I feel like it's naming a very real variant of general misandry and giving us the chance to change how we talk about it, and misandry as a whole.
-
Not to speak for trans women, but I think the community concluded that the threat of playing into the idea that they're "really" men outweighs any detriment of less-clear language, And, I think that could be a valid concern for trans men as well...
...in deciding if we want to talk about how sexism/misogyny impacts us honestly, vs reinforcing WE ARE MEN in all language. The calculation is different bc of the relative social position of men and women. Saying WE ARE MEN too strongly risks being itself misogynist.
-
-
i 100% agree that those things are problems, but the known use and meaning of the word "misandry" is tied into MRAs insisting it's a system equal to misogyny. and I think the idea that patriarchy/misogyny only targets women is problematic to begin with.
-
"transmisogyny" when it was coined referred specifically to trans women's oppression under the assumption that only they could be impacted by misogyny, as women. it functions now in a necessary way, but imo that original assumption was flawed.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
And, I think, there's also a social factor bc trans men have all these historical ties to lesbian feminists, NBs, and butches. So saying WE ARE MEN excludes people many still feel are part of our community.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Help me understand why saying that we are men too loudly is misogynistic? I only speak for myself here, but I fought hard to be authentically me. How does my pride in existing harm women?
-
Bc WE'RE MEN NOT WOMEN was long ago coded as something cis men say when they're saying they're not wimpy.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.