Transandromisia is in fact the counterpart to transmisogyny, just as ceteromisia is the nonbinary counterpart to both. They are not oppositional. Transfems can experience transandromisia, just as binary trans people can experience ceteromisia and nonbinary people can experience transandromisia and transmisogyny.
Transandromisia is talking about the trans men who die of treatable cervical cancer due to being denied pap smears based on their gender markers. It is talking about the trans men beaten to death for being trans men specifically. It is talking about the trivialization of terfs attempting to force conversion therapy on transmascs. It is talking about the rape and forced impregnation of transmascs in order to specifically impregnate and force them to detransition. It is talking about the comparable rates of violence faced by transmascs in every category except sexual assault and suicide rates, which are notably higher than any other group in the trans community.
It is absolutely the counterpart to transmisogyny, and claiming it is not reveals your bias.
Transfems sometimes weaponize transmisogyny specifically to escape accountability in discussions of transandromisia, just as transmascs sometimes do to escape accountability in discussions of transmisogyny. There is a both sides to this, because it is a problem specifically driven by and reliant on gender essentialism and radical feminism in the trans community that views any proximity to masculinity as inherently privileged and seeks to erase the harm done to people viewed as masculine in any way.
This hurts both transmascs and transfems.
Being a "tboy" (trans man?) doesn't make you immune to being transphobic, misogynistic, transmisogynistic, OR transandromisic, but neither does being a tgirl excuse you from being any of those. Being masculine or a man does not make you more likely to be a perpetrator of these forms of violence, in the same way that being feminine does not make you less likely to.
Being feminine or a woman does not make you inherently virtuous in the same way that being masculine or a man does not make you inherently violent. This is in fact a message that all trans people need to hear, but aiming it only at specific subgroups and refusing to acknowledge how others are guilty of this specific form of lateral aggression against their own community shows a clear refusal to interrogate your own internalized harmful beliefs about transmasculinity.
By your own acknowledgement, being transmasc does not make you "tme". Neither agab nor gender nor trans identity determines whether you are subjected to both interpersonal and systemic violence on the basis of perceived identity. Intersex people who were assigned female at birth commonly face transmisogyny. AMAB transmascs often face transandrophobia. TMA/TME is a bullshit dichotomy reliant on the idea that ontologically identity determines how bigots and oppressive systems interact with you as a marginalized person, as if they stop to ask your identity before assuming.
The thing is, it's not becoming "rageful and self-infantilizing" to be angry at the very real lateral violence transmascs face and the way it contributes to erasure of the violence against them. It's not a self-serving focus on victimhood to acknowledge the unique and serious violence they face as such - and as equally serious to transmisogyny. It is in fact seeing how transmasc oppression is deeply tied to transmisogyny and oppression of transfems to acknowledge it - and how the underlying patriarchal attitudes that inform it also hurt transfems via both transmisogyny and transandromisia.
It's not in fact "doing a white feminism" when transmascs of color specifically talk about how transandromisia is serious, intersectional, and often racialized as well. It is in fact "doing a white feminism" to speak over and erase their voices, as well as to imply that misogyny of any kind is the most central and serious form of oppression that all other forms of oppression are secondary to and mainly serve to uphold. It's "doing a white feminism" to uphold white supremacist and colonialist narratives about protecting womanhood as the most vulnerable class - and yet a class that is based specifically on white supremacist ideals of femininity and womanhood and that is not granted to women of color.
It is also "doing a white feminism" to specifically allow the few bad actors within the transfem community to weaponize their white women's tears to avoid accountability and shut down conversations of the harm they specifically perpetrate against other trans people.
It's not weaponizing victimhood to be a victim, and quite frankly it's extremely concerning that you determine victimhood based on gender, race, and other identity characteristics, and not the actual harm being done between two people.
I am a trans woman (notably, I am intersex and also transmasc, and have faced violent and profound transmisogyny, transandromisia, and ceteromisia) The transposition of the text is both accurate and illustrates exactly the flaw in your original criticism.
I saw that your bio says that you are transmasc nonbinary. Quite frankly, I am tired of transmascs uplifting the voices of specifically majority white and ALWAYS perisex transfems that are a minority within our community, who specifically use their own identities to escape accountability and refuse to unlearn their own internalized gendered biases and gender essentialism, and who remap radical feminist ideals of "man bad, privileged, abusive oppressors; women good, marginalized victims" to trans people and call it inclusion.
I am tired of my identity being used as a cudgel against transmascs, to "remind" them to "resist" the toxicity "inherent" in being a man, to enforce the idea that they have taken on the sins of cis men and women by virtue of associating themselves with manhood, to act like they are capable of oppressing or holding societal power over trans women, to act like they are uniquely capable of or more likely to perpetrate misogynistic and transmisogynistic violence against members of their own community when cis people are right there.
I am tired of transmasculine people white knighting for the very same transfems who are watering down the definition of transmisogyny to "another trans person disagrees with me, has experiences I don't, or even claims to be oppressed".
I am also tired, quite frankly, of trans people of all genders gleefully participating in the erasure of transmasculine oppression and the violence that I myself have faced, often due to privilege on their own part that allowed them to experience less severe forms of this same oppression.
None of this may have been your intention, but it is still the context under which you are entering this conversation.
