I think its important to draw a line.

"Male socialisation" implies that everyone who was AMAB went through the same kind of upbringing and was exposed to the same kinds of indoctrination, toxicity, and bias. It is an over generalisation at best, and intentionally misrepresentative at worst.

If you want to talk specifically about what being assigned male at birth did to your upbringing, I can see it being useful to have a generally understood terminology for that. But you aren't talking about something that is necessarily applicable as a broad term like "male socialisation".

I was raised by people who thought I was a male, and part of that bombarded me with machismo and objectification of women. Traditional masculine values were, or at least there was an attempt to, pasted onto me. But many of them slid right off because even if I didnt acknowledge it until a decade or more later, I was a woman, and these values did not align with me. Some stuck, and took learning and introspection to undo.

I am still undoing some of that and I'm sure theres more that I'm unaware of that I will be undoing for years. But my experience differed so greatly from one whose identity aligns with their assigned gender at birth, because the core assumption at the root of what those around me were trying to impart upon me, was wrong. I was not a man. I have never been a man.

I can plant a seed and a plastic bead in the same soil, give them the same fertiliser, water them the same, and only the seed will grow into a plant. The bead might be wet, or dirty, just like the seed, but to expect that it would have experienced the same resulting changes as the seed would be unwise.

"Male socialization" paints transgender women as invariably unable to escape the chains of their assigned gender at birth. Let us rather discuss, on an individual basis, the toxicity and unhelpful values that were or were not taught by those we trusted.

but being trans did not make me immune to the harmful behaviours and ideas that are taught to those children perceived as boys.

Absolutely not. But you also didn't have the same relationship with your upbringing as cis men and boys did, because you dealt with a lifetime of internalised transphobia that made you doubt who you are.

We all absolutely share some similarities with the socialisation of our cis peers, good and bad, but we did not have the same experience as them, and I think that's an important distinction to make. "Male socialisation" erases those different experiences. But when you don't conflate the two experiences, you can start to talk about the difference, whilst also acknowledging the commonalities.

I call it what it is. Socialization as a closeted trans person.

Which is to say, it's a mixture of being socialised as our assigned genders, but it's also our own internal relationship and interaction with those norms and pressures. And that last part is very different between cis people and trans people.

I'm not saying trans people escape the influence of being socialised according to our assigned genders. I'm saying the way we internalise and respond to those norms, perceptions and pressures differs sufficiently that it should be acknowledged and talked about, not erased and conflated with cis experiences.

The neonazis once used it as a dogwhistle to signal to each other. They had a subreddit so bad that even that useless company banned them fairly quickly. They really don't use it anymore as far as I know, so it really isn't a problem to use it. That doesn't stop me wincing whenever I hear it though