#tmisogyny

Do not go to transfem positivity/experience posts and go "and trans men/transmascs too!!!" Make your own post.

Comparing transfem rep to transmasc rep. - "transmasc rep needs to be better!" "i wish there was more transmasc rep" ✅✅✅✅✅ - "transfems get so much more rep" "we get nothing compared to transfem" ❌❌❌❌❌❌❌❌❌❌❌❌❌❌

Going to transandrophobic blogs and spamming them with asks - you are not going to change their minds and you run the real risk of opening the floor to TERFS. we are all better off just blocking and not engaging AT ALL. No comments, no asks, no reblogs. JUST BLOCK.

FOR THE LOVE OF FUCKING GOD, PUT THE FUCKING SPACE IN BETWEEN "TRANS WOMAN"

reading a bit of OP's blog tells me this is def about the term "TMA"

This is about people defining trans womanhood by misery and suffering. As it said.

because you dont actually know what the term means.

I know what TMA means, and am well versed in the usages of it (both correct & incorrect) & the misconceptions that tend to cause people to misuse it. So, sure. Play ball.

TMA is not an identity, nor was it ever.

Naturally.

it has nothing to do with defining trans women by our oppression

Of course, since that would be highly preposterous & an inaccurate view of words we use. Like I said, womanhood is more than suffering.

but by identifying who is most vulnerable in the face of the oppressive societal forces of transphobia and misogyny.

Did Serano tell you this herself? Do tell her hello!

I kid, of course. I simply wish to paint a picture of how you are twisting what a word means beyond what it's clear intention was to be made for. I don't mean to armchair diagnose you, but I fear you are showing early signs of discourse addiction & brainrot.. It can surely warp your perception of others around you and important topics such as this. May I suggest a break from these things? Till you feel of the right mind?

Though, I do not mean to be getting ahead of myself. You could also just be entirely misinformed!

The word transmisogyny is not about who suffers most from this intersection and about how the intersection in general, it isn't about anyone else at all. It is specific. Julia Serano saw a phenomenon in her community, happening TO her community, and put a name to the intersection that was being faced - as well as some good literature behind understanding it! It isn't about who's "most susceptible" to be harmed by it, it's simply about the transfeminized class of people's specific experiences. Others can have similar, also experience this intersection in their own way, but this is our word we made for us and our community's experiences. To frame it as anything else is silly.

So, now that we understand what transmisogyny is, we can see that TMA doesn't really define itself as "who's most susceptible to experience this intersection." easily. It wouldn't make sense, becauee you'd have to change what transmisogyny means.

You may be wrong in a few ways:

Maybe you think the word is about the intersection in general, but somehow only trans women experience it the most. Your initial misconception about transmisogyng led you to further misunderstand what TMA means, and since you are online where everyone is malinformed at best - this was allowed to fester and be corroborated by people who are just as uneducated as yourself. Leading to a false understanding that you are confident in.

Maybe, you think transmisogyny is somehow only affecting transfeminized people because girl/fem=oppressed & experiences misogyny , Julia Serano speaks on this many times & the harm on it. (as well as other transfeminists, but it is her word so we understand it through her eyes.) This isn't how reality nor the patriarchy works.

Maybe you're mixing the misconception that the misogyny in the word is because "girl dislike" so it's a word about disliking trans-women/fems/etc , and the fact it's about intersectionality to have this dualthinking that leads you to the eventual conclusion of the cycle misogyny=womanhood=misogyny.

And maybe you don't care about what serano has ever said about her word because you don't like her, so you want to take the word and change it to your liking. Which would be ridiculous because without acknowledging where it came from and how misconceptions & ideas speead off of it, you are basically electing to not understand any of where the beliefs you parrot stem from and can no longer think critically about them. It's historical revisionism mixed with willfully blinding yourself to anything that can cause you to think as a person instead of a discourse label.

since you're mayyyybe a half-step at most from screaming about "oPpReSsIoN oLyMpIcS" 

Mmm no, I just think you're poorly informed. But yes! Let us delve into how you view the ~oppression olympics~.

let me explain why that's important: we have limited time, energy, and resources to push back against these societal forces. focusing as much of that as possible on SPECIFIC issues gets us more progress on those issues.

