Last Seen Blogs
Text
guys who say “but what if i don’t pass?” about transmascs having privilege over transfems are like the exact same type of guy as back in the early 2010s when all those cis guys were like “how do i have male privilege? i’m literally poor? i’m literally gay? i’m literally a man of color?” etc etc etc. like yeah man. that sucks but it would still suck worse if you were a woman. this is called “feminism” you should look it up.
236 notes
·
View notes
Text
obviously it is cynically deployed as a cudgel against trans women and so is primarily a transmisogynistic sentiment but it is in fact also on its face hugely transphobic in general when people say shit like "trans men don't have male privilege because nobody sees them as men", like. do you not see how that is just straightforwardly transphobic towards the trans men you are talking about lol
#best part is whenever i point out that some trans men are in fact seen as men in public#i ALWAYS get told 'well not all of us are as LUCKY and PRIVILEGED as you your experiences arent universal'#like. are you actually trying to guilt trip me for passing rn. is that really happening.
801 notes
·
View notes
Text
me defending trans men online: we’re actually oppressed for being women
#the giveaway is always that these guys act like radfem terf beliefs are super common and mainstream#but they're just ex-terfs.#thats why they use “terf” as a baseless insult instead of a label of a particular ideology. that's all it is to them
1K notes
·
View notes
Text
i’ve just been deleting all the anons i get telling me to get a hobby but i think i’m gonna start responding with links to my online store. put your money where your mouth is an support my hobbies by buying my shit
0 notes
Note
Hello! I asked thyrell this but do you have any receipts of tyler being transmisogynistic?
on his old blog, neotrances, he routinely used guilt by association and outright lies about people to pad his callouts and blocklists, and the victims of this behavior have routinely been transfems; most often this was painting trans women as sexually deviant, dangerous, or pedophilic for holding differing (some would say principled and sex positive, even) views on kink and sexuality, the crime of being a trans woman accidentally reblogging a post from "one of the bad ones", or as became the case more and more before he moved blogs, baseless accusations of raceplay when other nonsense didnt stick. he has deeply reactionary views of sexuality and many kinks, such as seeing pregnancy kink as pedophilic, cnc kinks as evil, and furries as zoophilic, that he almost exclusively uses to paint trans women in sexually menacing light.
in recent history, he attempted to piggyback off the toonimal callout situation by accusing txttletale and maia nyancrimew, two outspoken transfem users, of "running in the same circles" and defending him for reblogging a post of his before the callout even dropped. like he always did during these routine transmisogyny episodes, he then doubled down, exaggerating and lying about the situation with new and equally baseless accusations of them defending "loli [...] shit". he accuses random people of being pedos or raceplayers or whatever, and then adds you to the list for asking why or where the evidence is, accusing you of defending whatever the charge today is. this was two recent examples, but i cannot stress enough that this was a many-times-repeated pattern of behavior that he consistently engaged in with no remorse or apology for years, just shitting on and slandering transfems over and over while palling around with open transmisogynists.
and this isnt even touching on how they tokenize black trans women when they constantly accuse genuine criticism of their transmisogyny as being antiblack, which is one part of this bullshit that always gets ignored, because nobody gives a shit about trans women of color and nobody listens. we say "its an unjust and shitty reach to call a trans woman a pedo for unknowingly interacting with a bad person", and he says "white trans women are evil and harassing me because they're racist". how many times will it happen...?
265 notes
·
View notes
Text
WHITE QUEERS GET THE FUCKING HINT THAT YOUR QUEERNESS DOES NOT ELIMINATE YOUR WHITENESS AND YOU ARE STILL NOT ONLY CAPABLE OF AND IN MANY CASES ACTIVELY DOING RACIST SHIT!!!
like oh my god can you guys stop making shit up to have an excuse to harass people of color on this website you fucking thin-skinned eggshell motherfuckers. a nonwhite user calling out your fucking racism is not queerphobic you're just being a racist shitbag
1K notes
·
View notes
Text
trans girl: so the patriarchy still benefits under-privileged groups relative to their social positions, for example whilst obviously oppressed, working class men obviously still have privilege over working class women, gay men still have privilege over gay women etc.
