I had a lot of doubts to begin with. Part of what helped me was learning that it's not useful to think of words like trans as prescriptive, but as descriptive. I started only thinking in terms of benefits and making myself comfortable.

I want to wear different clothes and otherwise present myself differently because I've always wanted to? Then I'll do that.

I tried HRT and I liked the mental and physical effects? Then I'll continue with HRT.

I have no connection to my name and prefer a female coded name? Then I'll use a new female coded name.

Etc. etc.

Trans is just a word and the more important part is making yourself happy.

Edit: The word trans is useful because it describes a bunch of the stuff I'm doing, and it makes me happy when I see things that are trans supportive. I think it's also worth remembering that gender is a spectrum and that being transgender is defined as not identifying with the gender you were assigned at birth/not being cis, and therefore includes a lot of identities and ways of expressing yourself.

No one else gets to go inside your head and tell you how you feel, so it's only up to you to decide whether or not you are trans. Honestly you can do a bunch of gender non-conforming things and even do all sorts of transitiony things and stuff associated with being trans and then just decide to "not be trans" if you feel like it, even if others might describe you as such. What do they know anyways? Most people haven't really put their gender identity under the looking glass or even so much as read about the subject.

Ah, that would make sense

I am in awe

How so ?

The soviet union and the CCP today famously committed a number of genocides, killed dissenters, and are one party states. You seem to think I mean liberal democracy when I say democracy. I mean democracy.

Soviet Democracy by Priestland seems to disagree with you on how democratic the worplaces were. The power of the unions was greatly dialed back very quickly, with managers being reintroduced and the economy becoming more hierarchical as time went on.

Incorrect. You are referring to cooperatives,

Socialism being when the workers own the means of production is kinda essential, be it directly or indirectly. This is the basis on which I state that tankies are not socialists. I'm guessing you think that the workers indirectly own the means in the soviet union, or that the direct democracy you seem to think existed there for any meaningful amount of time counted (it did count, but again, only briefly).

Anything you've said about china is just flat out wrong. The soviet union is certainly complicated, and much could be debated there, especially since the power of the unions fluctuated with time, but workers have literally zero power under the ccp.

But we clearly disagree on reality, no further debate is necessary. Have a nice day I guess.

No actually. The Soviet Union was a union of national republics, hence the name.

Ah, I misremembered. I thought soviet meant council as in a union.

I'm not going to spend too much time debating a tankie, but I think most of these regimes kinda by definition are not socialist given how little power the workers had. When unions are suppressed and the military and the dictatorship are essentially the same thing, how could they be socialist? Socialism requires that workers own their workplaces, that they run them. This was not the case in the soviet union nor is it the case in china today, where businesses are either organized by the state (like in the soviet union) or mixed (CCP). The state organizing businesses or whatever you want to call them would be fine if the people owned the state, but again these were/are dictatorships.

The people don't control anything at all in your so called marxist states, and so therefore they are not marxist. Centralization is not something that I'm opposed to, but what does it matter how decentralized or centralized something is if it's not also democratically owned?

I would probably call myself a marxist if tankies hadn't so thoroughly stained the term.

Edit: I am also well aware that there were unions in the soviet union, hence the name. However they had little power, and mostly could only ever push for worker safety regulations.

Historically it has never worked out very well for the anarchists, so I would hope that they have learned their lesson by now

It's really not unorthodox in leftist spaces, only in tankie and non-leftist places :/

I dunno where to find sources on hexbear being bad, but please stop using marxist and tankie as if they are synonymous: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie

Hexbear has been problematic from the start. I would love to find some sources, but that would require effort that I'm not willing to expend right now. Basically hexbear has done a lot of brigading and bullying in the past, with blessings from their moderators.

I do not consider tankies socialists, as socialism is inherently anti-authoritarian, and I honestly have little respect for socialists and anarchists that hang out with them. History has seen the regimes the tankies defend ruin attempts at socialism and anarchy countless times, especially considering that these regimes are often military takeovers of actual socialist revolutions.

It’s a nice atmosphere if you aren’t a liberal.

Doesn't sound like it would have a nice atmosphere for socialists or anarchists either

Edit: Also that place allows coordinated attacks against non-tankies, and the most troubling users from blåhaj ran to that place, so I'm not super impressed.

Fascism is by definition a form of capitalism :P As defined by Mussolini back then and by political scientists today. It's not just about dictatorship, but about the relationship between private businesses and the state.

Why would anarchists associate with tankies? I don't wanna share any space with authoritarians of any kind

I mean that's why they are called tankies :P It's a derogatory word originally used to describe "socialists" defending tanks being sent into ukraine by the soviet union, and then was quickly used to describe all "socialists" defending genocide, imperialism, and authoritarianism.

Then you don't know what communism is. I've never met a non-socalist who knows what socialism is, or can describe how or why socialism has failed in the past.

Please do not conflate tankies with socalists

Tankies are authoritarians and therefore cannot call themselves socialist

I agree in spirit! However the soviet union was neither capitalist nor communist, and fascism is a form of capitalism which means the soviet union wasn't fascist, but rather something else entirely.

Hexbear is a tankie instance

Edit: being anti-sectarian is not an excuse Edit 2: Because tankies are not socialists