I want to preface this by saying I don't use the TMA/TME framework, I consider it flawed and essentially meaningless due to how it is used by the majority of people who adhere to it. but your pinned post is incorrect/has a flawed understanding of how TMA/TME is intended to work. it doesn't mean "a gender/gender presentation that is immune to being perceived as a trans woman/receiving transmisogynistic violence" and arguing that since trans men/mascs are often perceived and attacked as women therefore are also at the intersection of misogyny and transphobia (which is technically correct and I would agree with your definition of it, if people actually really used "it's the intersection of transphobia and misogyny" when using TMA/TME) unfortunately does not invalidate or prove it as flawed.
under the intended/original use of it, TME is someone who is either a cis man who adheres perfectly to the gender binary without deviation OR someone with an F on their birth certificate, regardless of whether they are intersex or perisex, because it's not about how they are perceived or what attacks are made against them (plural them), TME means "I can leverage my AGAB to protect myself against further transmisogny," hence why people insist that cis women who are viciously attacked by transphobes are TME. TME (under its intended use) is by definition supposed to mean being able to "get out" of accusations by having "proof" to back up the fact that the person is not a trans woman and therefore "safe" from further transmisogny. AKA: intended targets of transmisogny vs "collateral damage"/unintended targets who get caught in the crosshairs. in theory, the transphobes goes either "oh okay my bad sorry!" or switches their attack to no longer include misogyny.
it's flawed because it only works on paper; transphobes don't actually care, it's about how they perceive the person they're attacking and as many folks have pointed out, being able to say "no I'm REALLY a woman/man by your standards, transphobic person so stop being transmisogynistic to me!" changes absolutely nothing and protects no one. it's useful as an tool of academic discussion but not for application in the real world.
I'm only pointing this out because anyone who actually believes in the framework is never going to be swayed by your argument since it approaches from a completely different understanding of what TMA does/should mean than anyone who uses it as a cudgel against anyone they dislike and also denies trans men/mascs the right to use any term when talking about the oppression they face.
I am not a fan of this blogger (and I disagree with its conclusion about the value of the term), but this explanation of the framework that it provided is the most succinct explanation I've been able to find that also correctly identifies what it's supposed to mean: https://certifiedsexed.tumblr.com/post/764724784123740160/well-the-gender-binary-and-the-patriarchy-are/amp
and this person explains why it's flawed way better than I ever could: https://velvetvexations.tumblr.com/post/752859337155903488/in-my-opinion-the-problem-with-transmisogyny
My ultimate nitpick with this whole situation is that transfeminists are (rightly) allowed to make terms that are not defined by their exact etymology. Transmisogyny does not just mean ‘intersection of transphobia and misogyny’, it includes things outside of that, and excludes things that that definition applies to (like misogyny against trans men).
TMA means, by its exact etymology/meaning, affected by transmisogyny. Most trans, intersex or GNC people are affected by transmisogyny in some way. Personally I would prefer the term (TMA/TME, not transmisogyny) to be changed to reflect the above definition, but I’m theoretically okay with the term. Practically, I still don’t like that definition - simply stating or showing evidence of your AGAB will not stop transvestigators or intersexists from harassing you on the basis of transmisogyny, but that isn’t relevant to this specific discussion.
My point was that people against the term ‘transandrophobia’ do not give the users of the term that same benefit. They only acknowledge the direct etymology of transmisandry (intersection of transphobia and misandry). There are other definitions that are valid (intersection of transphobia and fear/hatred of men (aka androphobia) - intersection of transphobia and general sexism as it targets transmascs - bigotry against transmascs - etc… ) that are all ignored by people who hate the term.
These people still use transmisogyny and TMA/TME even though by their own logic (direct etymology is only valid definition of a term) they are using them wrong. They are being hypocrites if they act like the direct etymology of transmisandry is the only valid meaning of transandrophobia but ignore that when they use their own terms.
Edit: My actual meaning now is that TRFs ‘respect’ etymology by using the exact definition of transmisandry, but completely ignore it when they then apply that to transandrophobia. Because the exact etymology of transandrophobia is the intersection of transphobia and fear/hatred of men. They pretend to hypocritically respect etymology but they don’t even do that.
