Julia Serano describes what is colloquially called "passing" as being more accurately described as "conditional cissexual privilege". Any privileges that it affords evaporate the moment cis people realize the trans person is trans. For this reason she accurately says that it isn't actually much of a privilege, and trans women who "pass" shouldn't be regarded as having "escaped" transmisogyny. True cissexual privilege never ends.
I would like to propose an important addition to this point: that this condionality goes the other way as well. When a transmisogyny exempt person has transmisogyny directed at them because they've been mistaken for a trans woman, that transmisogynistic oppression is conditional. It ends the moment the transmisogynist finds out the person is not a trans woman.
And so, just like conditional cissexual privilege, this conditional transmisogyny affected status should be largely disregarded, or at least not regarded as being "just as bad" as the oppression transfeminine people face to the point that anyone can claim "everyone is affected by transmisogyny." It is not the same as being truely transmisogyny affected; trans women and nonbinary transfeminine people aren't mistakenly targeted with transmisogyny, we're it's intended targets. We cannot use the gender we were assigned at birth to escape it.