Appreciation For Some Of My Mutuals & Non-moots On Here!

appreciation for some of my mutuals & non-moots on here!

@chocospresso - i don't interact with you as much as i used to but you are the first person that i followed & we're still moots! i used to follow your mogai account and that's (mostly) what got me into coining <3

@egodoll - your flags & edits have me inspired when i don't feel like doing anything or if i don't have any ideas on what to do! you are soo nice and kind to everyone!

@phantasverie - one of my best friends on here, you've always been so kind to me 🫶 every time i talk to you, i feel so much better than before! thank you for always being someone i can talk to & also, your flags and everything you make always puts a smile on my face. you are so awesome!!!

@phaea - mostly friends on discord but you are so interesting and i love all of your edits & frames & things! i always want to use them even if i have no idea what to make. i'm proud of you tbh for making flags and doing what you want to do! keep being so cool

@daybreakthing / @revenant-coining - i LOVE your terms & seeing them always make me feel better about myself. i use a lot of them and i'm always happy when i get to see something new on my dash!

@smilepilled - i always get so happy when i see your posts & your reblogs!! you are such a nice person here & on discord! your views on thing always make so much sense to me & i love learning about new things from you 🫶🫶

@zombmelukitty - my sibby!! your flags are so nice to look at & i love talking to u on discord even if it's about random things! i love learning more things about u :3

@rwuffles - HI!!! your flags are so awesome & i love every single term you make! you're always positive and make me want to be nicer all the time :3 you've always so creative, i love seeing what you come up with!

@winecovered - omg okay so. i love using your flags & terms whenever i can! the way you use colours is always so amazing! you always come up with things that everyone loves and i have no idea how! you have such a special little brain /pos

@riamuverse - hi kolette. this is a hate post actually (joke). anyways, you are so creative, i love seeing what you make! you always bring something new & you're actually a really kind person and nothing like engagekiss (sorry not sorry)! idk if this is gonna make sense but we use a lot of similar terms & it makes me happy to see that someone else closer to my age using the same stuff!

@lunentity - also one of the people i've followed for a while! your flags never cease to amaze me! the things you come up with aren't close to anyone elses and that makes you so very unique! you are also always so kind and helpful, i'm happy to consider you my friend :3

i will probably reblog this with more people because i always forget some! anyways, love to you all, thank you for being awesome always 🫶🫶🫶 (feel free to send me an ask if you feel like i forgot you :3)

it is quite literally just a blatant LIE that ‘theyfab’ was coined to punch up at transmisogynistic nonbinary people. ‘theyfab’ was invented by transphobic cis men to make fun of afab trans people you are all literally lying about its origins i was THERE when the term became popular and it became popular because it was an easy and cruel way to make fun of trans people who were afab

a transandrophobic's guide to transandrophobia

a small and short guide that oversimplifies things so even normies can understand. basically "don't say these things, be normal about queer men."

what is transandrophobia?

transandrophobia was coined around 2017 by a user named Saint (st-dionysus). it's a term describing multiple ways transmascs, trans men, or genderqueer men experience a form of androphobia that has the main goal of separating manhood from trans identities.

what is transandrophobia made of?

transandrophobia is made up of transmisogyny and androphobia. the transmisogyny is the ideas that trans men are either women in disguise, traitors or alien to womanhood, or lost little girls fetishizing lesbians. the focus on trans men as confused women is to assume that women cannot be anything but little innocent girls or servants. if a woman is not of those categories, then they are traitors, snakes, and are not real/pretending to be women. we see this in all sorts of spaces. if a woman is not subservient and tolerable, then they must be a "bitch," or a man in hiding. for trans men, this narrative means that they are failing womanhood because they too are not tolerable or subservient.

androphobia is the fear of men or the patriarchy. it affects women more than it affects men, and most trauma resulting from it comes from direct or indirect sexual violence or misogyny. androphobia in terms of trans men would be the fear of manhood or isolation of manhood from transness. a common pushback against androphobia and transandrophobia seems to be the idea that trans men are just trans, not men. they aren't women, but they aren't men either, so they stay in the gray zone of being defined by their agab or their sex traits.