tumblr: right, that makes sense
trans girl: so naturally, trans men still have privilege over trans women, even if they are still relatively under-privileged in comparison to cis men
tumblr: shut the fuck up transphobe
3K notes
·
View notes
Text
the reason we wont budge on "TMA/TME" is because it doesnt matter if the language is imperfect: any terminology tgirls et al (<- this is my new favorite btw) create to describe our experiences will be inevitably dismantled and expanded into a general-use term by the wider trans community as, of course, all previous examples have been too.
like yes of course in the most literal sense everybody is "affected" by transmisogyny in the same way that everybody is "affected" by all misogyny, or for that matter, everybody is "affected" by racism; the whole point is to describe what relationship specific groups have to institutional transmisogyny. nobody is saying people never (incorrectly) clock you as a trans woman and be mean about it, we're saying that there is nothing we can do to "exempt" ourselves from that type of violence; no ID, no birth certificate, no karyotype that will exempt us from institutional transmisogyny. it is literally fucking insane that people will understand this about any other type of institutional oppression & its relationship to gender -- seemingly, only in the trans community are we expected to believe men and women are on an equal footing.
2K notes
·
View notes
Text
every "transandrophobia is real but it DOESNT imply androphobia is" post is full of people in the notes going "yeah! except misandry IS real actually"
58 notes
·
View notes
Text
i mean the fact that trans men being expected to care about transmisogyny is being painted as a "hate campaign" is proof enough of a delusional victim complex, but i lose a year off my life every time i see a transandrophobia truther claim that anyone against these terms is a fed psyop. get over yourselves lmfao.
5 notes
·
View notes
Note
Could we say that rejecting afab transfemininity is a form of bioessentialism because this rejection is based the sex assigned at birth of this category ? Isn't this like rejecting amab people from womanhood for the same reason ?
this only makes sense if you believe that "transfemininity" was a freely-made, vibes-based gender category with no prior anchor in the world. bioessentialism requires prescription by the accused bioessentialist; it requires that your imagined bioessentialist (me) decide post-hoc that certain biological claims about a person determine whether they can be transfeminine or not. if transfemininity was just a set of expressions, forms of behaviour and labelling, a particular aura or whatever, it would be indefensible to gatekeep people from it based on assignment. but that's not what transfemininity is.
transfemininity as a term developed to describe a category of gendered subjectivity in response to transmisogyny. the transfeminine isn't just a particular appearance or set of labels—transfemininity is anchored to the way transmisogyny shapes the subject-formation of those people who are subjected to it. like being a trans woman, being transfeminine is a politicized positionality determined thru cisnormativity and its reflex, transmisogyny. and the logic of transmisogyny operates precisely thru birth assignment.
here is a second clarification: birth assignment is not a biological fact about someone. birth assignment itself is a bioessentialist social action done to someone in the maintenance of hegemonic sexgender. the corrective machinery of gender then sets its normative expectations in accordance with ASAB, and metes out its punishment likewise. and transmisogyny is the specific genre of punishment reserved for those who have betrayed the expectations of being coercively assigned male at birth: the class of failed men who become an underclass of failed women because they cannot even perform the kinds of reproductive labour expected of women "proper". the transfeminine is a subject formed in response to this experience: a gendered category that coagulated against the stream of transmisogyny. it was not an invention ex nihilo, but political development.
so when I reject "afab transfemininity", I am not engaging in prescription. I am just describing transmisogyny, and deducing what must therefore be true of transfemininity. to call this bioessentialist would be a category mistake. take it up with the instruments of transmisogyny. the bioessentialism sits much deeper than a trans lesbian saying no—and your comparison to transmisogyny itself rejecting trans womanhood is, to be honest, absurd.
1K notes
·
View notes
Text
maaaaaybe it’s not really counter culture or nonconformist at all to create a plethora of entirely new identities based on every minute aspect of your personality which can be easily marketed and pandered to, furthering this egotistical american obsession with hyperindividuality but hey man, that’s just me.
