anarchotransfem:

anarchotransfem:

eyeshadow2600fm:

femsaphique:

tiredoftiredofcishets:

clitcheese:

(their former urls are birobotic, aromasterchief, transkrem, bimonsters, zemyatta and robotcas)

don’t go and harass them, this is just a warning to people they’ve given off a lot of red flags and generally dismissed transmisogyny

• made a post trying to reappropriate the idea of terfs to create the spectre of “Terfs 2.0″: “women and fem aligned NBs” who support trans women but are oppressive to trans men and masc NBs.
• convinced that any transmisoginistic reading of their post was putting words in their mouth even after they admitted their post was vague and unclear
• blocked me and @anarchotransfem and claimed they were being abusive, again just for asking them to clarify the meaning in their poorly worded post
• whatever the hell happened in this reply they sent immediately after they blocked me, claiming that transfems being concerned about transmisogyny in their post was a purposeful attack on their mental health, that this was a concerted effort to gang up on them. it’s basically textbook “how not to react” after people tell you that you’ve fucked up.
• generally going out of their way to absolve themself of any possible
  transmisogyny in their post, acting as if any concern of
  transmisogyny on their part is us being manipulative, oversensitive and out to
  get them. which is, surprise, transmisogyny.

• even after the original post got clarified, they seem to genuinely think fem aligned NBs are oppressing masc aligned NBs on the basis of masculine alignment, which is, convoluted to say the least
• and from their archives, this post about how trans men actually can’t have male privilege
• a second post saying trans men can not have male privilege
• another post where they’re doing the same thing, as well as acting like they’re an expert on transmisogyny
  
• this post where they define misogyny as the oppression of dfab people

while a lot of their posts about how trans men’s access to male privilege is highly conditional is stuff i agree with, it does start to give a bad impression when coupled with; their dismissal of transmisogyny, their near constant assertion that cis women are their main oppressor on the basis of gender (cis women specifically rather than cis people generally), and their assertions that cis women and trans men have identical experiences of misogyny. basically, it starts to look like the common truscum assertion that trans masc people can’t possibly hold power over trans women (and the corollary, that trans women who talk about transmisogyny are misandrists). they outright claim “trans people have no power” in reference to trans men having no social power for being men.

tbh i don’t think they’re even aware that what they’re saying could have these implications, and by no means do i think they’re actually a truscum or absorbing any truscum rhetoric. please don’t harass them, this is just to get the word out to other people not to interact with them concerning transmisogyny, because it looks pretty futile and i don’t want any more transfems to have to deal with their childlike behavior.

the rest of this horrible interaction and related screenshots under the cut

Keep reading

This is…..some pretty gross accusations and more than one of your “receipts” is presented with a misleading description that shows you have a personal, petty agenda against this person. Seems like you’re mad they blocked you and that you didn’t understand them, and scrolling their blog there are a lot of explanations that say the opposite things of what you’re implying about them. Idk, this callout seems iffy and less about “warnings” than being vindictive to me

I would say that it is indeed a personal agenda! As personal preservation from a person that keeps on talking over transfems, and reinforces trans men’s male entitlement would be hard to not take personally!

And yeah like not all of these are straight up bigoted things.

But I am highly concerned with how this person keeps on writing really vague shit and trying to make misogyny about men with such desperation.

Like, I’d highly just advice people to stay away from this person instead of trying to excuse them, because this person is clearly in some kind of echo chamber of transmasc self-victimisation, and latches on to the “you all are using radfem rhetoric!” argument while using radfem rhetorics.

like look at this person’s blog. they’re clearly trying to shape trans men as having authority on misogyny. and i don’t know about you, but when they keep on insisting on crypto-radfem rhetorical use, they really should be analysing how their words and actions might be do similar things when they pull the same shit terfs do!

if you say misogyny is about trans men, maybe you should analyse what that says about trans women. how do trans women not have male privilege within a frame where trans men and all dfab people are targets of misogyny, and should be the authority of it.

this all isn’t an attack jfc. it’s concern. because this person is making no effort to look at their own words and how their words carry implications.. even when multiple transfems independently go “hey.. what the fuck.. have you maybe thought that the rhetorics you’re spreading carries a transmisogynistic undertone”.

Please stop saying “transfem” when you mean trans women, for frik’s sake

Hi I’m transfeminine and affected by transmisogyny but also not a trans woman

I got blocked for this reply omfg

hey hang on. my op was literally about gaypeachs refusing to address transmisogyny that impacts nonbinaries. literally their rhetoric was specifically aimed at ‘fem nbs’ with no regard for transmisogyny or power dynamics. limiting the subject to binary trans women would just make my post incomprehensible, and is basically the same as the problem this post was meant to address; erasure of transmisogyny aimed at non-women/non-binaries. gross.