This took SUCH an interesting turn. Okay, let's discuss this!

I disagree we have limited resources since we are talking about discussions. You do realized you jumped from "don't define womanhood by oppression" to "TMA is pawesome and we matter most" to "limited resources".

There are no limited resources in discussion spaces and queer theory, and I disagree with the notion we should only expand our efforts on one front as if it is not all connected. Especially as a group, trans women are not their own seperate group. Trans women do not suffer any more in some way that makes them a different fight than trans people as a whole (especially when we step outside of America). Why divide our efforts? What does that accomplish? People are dying now. If you mean REAL LIFE actibism, sure divide a little bit but not to the extent you seem to be suggesting. Maybe all organize to attack V-Coding one day, then all organize to attack abortion rights for trans men the next. Shit like that. Like "trans woman" is not a specific issue. We can divide up which issue our activist group we are working with atm is attacking, because messages are stronger that way, but it's silly to go "trans women suffer most on this" (not true) and "thats why we only focus on trans women". (still obscure and handling multiple issues at once while electing to neglect other ones that are intertwined.)

in this case focusing on protecting and uplifting trans women will get us, as a society, MAJOR progress on dismantling both transphobia and misogyny. 

Okay. This isn't actually anything though. This isn't activism. "uplifting trans women" what are you actually doing though? And if it's so important to you, sure, go join a trans woman specific focus group. That's fine. It's still for the cause.

But misogyny intersecting with transphobia (misotransphobia) is a way wider issue, and it kind of seems like you're obscuring your own talking points here. There are no limited resources in "uplifting voices". What are you? Fakewoke? This kind of sounds like one iffy statement building upon itself. "Trans women suffer misotransphobia the most (untrue), so we need to focus our limited resources (true IN SOME CASES), and only focus our unlimited resources in this one area on trans women."

It doesn't make sense when you break it down. You can vaguely allude to activism as an excuse for silencing others. Because that's what this is, you didn't like my post was uplifting trans women in a non discourse manner, so you made it about your discourse because youre addicted and if theyre not with you theyre against you, then changed the subject to how only trans women experience misotransphobia.

You made a post about transfeminized issues about non-transfeminized people. You derailed important discussions for your discourse. You are doing nothing. Your ending will always be the same, I predicted I'd have to say this in the first sentence you wrote to me.

A discussion for transfeminized people by transfeminized people cannot exist if it doesn't serve your ego-filled discourse mindset, becaude obviously it is someone trying to trick you into genuinely caring about trans people. So you have to find a way to make it about your discourse (you chose the word TMA), and then from there get more and more derailed until you are fully discourse-maximizing. Denying the experiences of people who weren't even in the conversation and fantasizing about your own oppression points and how everything has to be about you. I'm sorry if I'm wrong but are you a white woman? Because I genuinely have only seen this entitlement from white women who are fake feminists, who bask in their own fragility. <- Cis white women as well.

Genuinely stop and think for a second about the bs train you have been on this entire time, I bet you were just bursting with anticipation writing this whole mess in my notes waiting till you bs-ed your way into finally getting to your real point, the only thing you care about: "I matter more than other queers & I will use my discourse credentials to prove it."

-

Tell me, no seriously! How do you plan to make "major progress on dismantling both transphobia and misogyny" by "uplifiting trans women"... Do you like.. know what activism is? Or are you too far gone in your fantasy?

And especially since you want to ignore a lot of the more intricate issues that have nothing to do with you or inherently trans women. Ignore all the people who face this intersection, deny them even a seat at the table. Deny the wide array of systemic oppression faced by people you cannot feel oppressed-by-proxy over. Derail any discussion that doesn't regurgitate the points you want to hear over and over again. You inherently stop progress, yet you speak of it. Do you even recognize how far you've fallen? This feels like a depressing cautionary tale.

this is because we're affected by both transphobia and misogyny. 

