I've started to see another increase in the absurd argument that, "saying transfemininity is more heavily punished than transmasculinity ignores that feminists fought and died for the right to be masculine," and I thought I'd just summarise some of the many issues with it:
It imagines a historical time and place where gender transgression was once equally harshly punished in both directions, a time and place that has never existed.
It presumes that historical transfeminine people didn't also fight and die for their right to be feminine.
It counters a claim about the state of the world today by just suggesting one theory about how the world ended up that way, which even if true is irrelevant to the question of the justice of the world as it is now.
It presumes that transmasculine rights are naturally within the realm of feminist activism, while transfeminine rights are not.
It ignores that the relative lack of interest from cis and transmasc feminists in defending transfeminine rights is just another example of the inequality being complained of in the first place.
It seems to suggest by symmetry that a "masculinist" movement made up of principally cis men would be the natural vehicle through which transfeminine rights might be won, the utter absurdity of which idea is yet another demonstration of the underlying inequality to which the word "transmisogyny" refers.
It positions the current severity of transmisogyny as a failure of activism (or a failure to convince the wider public that we're not a threat), which is just victim-blaming.
It presumes an ignorance of feminist history on the part of the transfem who is being argued with, a presumption which is in itself transmisogynistic.
It ignores that conditions have generally improved somewhat for transfeminine people too.
Depending on the phrasing, it often but not always presumes (without acknowledging that it is doing so) a US-centred understanding of feminist history that may have little relevance to the transfem being argued with if she e.g. lives in India.
It's quite amazing really how many problems there can be with such a brief argument.
It's like complaining that you did 10 hours of chores this week while your brother did 1, only for your brother to reply that you should just get better at negotiating with your parents like he did. And even then, the "negotiations" were something you both took part in and were in response to an earlier week where you did 15 hours of chores and your brother 6. It's injustice on top of injustice on top of ingratitude on top of victim blaming on top a total lack of giving a shit about anyone's suffering but their own.