5K notes
·
View notes
Note
hey, radfem transphobic misandrist bitch, kill yourself :)
hey skrungblyshifter completely normal reaction to someone disagreeing with you
1 note
·
View note
Note
I used to read a fair amount of fan fiction and a pretty well known ace author in the fandom wrote a fic where a lesbian sucked off one of her male friends and they tagged it with the & (platonic) indicator, and I was like “hey dude can you use the “/“ indicator so people know that there’s sexual stuff going on” and the author was like “hmm no, I don’t think I will - it’s a PLATONIC” blowjob” and like wft dude?? I don’t know who else I can tell that to without sounding insane but totally wft dude???
y'know i have heard second-hand accounts of people who, when underage, were groomed/pressured into doing (or talking about) sexual things by adults who identified as asexual. but whenever i say that to anyone as an example of toxic inclusion in the ace community, they either don't believe me or claim that pedophiles are in every community and therefore doesn't count. but "queerplatonic" relationships between adults and minors was defo something that happened
4 notes
·
View notes
Note
same anon from before :3
yeah, and it’s weird to me as a young(-ish? Idk how to refer to myself skfjdkjsf, I’m 17) lesbian. Like, I’ve been called a dyke and faced both internal + external homophobia due to my identity. For lack of a better word, why are that person and I both considered LGBT, you know?
at the risk of sounding rude as hell, it’s because they want to feel special, lol. i think some young cishets see lgbt kids get praised for being “strong” and “brave” (as if we have a choice…) and having pride in their identities, and i guess some kids feel left out of that… but you can’t celebrate overcoming adversity when you haven’t had any adversity to overcome. we just have to hope that these people get a little more aware when they’re older and/or learn from the actually lgbt people in this group
4 notes
·
View notes
Note
Ranting on anon bc I don’t feel comfortable sharing my username :> don’t worry, this isn’t hate towards you or anything :)
(pardon the use of cringe text faces)
I’m on this website that advertises itself as a site specifically for LGBT teens, and I just saw this person say that they’re “demihet” (demisexual + heteromantic, I assume). It gets on my nerves a bit, bc like - you’re (the person) essentially a straight person. Why are you on an LGBT website??? There’s tonnsssss of other websites similar to it, there’s no need to go to this specific site :<
Thoughts? :>
(Have a good day! :D)
never apologize for text faces my guy they are the sugar sprinkles of the internet. and good fucking question lol. i doubt THEY even know the answer to that question. on the one hand i can sympathize with a teen who feels alone in their experiences who wants to connect with teens people who feel similarly... but on the other hand i can't understand how that person would feel alone in their experiences. "you date someone of the opposite gender and then get married and then have sex" was the societal norm where i grew up, it was what was expected of everyone. hell, casual sex still gets presented as some sort of problem or moral failing. it just makes you wonder where that person is getting the idea that "being straight and only wanting t have sex after emotional connection" is a marginalized/minority perspective. i just hope that person doesn't make other LGBT teens feel weird or judged for talking about queer PDA or whatever :^\
5 notes
·
View notes
Text
Transandrophobia isn’t real because misandry isn’t real. This is the basic truth of the matter.
The very structure of the word implies some kind of intersection of transphobia and misandry, which is impossible, because again misandry doesn’t exist. The phrase “transandrophobia” exists as a transmasc counterpart to transmisogyny, and it doesn’t work, because while misogyny is real, misandry/androphobia is not. The things that are described as “transandrophobia” which are actual instances of oppression are better explained as plain transphobia.
The antifeminism of transandrophobia theory
“Transandrophobia” theory often launders antifeminist concepts of misandry. Of course this is openly often denied. The defense is that transandrophobia doesn’t imply that misandry exists, but only describes transphobia directed at transmascs.
And it’s often disingenuous. I’ve come across numerous transandrophobia blogs that clearly believe in misandry. The very coiner of the word, says it’s caused by “the effects of irrational fears of masculinity and manhood“ (taking “androphobia” quite literally) which implies both the existence of misandry and also misogynistically dismissing women’s fears of men’s violence as irrational.
Of course they change the language around, using euphemisms for misandry. In fact transandrophobia is a clear evolution of the term “transmisandry.” Genderkoolaid and ey’s idea of “anti-masculism” that I criticized here is maybe the most obvious example of that on tumblr today.. The belief in some kind of systemic force that “negatively impacts men and masculine people on the basis of their manhood and/or masculinity.“ to quote genderkoolaid is as succinct a definition of misandry theory as any. And ey even outright admits that “antimasculism” is just another word for misandry. Other transandrophobia bloggers like the transunity blog outright use the word “misandry.”So for simplicity’s sake, I’m going to use “misandry” for whatever euphemisms transandrophobia people use, like “antimasculism”, “androphobia” or claims that “society hates men” or “there is a widespread irrational fear of men and masculinity.”
