#ceterophobia

"sex class /sex based class" analysis that ignores and erases intersexism and transmisogyny in favour of equating trans women with cis men (misgendering)

"male supremacy" - and assuming (the small minority of) trans women who are awful to other trans people are that way because they are some kind of crypto MRAs and not just radfems and or assholes in their own right. Any harmful behaviour done by a trans woman is immediately assigned to "male supremacy"

"AMAB supremacy" just the same as calling trans women "male supremacists" & equating them to cis men and cis men MRAs - terfs seem to think that this is a way to get their "trans women are MRAs" shite past our BS detectors

"male socialisation" - especially when talking about (mischarecterising for grooming purposes ) intracommunity trans issues eg "trans women dOmInAtE and oppress trans men and trans spaces due to their male socialisation /experiences being raised as boys & trans men are demure in spaces and unwilling to speak up against the mean domineering trans women because of female socialisation "

When you see terfs calling trans women "violent males" you know that that is transphobic and deliberately misgendering.

But when terfs call trans men "confused girls" for some reason everyone reads that as-is and don't twig that like "violent males" it's a derogatory dogwhistle to refer to trans men.

Hence, when people try to tackle transandrophobic terfs, they go about it all wrong because they take terfs at their word they are actually talking about girls and not trans men. Leading to people assuming that trans men don't get hate from terfs.

This is why transunitism is important! Sure, you can identify when a terf is targeting trans women, but can you tell when they target trans men and nonbinary folk?

If you somehow managed to stop every terf from being transmisogynistic overnight, you haven't stopped terfism. If you eradicated all homophobia against gay men overnight, that doesn't eradicate lesbophobia.

It all has to be tackled together, with each other.

And then continued, on their blog, in three separate posts, to rant about how “transmasc/tme people/people who purposefully obfuscate are their relationship to transmisogyny” are “the worlds biggest crybullies,” how people “on this site romanticise being oppressed,” that “some people seem to pride themselves on being borderline sociopathic,” and how we are “mra clowns.”

So I guess I’m transfem and not transmasc when it’s convenient to ignore my perspective on transandrophobia, but transmasc and not transfem when they want to delegitimise my experience with oppression and imply I’m whiny for talking about it. Then I’m a “mra clown” when it’s convenient to see me as a man.

Then they went in for the triple whammy and were lowkey ableist, I’m sorry but I’m not “priding myself on being borderline sociopathic” by… having ASPD, I guess? I’m just being open and trying to spread awareness.

And idk, I feel like something about this is a good microcosm about how a lot of discussions on invisibility vs hypervisibility go (not just when it comes to trans issues, this is a pretty common dynamic in a lot of areas); an issue affects an invisible group, mainstream discourse makes it about a hypervisible group whose members for the most part are Not Happy about this, some of those members then turn around and blame the invisible group for the fact that they're being harassed for something they had nothing to do with, and then sometimes members of the invisible group decide that actually the hypervisible group wants to be part of that discussion and are strong-arming their way into it collectively.

Why? Because there are countless trans men and transmasc people who get, have gotten, and/or need to have access to abortions.

Abortion is not just a woman's rights issue. It's a human rights issue. Include trans men and transmascs in your discussions and terminology. Stop speaking over/for us.