Hi I wanna ramble about my thoughts and opinions on transmisogyny being exclusive to transfems/transfeminized ppl and vice versa for isomsiogyney being exclusive to transmascs/transmasculized people
I think that the term "transmisogyny" should honestly just be for anyone who experiences the intersection of transphobia and misogyny. Why do we need to make this and isomisogyney gendered when they both mean the same thing? Why are we making another binary for bigotry that multiple people of any gender can face?
Both these terms exclude transnuetral people and multigender ppl like me
Do I experience transmisogyney or isomisogyney when I'm transfemmasc? Why are there even gendered words for this in the first place when the original wasn't even gendered???? (Atleast that's what I heard could be wrong)
I wish that people would just stop making everything so fucking gendered!!! We do not need misogyny but for boys and vice versa!!!
Anyway maybe I'm just confused but from what I've seen it just feels like binarism :/
First of all, transmisogyny does not exclude transneutral people at all. It doesn't even exclude cis people. You should read up on how Serano describes the term & get a better understanding of what 'transfeminized' means.
Secondly, these terms are different because the coiner decided that. Somebody in their discussions around queer theory decided there was a phenomenon they wanted to name, and it just so happened to be that in this case it was somebody describing a more specific presentation of how transphobia and misogyny intersect. I agree with Serano, more language may be needed but I don't think the term transmisogyny needs a makeover to have that happen. It sucks because it seems like the easiest word to think of for "general intersection of X and Y for trans people", but that's just not how it was coined, yk? You move forward, make new language for what you want.
Do you experience transmisogyny or isomisogyny when you're transfemmasc? Well the question relies on are you being transmasculinized or transfeminized in the scenario. Of course this can always get messier from there, but that's the nature of language. The term transmisogyny is not dictated by identity labels, and people saying so don't understand Serano's work.
Anyways, all the same goes for isomisogyny in theory, if you're for the more inclusive definition. (which is why I didn't include it initially, I know people got issues with it.)
