Often some TME will freak out over the fact that they were mistaken as a transfem and thus discriminated against. They will use this as evidence that these terms are exclusionary because they were affected by transmisogyny while being TME. While I agree broadly that maybe instead of transmisogyny affected we should say transmisogyny targeted, I also don't care that much. These complaints are usually used as a means to tone police or shutdown transfems who are simply using the common terminology to describe their oppression. By pointing out problems in phrasing or choice of terminology they trivialize or ignore the actual bigotry that's being discussed.
More common though are people saying that TME/TMA "recreate the gender/sex binary". This is untrue for a number of reasons, not least because TME include both cis men and women, but primarily because these terms exist to be inclusionary of people who exist outside of the gender/sex binary. There are plenty of agender, bigender, or otherwise nonbinary people who are direct targets of transmisogyny. In addition there are many intersex people who might not even refer to themselves as transfem or nonbinary also experience transmisogyny. The entire point of the TMA/TME is so that we can move away from referring to trans women exclusively as the targets of transmisogyny, because they aren't. TMA/TME are not prescriptive terms, they are descriptive, and in fact exist outside of the gender/sex binary precisely because that is what is necessary to describe the targets of transmisogyny.
However, I can also sort of understand where people are coming from. To someone first encountering these terms it can feel like TMA could just be replaced with amab trans, and TME could just be replaced with afab trans + cis people. Of course, this isn't true and the reason why is again because TMA/TME are descriptive terms. Any use of agab is necessarily prescriptive, it is takes a largely meaningless characteristic of someone's life (agab) and prescribes unrelated traits based on that characteristic. When making a statement about all or most amabs or afabs, you are presupposing some universal experience inherent to those with a given agab. This is just gender essentialism. Conversely, TMA/TME are direct descriptions of one's relationship to transmisogyny. Any statement connecting the two would necessarily be essentialist because it would be making a statement about the way all people of a given agab are. The sex/gender binary is bad not because it separates people into distinct groups but rather because it essentializes and oppresses people based on socially constructed and broadly meaningless traits forced on them from birth. TMA/TME could not be more different.