The use of feminist language like “patriarchy” common among transandrophobia people is either severely confused or outright dishonest. It’s a symptom of the terrible understanding of feminism on this site, as I lamented before. Patriarchy as a term that inherently implies male privilege, men are privileged for being men, not disadvantaged. Claiming the patriarchy oppresses men on the basis of their gender is a contradiction in terms. And belief in misandry is inherently misogynistic and anti-feminist.
How terms for systemic oppression actually work
Let’s however assume that the word “transandrophobia” just means “transphobia aimed at transmascs.” Then I don’t see why this word needs to exist. It contradicts most academic work on systemic oppression. New terms are generally not made just to describe “specific experiences of an oppression”. Instead they are created to describe meaningful intersections of different forms of oppression. Often these are intersections with misogyny, because that particular oppression affects about half the population. So misogynynoir describes an intersection of anti-blackness/racism and misogyny that black women experience, and lesbophobia describes an intersection of homophobia and misogyny that lesbians experience. And transmisogyny describes an intersection of misogyny and transphobia that trans women and transfems experience.
The lesbophobia example is especially pertinent to this discussion. The homophobia that gay men experience is often distinct from that lesbians experience, and homophobia against gay men is no minor prejudice, gay men have literally been murdered for being gay. Yet there is no “homoandrophobia” (to borrow an argument from this post by catgirlforeskin) and that’s because misandry/androphobia isn’t real. Men experience systemic oppression differently from women experiencing the same oppression, but that’s because of the absence of misogyny, not the existence of any misandry.
So a word like transandrophobia does imply an intersection between “androphobia/misandry”and transphobia. Otherwise it doesn’t have much reason to exist.
Misandry must affect all men in order to exist
I have seen claims that while “cis misandry” doesn’t exist, trans men and transmasc people are in fact oppressed for being men or masculine. And that’s how transandrophobia works
.
But that’s just transphobia. Misandry can only be real if it affects all men. Misogyny is a viable term because all women are oppressed for being women, even if they can also be privileged because of things like being cis, wealthy or white which balances out their oppression for being women (intersectionality is complex). I wouldn’t claim misogyny was real if it only affected a subset of women.
You can’t claim that men are oppressed for being men or being masculine, that it is some stigmatized gender or gender expression, when being a man and specifically a masculine man is what is expected of about half the population, and in fact men gain privilege for the successful performance of masculinity.
It’s true that trans men and other transmascs are systemically oppressed, and do indeed experience severe pushback if they express their manhood or try to transition in a transmasculine direction. But that’s because they are trans. Transfems experience a similar oppression for expressing their womanhood or trying to transition in transfeminine direction. That’s why the word transphobia exists.
Let’s make an example of a common bit of rhetoric among transandrophobia people, and see how it is all explained entirely by transphobia. Transandrophobia people talk about some general “hatred of testosterone” as part of transandrophobia, often dishonestly conflating transfems expressing their dysphoria with transphobic rhetoric about how testosterone ruins transmasc bodies.
But any idea about society hating testosterone fail to account for why the testosterone flowing through bodies deemed naturally male is seen as okay. In fact being “high-t” is seen as a positive in a man. It’s not even a prejudice against medical testosterone, being “low-t” is a fad disorder that cis men can easily get testosterone prescriptions for. And trying to lower your “natural testosterone” levels is something that’s actively hindered and gatekept, something I’ve experienced. I waited three years to get on t-blockers due to medical gatekeeping. In my country Sweden getting your balls removed legally and thus permanently lower your t-levels is something you have to petition the government for, something I’m trying to do.
Any kind of theorizing about a misandristic hatred of testosterone can’t explain this. It’s only so-called “cross-sex hormones” that are seen as bad, not testosterone in itself. And this is entirely explained by transphobia, not misandry.
It’s of course true that men are oppressed, but it’s never on the basis of being men. People who try to argue for misandry often use (often appropriatively) the struggles of oppressed men and try to argue they are oppressed because they are men. And transandrophobia theory is no different.
