To Beat a Dead Horse:
Obviously, transgender men are violently oppressed, including by sexual violence, by patriarchal culture.
But I don't think anyone in the whole cesspit of Tumblr "transandrobro vs transfeminist" discourse is actually denying that, except for the fictitious versions of trans women invented by misogynists to make us look stupid so we can be browbeaten into shutting up about our experience of marginalization by men in "our" spaces.
What's at issue is the claim that trans men are oppressed for being men-- implying that oppression of trans men is a subset of some wider problem, oppression of men as such. This does not hold up under a systematic philosophical view of material social conditions.
Notably, cis men often rape and murder each other-- but it would be nonsensical to suggest that this speaks to a world problem of systemic "cisandrophobia."
Many men around the world-- most, I'd hazard a guess-- are oppressed violently by the prevailing social order. For being trans, or gay, or poor, or workers, or peasants, or a national or racialized or linguistic subaltern population-- for membership in some group marked for subordination to some other interest. But not for membership in the group men.
Women globally are subject to a prevailing architecture of material relations of ownership, subjugation, oppression, and exploitation of them as women-- although these relations manifest massively different across other lines of political-economic iniquity, in different places, class situations, etc. Transmisogyny is a particular subset of this.
There is no prevailing architecture of material relations of oppression of men as men.
On the contrary. I think men use violence against other men, not to denigrate "men" as a category, but to police and regulate its borders, to preserve it in the form they want it to be. Men trying to keep others from claiming the right to manhood isn't anti-men, in the same way the rich trying to keep others from claiming the right to be rich isn't anti-rich-- it's maintaining the present membership of the ruling class, preventing others from joining.
Male violence against trans men is not anti-men; it's pro- the "right" kind of men, anti- the dissolution of the borders of that class. Male violence against trans women is anti-women, anti-woman as a class being something someone would want to be.
One Last Good Whallop:
Male violence against men is not based in "androphobia," which does not exist.
But we may go further(!): very often, in fact, the basis of male violence against men is not anti-man, but anti-woman. How can this be?
In a political-economic structure defined by unequal dialectical relations between an elevated, owning-controlling class and a subjugated, working-controlled class (of which patriarchy is an example, as are the various forms of wider privately controlled production, the various forms of class society, under which it has existed), the borders of the former are more or less rigid, those of the latter more or less porous (for reasons I should think are obvious.
Within the culture of the elevated class (man) a whole host of traits-- softness, kindness, emotionality, prettiness, gentleness, lacking a penis, et cetera-- are denigrated by association with the subjugated (woman). The ruling class polices its borders to maintain its purity, to prevent its pollution by the traits it regards as inferior, i.e. feminine. These traits can mark one for persistent, or merely transient, exclusion from the privileges of that class, even if one is otherwise a member. A man mocked by his friends for his emotions, or his drink order, or his manicured nails is not experiencing "androphobia"-- he is experiencing social censure for his association with womanhood. This is, even as the victim is not a woman, based above all in misogyny-- in the policing and preservation of the border between the sex-gender-classes, a border which functions to elevate one above the other.
Trans men are victimized by other men, denied full rights for their membership in the class of man, for proximity to womanhood. This violence is not "androphobic"; it is based, if anything, in misogyny. To say this is, critically not to deny that the victims are men, or to claim that they are women. Any man can be abused by his fellow men for appearing too womanish. This happens a lot to cis gay men, who are not women.
Importantly, the people marked for constant, systemic suppression as a class in all this, in the functioning of patriarchy, are women.
