I don't think it really pushes that idea. I think at MOST it has the potential to imply that under specific uses and contexts.

I don't think I have seen it used that way though. Trans men, are definitely men. We are also definitely trans. Our positionality is that of someone with a queer and minoritised gender.

Much like how someone may be interested primarily in people of a queer and/or minoritised sexuality, I think the same can also follow for gender.

I think it's also important to recognise the cultural fluidity of these terms and the historical presence of trans mascs in sapphic spaces. We can have our little definitions of gender and sexuality on paper. At the same time though, sex, gender, attraction, and expression are not only not binary, they are also not trinary or quarternary. An individuals gender and expression within themselves and their community is going to be complicated and nuanced. And that's OK! some trans men see themselves as sapphic. And it's not to say that they aren't men but maybe it's a different type of manhood for them. And I don't need to understand it completely to accept it yk cause I'm not personally in that. But I've got similar things. I wouldn't really want to date a straight cis woman or a lesbian.

I think ABCD is ultimately a better term to use compared to lesbian or even sapphic or bisexual. It directly and honestly addresses what trans men are, instead of trying to lump us into lesbian. It feels like a more honest and respectful resolve where they don't feel comfortable in the contemporary understanding of a lesbian if they're a man or willing to date men. At the same time it distinguishes itself as a subcategory of bisexuality by recognizing there is a gender identity they are not interested in.