“Deserving a word”
The attitude among the transmascs who support transandrophobia theory seems to be “transfems have transmisogyny to describe their oppression, we deserve a word too.” Except again, transfems don’t have the term transmisogyny because we are very special girls who need a special word for our oppression, it exists because it describes the intersection of misogyny and transphobia we experience. It exists for the same reason as lesbophobia does, to describe an intersection between misogyny and another oppression. Gay men are not disadvantaged compared to lesbians because they “only” have the more general term “homophobia” while lesbians have the more specific word “lesbophobia.” And I don’t think transmascs would be disadvantaged if nobody accepted transandrophobia as a tern for their experiences.
You don’t need a specific word to talk about your experiences with transphobia, just as gay men don’t need a world like lesbophobia to talk about their experiences with homophobia. You can just talk about them, and use the word “transphobia” as a label for it.
And sometimes acknowledging that our experiences of oppression can be similar is useful for solidarity and community building. All trans people are negatively affected by transphobia, and that is the real “transunity.” theory.
Don’t end up like nothorses who once unironically listed “Misgendering over the phone,“ as an example of transandrophobia/transphobia only affecting transmascs.
Words exist in a context
Transandrophobia clearly exists as some transmasc counterpart to the transfem transmisogyny. It was even more obvious when the word was “transmisandry.” Words always exist in a context, and is often built by binaries. How someone who believes it defines transandrophobia does say a lot about how they define transmisogyny.
I’ve already described how if transandrophobia merely means “transmascs specific experiences with transphobia” it doesn’t have much reason to exist. But it also by implication diminishes and reduces transmisogyny. If transandrophobia only means “the transphobia experienced by transmasculine people”, transmisogyny is reduced by implication to only meaning “transphobia experienced by transfeminine people.” It’s another symptom of how tumblr discourse is uninterested in acknowledging misogyny, and in this case that misogyny is intersecting with transphobia in transmisogyny.
And well, if transmisogyny means “an intersection between transphobia and misogyny experienced by transfems” it does imply that transandrophobia also should describe an intersection, for why else does it exist. And we are back to it describing an imaginary intersection between transphobia and misandry, a misogynistic and antifeminist idea.
Who gets to define their own oppression?
Of course I am a trans woman, and I will of course get accused of hating transmascs, and robbing them of their ability to define their own oppression.
I would be more sympathetic to this argument, if transandrophobia theorists didn’t keep on constantly defining transmisogyny as the result of misandry. It is common in these circles for transmascs to reject any tme/tma distinction too. Literally going “I got mistaken for a trans woman once, that means I’m affected by transmisogyny.” There is absolutely zero respecting transfems rights to define their own oppression in transandrophobia circles, so why should I respect theirs?
Seriously, the “transmisogyny is actually misandry” claim just keeps happening. Genderkoolaid did it, the transunity blog too, and this dude who I literally found by browsing the “transmisogyny” tag spewing his misandry nonsense.
The problem with “transmisogyny is misandry, actually” is that misandry isn’t real, men are privileged for being men. Transfems experience oppression because we reject being men and performing masculinity. Men are in fact our oppressor class. When transmisogynists talk derisively about “men who wear dresses and say they are women”, they aren’t saying that being a man is bad (in fact they are often men themselves), it’s that “being amab and rejecting masculinity and manhood and claiming to be a woman is bad.” Its an intersection of transphobia and misogyny.
“Transandrophobia” is seldom just talking about the difficulties of being transmasc, it wants to redefine how transfems think about their oppression as well. And it does so in misgendering and transmisogynistic ways.
The transandrophobia theorists generally ignore the existence of transmisogyny, especially in queer communities. In fact it often implies or outright states that transfems are privileged in the trans/queer communities for being women or feminine, which is bizarre. In reality, Transmisogyny is rife in queer spaces, with “crazy trans woman syndrome” being common.
And it’s not like transandrophobia discourse is immune to that particular syndrome. Transmisogyny-exempt privilege dynamics remain very much in play. Transfems tend to get accused of being transandrophobic. The accusations are framed as “lateral aggression” not oppression, although the tone of these posts suggests “lateral aggression” is another polite euphemism word swap game like misandry for “androphobia.”
It feels like the antifeminist, and specifically anti-transfeminist roots of the whole transandrophobia idea coming to the forefront.
881 notes
·
View notes