Transmascs face significant and severe violence that is in many ways unique specifically because of the intersection of their inherently marginalized manhood (due to the transness being inseparable from the gender it trans-es). They do not face less or lesser forms of transphobia or transmisogyny. To say so is to be complicit in the erasure of anti-transmasculine violence, as well as ironically to feed into the self-same patriarchal ideologies that perpetuate transmisogyny.
Transmasculine people are not uniquely guilty of being transphobic, misogynistic, or transmisogynistic. Neither are abinary trans people. Neither are, in fact, transfeminine people. Some of the most abhorrently transmisogynistic takes I've seen have been from transfems, including literally accusing nonbinary transfems of being predatory men trying to invade women's spaces.
Transmisogyny is also crucially not the only unique and serious form of gendered trans oppression that trans people are capable of perpetrating.
The example of the US with colonialism and imperialism is a grossly false comparison, because put simply, transmascs don't have comparable societal power within trans communities that a genocidal military industrial nation-state with nuclear capabilities and one of the largest arms budgets in the world has on a global stage.
A better comparison would be coming into a larger discussion of ableism and saying "neurodivergent people are capable of being ableist towards physically disabled people and need to stop weaponizing accusations of ableism and sanism and refusing to take accountability".
Yes, it's true. Physically disabled people also use accusations of ableism to escape accountability for the ways they are neuroableist and sanist. Both conversations are necessary, and neurodivergent people are neither uniquely ableist towards other disabled people, less oppressed or only facing smaller amounts of "real ableism" than physically disabled people, or even a true discrete category from physically disabled people.
Somehow I don't think I'm "weaponizing victimhood" when someone calls me a crazy attention seeking abled faker who should be locked up for talking about inaccessibility in the context of neurodivergence or how neurodisabilities can be as profoundly disabling as physical ones as someone who is severely disabled in both categories. Somehow all my disabilities being erased and fakeclaimed the instant I dare to experience neurodivergence as disabling is not in fact me "self-infantilizing" to avoid acknowledging my own internalized ableism against... OTHER physically disabled people.
I can't even begin to get into the nonsense that is "self-infantilizing", "doing a white feminism", and the way you specifically in your last paragraph first address adult transmascs as "tboys" but refer to adult trans women without the ironic actual infantilization. Deeply unserious and belying your underlying lack of understanding of transphobic oppression.
Also yes, you revert to asking if that is the type of man/masc transmascs want to be, but it remains that the only people referred to generally as a class with the youth-associated form of their gender is transmascs, and not transfems. It's whatever if you use that as a descriptor for yourself, but it's generally considered condescending and infantilizing to do it to others without their consent.
Notably, "t-boy" specifically also takes on new connotations when considering the racism you are accusing transmascs of while speaking over and erasing the transmascs of color leading and contributing the most to these conversations. Is it possible this hypocrisy is in fact projection, just as the usage of the TME/TMA binary was pointed out as a fundamental facet of white feminism?
Anyway, I seriously doubt your ability to have a productive conversation about this topic based on the assertions you've already made, and I have less than zero interest in attempting to do so. I am posting this to inform and educate others, and specifically to assert that people like this don't speak for all trans women or transfems.
Quite frankly, I have been beyond done for a while with the way that transandromisia and general transphobia discourse is treated on this site. It is deeply hostile to all trans people but especially the most vulnerable and marginalized members of the trans community. People are acting like cisheteropatriarchal gender dynamics at all map to a community composed entirely of those considered genderfreaks and dirty queers by cisheteropatriarchy. It's all incredibly binaristic, not to mention based in dyadic views of transness.
4 parts transmascs to 1 part transfems are being laterally transphobic to transmascs via transandromisia. 4 parts transfems to 1 part transmascs are being laterally transphobic to transfems via transmisogyny. Half binary and half nonbinary transfems/transmascs are being ceterophobic especially to abinary and multigender people. The entire trans community is as deeply transphobic to intersex trans people as they are intersexist, while often white-knighting against altersex people (some of whom are intersex). The conversations manage to often be deeply ableist, racist, and otherwise bigoted and cruel.
Anyway, next time anyone is tempted to accuse people who are victims of transphobia of "weaponizing victimhood", something I have acknowledged the rare cases of within the context of this post but which are generalizing the actions of the near-comedically worst actors in a community to the rest of us and which is a deeply bigoted accusation on principle, I would like to encourage them to log off. Just log off and go do something else for a while.
Y'know what, I'm tempted to erase my whole post and start over. I should have said that from the beginning. It is deeply bigoted to accuse victims of oppression and violence of weaponizing their own marginalization against other equally marginalized people. I won't erase my whole post, because I think there's still important points in it, but that's really the main thing.
It's not like racial dynamics, because transmascs don't in fact hold privilege over transfems in the way that white women do over black people. It's also racist to act like transphobia and racism are identical, as well as ironic to ignore how white feminism and specifically the weaponization of white womanhood isn't specifically used as a form of violence against MEN of color as much as women and nonbinary people of color.
Honestly, there's probably more I could say, but I'll leave it at this: It's possible to have discussions about transmisogyny in the trans community without attributing it to or blaming it specifically on manhood, masculinity, agab, or whatever else you've decided determines who bigots don't target "as much" with transmisogyny who are therefore "tme".
