Maybe the phrase "Misandry doesn't exist" was useful in 2010 when MRAs were arguing that cis men underwent the same systemic oppression as cis women (and the use back then was even questionable), but now that we're actually talking about trans people it is doing so much harm than good. I think people need to revisit Oppression and privilege 101, because yes, misandry does exist.
So when we consider the hatred of a specific group of people, this is called a prejudice. A prejudice can be towards any group, and I mean any group of people, because all a prejudice is preconceived bias against a group of people. Its important to note here that prejudice is not systemically backed.
When a prejudice is systemically backed is when it becomes a point of marginalization against someone. If you've heard the phrase "Prejudice + power = racism" this is that idea, but applied also to other marginalized identities. It is why you can be prejudiced against a while person, but not racist against a white person. And it is also why you can be prejudiced against cis man, but not sexist against a cis man. The prejudice against men has the name of misandry, but all it exists as is the description as a prejudice, not as the name of an oppressive force. But it does exist.
Why this is important is because of how it is then applied to marginalized men, even beyond transgender men. Arguing against a word like "transmisandry/transandrophobia" because "misandry doesn't exist" is a fundamental misunderstanding of these basic sociological theories.
But to take is a step further, arguing against this word because "trans men are oppressed on the basis of being trans, not on the basis of being men" ignores the truth that transness is inseparable from gender within that axis of oppression. In other words, being men is inseparable from being trans. Transness acts as a modifier to the axis of gender, and fundamentally altars the way we move about the world as men. if Misandry is the prejudice, transness is the lack of power that translates to transandrophobia being a oppressive force. It is that equation again, of "power + prejudice = oppressive force."
But that is also not the entire story of what transandrophobia is trying to describe, and I've said it before, and I will say it again, but transandrophobia as a word describes the intersection of 4+ things: transness, expectations of initial gender you were perceived to be, the expectations of current gender identity, ability to pass (+ placement within the gender binary, + intersex status, with these last two adding consideration for exorsexism and intersexism).
So denial of transandrophobia (or transmisandry, or other language) as both language we can use to describe sociological phenomena, and as an actual phenomenon that actually occurs int he first place, is to be inaccurate in your understanding of sociology as it applies to transness and gender at best, and just an unwillingness to engage with transmasculinity as an oppressed class -likely in part to personal unexamined biases/phobias that one is similarly unwilling to admit- at worst.
(And there is also something to be said about how the refusal to admit that misandry is something that exists harms other groups of marginalized men, particularly black men and men of color, given how gendered racism is something that most certainly exists, including in the hypermasculinization of black men (and women) in order to justify racial aggression against them. To not have the language to examine the intersection of gender and race (and other marginalization) in this way, a very important part of the discussion is being neglected, and unresolved as a result.)