the isolation of manhood from transness is a tactic used to correctly gender trans men without having to acknowledge their gender as being related to manhood, even if that fear is towards those who uphold the patriarchy - which trans men, by identity, do not fit in the patriarchy. it is why androphobia is known as irrational or abnormal, as all phobias are, but isn't recognized as hate or discrimination. when trans men and cis men are perceived as the same type of manhood, the assumption becomes that trans men are of the patriarchal system instead of being completely outside of it.

why androphobia and not misandry?

misandry was created to be used as a gotcha towards feminism. no one wants that. misandry is real, but is not represented in the term. instead, the subsequent discrimination and hate of men would stem from androphobia's fear. fear is the reason many people say they hate something that could cause it, and it's not irrational to fear, but the consistent anxiety and distrust leading to narratives that affect men who are not of the patriarchy is a phobia.

no one hates cis men for being men, it is hate of their ability to use their cis status and patriarchal power. cis manhood is preferred, it is widely accepted, it is natural.. trans men on the other hand are hated for being failed cis men and confused women, who are then hated for being related to cis men by being men incorrectly.

you might be transandrophobic if..

...you see trans men as the cis men of the trans community. this is a running joke in some spaces, but it perpetuates the idea that since cis men are of a higher power due to privilege, that trans men must have the same privileges and the same status due to them being men. this is not how you affirm transmasculine identities and frankly, it's downright gross. when you begin to see trans men as trans men instead of removing their manhood from their transness, you see that the manhood is inseparable from our transness and is in close quarters to how our identity functions. without that manhood, we are not trans and we are no longer of that community - we are then lumped into three categories; "non-men," nonbinary, or afab. when trans men say that we do not want our manhood to be reduced/separated from our transness, we mean that the other terms to categorize us are inaccurate, false, or derogatory.

...you don't think theyfab is a slur. it was made specifically to go after those who were assigned female at birth and used they/them primarily. this affects most if not all trans people who are genderqueer/nonbinary and were assigned female. it's a slur and is used that way.

...you don't say trans man, but instead say "tme." tme is transmisogyny exempt, and is known to be used as a stand in for anyone not presenting as a woman. it's a bioessentialist/intersexist term alongside it's counterpart; tma. these terms leave out and actively discriminate against intersex bodies and identities - and if pointed out - those who use the terms tme/tma will have a meltdown.

...say more slurs. if any of this is in your daily or private vocabulary and you actively refer to trans men or transmascs like this, there is a problem.

...you position our HRT or manhood as poison. i don't have to explain this that much but would it be acceptable for a trans man to say that estrogen is a poison and womanhood is essentially harmful by nature? if not, that might be a reason as to not do the same to trans men who need it.

...you position our oppression as lesser or never experienced. trans women face transandrophobia. that's the truth. the fear of supposed men in women spaces is one of the most rampant forms of prejudice against trans women.anyone can experience transandrophobia and transmisogyny. anyone can experience exorsexism. the main point of it is what it is supposed to be attacking. transmisogyny attacks womanhood that is trans or queer. transandrophobia attacks manhood by removing it from transness.

...you ignore the quarrels of trans men against rampant transandrophobia that seem to revolve around fears of being excluded due to not being feminine or woman enough, which the community seems to gravitate towards.

...you make transandrophobic claims that don't make sense at all.

sometimes I wonder if people remember that:

'tranny voice' - even shortened to 't voice' - was something that specifically targeted trans men and like, the whole brand of harassing 'transtrenders' applied to trans men as equally as it did trans women, and our king [sarcasm] kalvin garrah was the main driving force of anti-trans masculine rhetoric such as 'you can't have big boobs' 'you can't like your boobs' 'you can't wear colours' 'you can't dye your hair' 'you can't be effeminate' 'tranny voice' 'you can't have a weird name' 'you can't be disabled' 'a real trans man wouldn't say that' and so on, bolstered by mega transphobes blair white and arielle scarcella

when we're told we aren't actually targeted in any specific way when, yes actually, we were and are targeted in specific ways, but the only people who talk[ed] about it were other trans men, trans mascs, and nonbinary people who were specifically targeted by this trans medicalist rhetoric, and then trans women who stood up for us were [and still are] told that they were 'forcibly transing little girls'

"So, which alter is the real you?"

Written whilst the system was blurry.