Okay. And the other people who are? What about them? Or was I right with the cultural feminism bit. If you start talking to me about the divine feminine here in a bit I'm going to flip my lid.

TransMisogyny Affected.

Yes! A term you have shown clearly to not understand at all, nor have read up on with any active reading skills. (Maybe this is why Serano said she didn't like the terms..)

not only that but so many other groups of the queer community have proven they would rather throw us under the bus, 

Nothing hurts worse than betrayal from other queers. But trans women throw other trans women under the bus all the time. Especially for the discourse which you seem to love so much. When will we stop the childish bickering and wars with each other and grow up? Do something to actually help somebody? You pray for our ruin I'm afraid. How are we expected to isolate ourselves, yet gain our freedom? How much doublethink are you capable of?

let the leopards eat our faces off, so they can get their rights.

Yes! And like you do to YOUR fellow queer. How quaint. It's like a poorly written tragedy.

and they do this because they are not affected by transmisogyny.

Every time you misuse that word an angel kills herself.

they are exempt from it. TransMisogyny Exempt.

"People who are not transfeminized do not experience transfeminized misotransphobia!" Wow. I am so so shocked. Anyways, they experience the intersection still...

You know, I could probably get you a book on what transmisogyny is? If you struggle this gravely?

oh and, no, not a single theorist talking about transmisogyny says or thinks there's no joy in transfemininity. 

Yea, I wouldn't call them theorists either. Just horribly ill people who have turned to a miserable doom spiral that causes them to harm others. Intentionally or not.

that's so obviously untrue even conceptually, cause, why the fuck would she be trans? 

You do know people cannot control their transness, right? Like, many people are trans and define it in misery. Famously. It comes with being marginalized. The issue arises when this mental health crisis goes unchecked and it leads you to harminv others or going down rabbit holes of harmful beliefs.

Eg. The trans girl that once told me all cis women are prettier than trans girls because testosterone was the devil and made everything ugly. She genuinely believed this, and believed she was being a radical transfeminist for saying it. It's no shock she only reblogged lolis cutting themselves. Damn shame to see people suffer so poorly. And there's a good conversation to be had about how discourse preys on the vulnerable like this, making them more miserable.

but even past that they actively talk about how awesome being trans women is on their blogs all the time.

That's great. What does this do? "Well miserable tgirls don't exist because ones who are a bit healthier in their view of trans womanhood exist." Wow!

goes to show you havent listened to a single fucking word we've said.

No, I have. You're just making a poorly researched fanfiction here.

You went back to the OG topic and are still so frazzled from the high you get from making everything supporting trans women about other queers and how miserable you are that you are speaking illogical nonsense.

op's blog def feels like a anti-transfem psyop meant to sow doubt in transfeminism. 

Got all this from "don't define transfemininity by suffering" btw.

Everyone who doesn't support my obscure, misinformed, & clearly in bad faith beliefs is a psy op!

constantly posts in conflict with transfeminist theory 

You don't even know what the word transmisogyny means. Do you think tumblr posts that agree wirh you are all "theory"? And are you aware theorists can disagree & discuss? Also if I'm CONSTANTLY doing this - why not show an example? Reply to the posts. Refute it.

while covering it in a thick layer of syrupy sweet "dont think about how youre oppressed or how you can change that, just be happy all the time and take your oppression with no resistance 😇" 

Yea, no. I'm telling people not to be stuck in their misery. In a single post. I thought you said nobody was agreeing with the statement and all transfeminists agree with what I said? Now you turn around and say what I said is not transfeminist in nature & transfeminism is "talking about your oppression" which you are equating to "defining your existence by misery and oppression".

You successfully disproved everything you said about the actual topic at hand in one run-on sentence.

fuck off.