and in case anyone has something to say: misandry doesn’t exist, it’s only women reacting to misogyny. We hate what men DO and what they SAY, it’s not inherently because they are men. If you are a man, trans or otherwise, and you are secure in the fact that you are NOT misogynistic, then obviously the hate isn’t for YOU. You should be able to listen to women’s experiences without feeling like it’s a personal attack.
I think you’re exactly right. That’s why I usually try to explain it, even when whatever they said made me mad, because there’s a chance it’s actually just a misunderstanding. Although, I’ve found quite a lot of men get mad at ME for explaining it and complain about women not being more clear or whatever instead of just owning up to their mistake, but that’s beside the point
Nah, I just thought that they might be somehow related/overlapping topics. Misandry is def not real (weirdly, sometimes I talk to people irl who say that misandry does exist systemically and that they agree with it? And I’m like uhmmmmm okay bestie & just kinda move on) & I've also seen discourse about the idea of transphobia specific to masculine identities
No I fully get you. I’ve had also men (cis and trans) get mad at me for trying to explain that if they’re not doing *the bad things* then they’re not the ones being talked about. It’s tiering- especially when they act like understanding where women are coming from equals being a “pick me”
there are forms of transphobia that are specific toward transmasculinity. this is basic intersectional theory. oppression and marginalization do not function as merely additive (ex. black women do not experience racism + misogyny, they experience misogynoir—the misogyny they experience cannot be separated from the racism, in fact the *kind* of misogyny they experience is grounded in racism, and vice versa, the racism they experience cannot be separated from the misogyny which targets them.)
so yes, anti-trans masculinity is a real phenomenon that needs and deserves specific study and attention. there is just some tension because the history of many of it’s central figures (especially within online discourse) is deeply transmisogynistic. transmisandry and transandrophobia were both coined by transmisogynists, so i view their usage as a red flag (tho ik many may be unaware of this), which is why i suggested using the term anti-transmasculinity instead.
anti-transmasculinity also speaks directly to what is being targeted, instead of reifying problematic concepts (misandry) or trying to coin a direct corollary to transmisogyny (transandrophobia) (faulty premise). this tension is not exclusive to queer theory, ex there is tension between black male studies and black feminism. yes, the experiences of marginalized men are specific and need to be examined, but *some* reinforce misogynistic dynamics in their study and get called out.
I didn’t know she was transmisogynist, unless I'm not reading what you said correctly? (I haven't read Whipping Girl, but I've read a couple of her free essays, and they seemed mostly fine. I was a little concerned about one or two parts, but when I brought them to others, they said they were fine)