This is a personal post with educational explanations.

This question insinuates a few misconceptions about Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID).

Firstly, the word 'real' in this context implies that the asker believes only one dissociative identity truly exists, while the others are either fabricated or hallucinations. This misconception is not only dismissive but also reinforces the harmful stereotype that DID is not a legitimate condition. It perpetuates the false belief that individuals with DID are simply experiencing psychosis or should be misdiagnosed with a different disorder, such as schizophrenia. This misunderstanding can lead to a lack of proper support for those living with DID, who have distinct and valid identities formed as a response to trauma that initially began in early childhood. All dissociative identities within an individual are real. In DID, multiple dissociative identities have the ability to take executive control, allowing them to interact with the environment. However, the ability to take control should not be the sole measure of their reality. Disorders like OSDD and PDID also involve alters who may not be able to or reluctantly take executive control, yet they are equally real. The existence and significance of a part is determined by their role and presence within the system. 

Secondly, the question mistakenly separates the different parts of a person with DID as if they are distinct, individual entities. In reality, each part is a fragment of the whole individual, meaning that every part is the “real you.” This ties into the outdated concept reflected in the name "Multiple Personality Disorder," which suggests that a person with DID has multiple, fully-formed personalities. In truth, DID involves dissociative identities, each representing a fragment of one complete personality. When integrated, these fragments come together to form the singular personality of the entire individual.

This misunderstanding also leads to the belief that the main host is not an alter, and that only the other identities are. The host is an alter, there is no single "core" or "original personality". Many try to explain this through the analogy of a shattered bowl, asking, "If a bowl breaks, which piece is the original?" However, this metaphor doesn’t accurately represent DID because it implies there was once a whole, unbroken personality that fragmented. In DID, there was never a singular, intact "bowl" to begin with. The system’s personality remained divided due to amnesia and trauma and was never able to form one personality. 

A more fitting metaphor is that of a stained glass window. Each piece of stained glass is meticulously crafted to fit with the others, just as each alter in DID is formed by the brain to complement the others. If all parts were to integrate, they would form a complete personality just as a stained glass window is whole when its pieces are assembled. This analogy avoids the implication that something is "missing" or "broken" and instead highlights how each part is essential to the survival and functionality of the individual as a whole. Even when not assembled a stained glass window is not considered broken and people with DID are not broken.

This is a personal post with educational explanations.

Written whilst the system was blurry.

I think a vital piece of information that transandrophobes are missing is this:

Manhood is gatekept to all hell.

I'm so serious. To be a man, in the eyes of society, you need first and foremost a working dick and balls. Even if we shelve that clearly transphobic notion for a moment, there's still all this:

You have to have abs

You have to have wide shoulders

You need to always want sex and be good at it

If your chest isn't flat it needs to be because you have huge pec muscles and NO OTHER REASON

You're expected to be straight (into women)

You're expected to not present as feminine in any way (because that implies you're not straight)

You're supposed to be athletic or at least interested in athletics

You're supposed to have at least some facial hair

You're supposed to be at LEAST 6 feet tall

You cannot be fat

You're supposed to have a sharp, chiseled jawline

You're not supposed to take it up the ass

You need to have huge muscles, especially biceps

And this is just the appearance stuff. There's more behavioral stuff I could touch on that gets even stricter. The point is, if you do not fit ALL of these + the unlisted behavioral expectations, including and especially the dick and balls part, you are NOT A REAL MAN TO SOCIETY.

Trans men are not considered men by society. We are denied manhood, and any privilege that might come with it, because we are trans. We're not SUPPOSED to be men, or supposed to want to be men, according to society.

But we are. And society hates that. And transandrophobes will try to take that from us any way we can. By erasing us and lumping us with women. By forcing us to detransition, or not allowing us to transition in the first place. By gaslighting us (often via assault or abuse). By making everyone else think we're "confused and annoying children" so we're not taken seriously. By malgendering us (ex. "You're not a girl so I can punch you") when we're perceived as men. By leveraging misogyny against us when we're perceived as women.

Trans men are oppressed for being men, because we are refusing to "stay in our lane", and manhood is not supposed to be our lane. This is why we need the term "transandrophobia". The oppression of transmascs is a problem, and the problem needs a name so it can be solved.