Transsexual refers to trans people in an explicitly sexual way and puts a heavy emphasis on genitals and sexual characteristics
i think most people use it without the emphasis on genitals (notice how there is not mention of genitals in the word transsexual). and even if they do, who cares? how does this erase identities or empower transmedicalism? just because you are uncomfortable with a word doesnt mean it cannot be used by anyone
Listen to your grandpa
There are some comedy movies, like the diamond arm, but Soviet movies are not known to be particularly upbeat fyi
Like a solid fifth of Europe yeah
Maybe using star wars as a point of reference isn’t the best idea. It’s not some peak revolutionary strategy or something. And if I were to indulge in this comparison, killing a couple of functionaries is hardly destroying the most powerful military installation in the galaxy.
i mean his post is not wrong, just a very anti-adventurist position.
Criticizing socialists for being "rich" is a right wing tactic
do you actually think that there are no ukranians that speak russian?
as another commentor said, bolsheviks also did land reform. Mao was inspired by it! im not sure that its what distinguishes PRC from USSR ideologically, though i agree that the peasantry dynamics were different in the USSR.
I feel like you are really hung up on sex as to mean "biological" but I want you to consider that this (perceived) distinction between sex and gender is precisely the part that’s harmful to trans people. By separating sex into its own "biological" "scientific" reality you are missing that sex is as arbitrary as gender. Who is to decide what are sexual characteristics and what is not?