u/Mindless_Yam1752

So I’m mainly just curious if it is just a matter of, if you believe in the principles of feminism the natural conclusion is that LGBTQ+ rights need to be supported as well, or if it’s just a matter of feminists tending to be left wing.
Or is there an aspect of it which is that a lot of women’s rights have a direct impact on LGBTQ+ rights (or vice versa) so regardless of if you actively support LGBTQ+ rights as a feminist you will end up helping them either way.

Part of why I ask is the fact that TERFs exist and are generally considered (in this community at least) to not be real feminists, so Im kind of curious about actual feminists relationship with LGBT+ rights
(i hope my phrasing wasn’t too confusing or anything, sorry if it was)

So my understanding of communism and Marx is that society evolved as a result of class struggles and that communism is meant to be the last stage in that evolution because there would no longer be economic classes. And also of course the idea that a communist society has no private property, money, etc and that the means of production would be owned by the people who use it for their labour.

One of my biggest issues with communism is the idea that a society can exist without classes. No matter what,there will always be some people who gain a higher social status and influence over the masses than others. Those people would likely have some form of privilege that the other people do not have and in turn that is a class divide.

Another issue that I have is that I don’t think a society can ever truly be moneyless. For similar reasons to why I think it cant be classless but also the fact that money at the end of the day is just a systematic and formalised way of trading labour. What I mean by this is that what money represents will always exist (so long as humans do), especially when you consider the fact that people will naturally fall into different levels of skill and talent (so if there is a baker that makes bread better than anyone else in an area, people will naturally gravitate towards them which would likely result in some form of a system developing to provide greater incentive to source from places elsewhere).

These two points accounted for, why wouldn’t a communist society just devolve back into some kind of capitalism? Or would it evolve into some other thing that somehow manages to balance the aspects that work of various systems Im a way that provides a greater benefit than any currently popular systems would?

So I don’t actually understand what is meant by positive masculinity exactly other than I guess the idea that a man can be masculine and also a good person (that is probably not accurate so my apologies). Either way though, I don’t really get the point. Like isn’t any idea that a person should be a certain way because of their gender just inherently toxic to some extent? Am I just misunderstanding completely? Because to me it seems that discussion about things like masculinity and encouraging positive masculinity kind of just end up naming good people who are men as examples of positive masculinity.

Basically, what exactly is the point of differentiating positive and toxic masculinity when it seems the very concepts of masculinity and femininity are based on stereotypes of what men and women should be and this inherently reinforces some form of gender inequality?

I saw a statistic that less than 40 percent of university enrolments in Australia (where I live) in the last few years were men. Is there a particular societal reason for that? My guess is that with more women entering the workforce force fewer of them are taking jobs in trades and so regardless of if men are actually going to university less it will look like they are if you look solely at statistics.

But I am genuinely curious if there are other factors going into this or if I missed something. Im also interested in what sort of an impact this may have since it would presumably mean that we see more female dominated workforces and potentially female dominated governments (I doubt that would be the case because of misogyny and I suspect governments would aim to have roughly equal representation rather than one gender dominating)