should listen to trans women.

"So I suggest you listen to intersex people, genderqueer people, and inclusive transfeminists before suggesting that these are actually helpful for anything other than pointless online."

This is literally the conversation we're having right now.

Misandry is when people tell people to "man up", or mock them for having small dihhs, or assume they're all predatory or violent. Transmisandry is having someone tell me I could be a woman or nonbinary but not a man, anything but a man and then proceed to bully me for my height and potential dihh size. As someone often seen as a man, I get stared at and treated as if I'm a threat just for existing. Trans men do face discrimination for being trans and being men. It isn't misguided misogyny, I face direct misogyny. Trans men have chosen transmisandry and transandromisia to describe the oppression faced by transmasculine people and trans men.

I face transmisogyny every time I got bullied for hairy legs caused by pmos that was often hairer than guys my age. Every time I got glared at for being in a woman's space for simply existing. When I got told to "stop swing my hips" for just walking naturally and was made to walk in a stiff manner. When I would get told off for experiencing emotions or was treated as a threat constantly as a child. Transmisogyny was me being treated like a creep as a child for just existing as a intersex child. It's being scared to leave my house alone in feminine outfits because of how I'm treated when I do.

I have listened to many trans women and our experiences are extremely similar. I hate tme and tma language because it's based on asab and according to my asab non of my experiences aren't tma because I happened to have been afab when I was born and that's ignores everything that's happened since then.

- When TERF’s claim that we are a danger to young cis girls because they believe that we are preying on them to manipulate them into becoming ugly, mutilated men.

- When TRF’s claim that we are a danger to trans women and transfems because they believe that we are inherently more likely to be violent, abusive rapists towards them than cis people.

- When we are excluded from lesbian’s spaces (or any spaces that were deemed to be “for women”) because our presence within those spaces is seen as us being “men trying to invade women’s spaces”. We are seen as dangerous and predatory towards women because people believe that we will be forcing them to get into relationships with us.

- When we are excluded from gay men’s spaces because our presence within those spaces is seen as us being “stupid fujoshis trying to invade gay men’s spaces”. We are seen as being dangerous and predatory towards cis gay men because people believe that we will be forcing them to get into relationships with us.

This is gonna ruffle feathers, but I really believe this is the most nonbinary inclusive language that I think could accurate explain what is being discussed with this distinction.

Since our society is exorsexist, the patriarchy is exorsexist. It's built on a binary. Unfortunately, the genders we were assigned at births are binary and the patriarchy doesn't know how to account for our nonbinary genders and experiences.

Transmisogyny is the intersection of "misogyny directed at women who are trans" and "transphobia directed at trans people who are women." Since the patriarchy doesn't have room for nonbinary genders, nonbinary amab people often are seen as 'trans women' to the institution of the cisheteropatriarchy. Thus, identifying people as "transmisogyny affected" and "transmisogyny exempt" allows us to discuss the nuances of transmisogyny as it affects nonbinary people across the trans genderscape.

I have seen this said a lot, that it's exorsexist, and that primarily comes from what I've seen from tme people of all genders who don't understand what transmisogyny is and/or don't like what essentially amounts to the acknowledgement of our privilege in this area. I think part of the problem is that trans men don't have a good word to describe how the intricacies of how the transphobia they face interacts with the patriarchy, so it often feels like afab people getting told there's an axis of trans oppression that we don't have access to. But I really think we need to look at the actual terms and what they actually mean to give credit to nonbinary inclusion rather than calling it exorsexist because it's complicated.

Second of all, of course I know that exorsexism isn't just "unfortunate" but rather "intentionally oppressive in its reinforcement." What I'm saying is that I don't believe these terms are actually reinforcing to exorsexism. I think they respond to a need for language to discuss the impacts of the exorsexist patriarchy as it affects people in the directional transition from men to women in a way that is inclusive to all genders and does not force nonbinary people to misgender themselves in order to be included.

Your definition of transmisogyny is not accurate and is speaking over trans women on the subject of transmisogyny, who have repeatedly stressed the definition I have proposed in this post.

This terminology is supposed to be used in addition to other terms, not in exclusion. So I don't think that it actually "not only ignores other forms of oppression but ignores the nuance of intersectional oppression by only highlighting one kind."

Trans men have terms that are antifeminist and thus do not do a good job at explaining how they are affected by the patriarchy. There is no such thing as misandry in a patriarchal society, across any demographic. Marginalized men are not marginalized on the basis of being men, and this thinking is a line of thought that has further marginalized women across intersectionally marginalized demographics, including trans women.

I think the privilege that trans people hold over and around each other is complicated and not at all simple. Thus terms like this are useful because they give us a way to discuss these concepts in ways that are inclusive of nonbinary genders and don't force nonbinary people to misgender themselves in order to be included. I don't think that promotes a misunderstanding of privilege and oppression.

Not tme and tma do force a binary. For example, I'm afab however I'm still tma due to my intersexuality.

You can't say it used along side other terms then call some of those terms "anti feminist", when I identified as a trans man I had people yell at me for being a man. Transmisandry is a real issue and does harm people. Misandry is real.

My definition of trans misogyny that to include trans women and other trans people that are affected by the combination of transmisia and misogyny. Limiting this to only trans women is exorsexism and ignores the transfems and other genderqueer people who are affected. It also ignores the fact that there is not a fine line between affected and not affected.

Saying that I should listen to trans women claiming that me (as intersex transfem) has privilege over them and am tme based solely on what was my asab is bs.

Do you also realise that the creator of the tme / tma terms believes that afab trans people oppress amab trans people?

It's not transfeminism, these terms exclude and binarise intersex and genderqueer people. I'm not going use a label that says I am both applicable and exempt from one kind of oppression.

This is gonna ruffle feathers, but I really believe this is the most nonbinary inclusive language that I think could accurate explain what is being discussed with this distinction.

Since our society is exorsexist, the patriarchy is exorsexist. It's built on a binary. Unfortunately, the genders we were assigned at births are binary and the patriarchy doesn't know how to account for our nonbinary genders and experiences.

Transmisogyny is the intersection of "misogyny directed at women who are trans" and "transphobia directed at trans people who are women." Since the patriarchy doesn't have room for nonbinary genders, nonbinary amab people often are seen as 'trans women' to the institution of the cisheteropatriarchy. Thus, identifying people as "transmisogyny affected" and "transmisogyny exempt" allows us to discuss the nuances of transmisogyny as it affects nonbinary people across the trans genderscape.

I have seen this said a lot, that it's exorsexist, and that primarily comes from what I've seen from tme people of all genders who don't understand what transmisogyny is and/or don't like what essentially amounts to the acknowledgement of our privilege in this area. I think part of the problem is that trans men don't have a good word to describe how the intricacies of how the transphobia they face interacts with the patriarchy, so it often feels like afab people getting told there's an axis of trans oppression that we don't have access to. But I really think we need to look at the actual terms and what they actually mean to give credit to nonbinary inclusion rather than calling it exorsexist because it's complicated.