The problem is these terms are basically undefined and current 'left' and 'right' trends don't match historic left and right trends. Actual communists (e.g., St

The problem is these terms are basically undefined and current 'left' and 'right' trends don't match historic left and right trends. Actual communists (e.g., Stalinist USSR) have had periods that were socially traditional in many ways, up to and including prosecuting homosexuality. The truth is what we call 'the left' and 'the right' is some kind of attempt to cluster a bunch of orthogonal belief systems that in our contemporary time tend to cluster. You then also have things like post-modernist ideas that in some sense reject the idea of an objective reality and are idealist, whereas orthodox Marxism is solidly materialist and modern. People don't know what the hell any of these terms mean. Even Marx himself, in comparison to some self-proclaimed Marxists, said something like, "if they are marxists then surely I am not a marxist." Most orthodox Marxists I know do not consider themselves liberals by the way and many wouldn't call themselves feminists because they may disagree with a bunch of baggage there, while being stridently in favor of equality between the sexes. A common struggle among "the left" (e.g., the "new left" in the 60s) is whether or not it is an intra-liberal struggle and whether or not class is the primary or even only determinate and other 'identities' should be subsumed. It's complicated. Personally I try to not take on a label that defines for me a set of beliefs that are orthogonal. Someone can disbelieve in the trans movement you identified entirely and also want a workers revolution. It's not actually uncommon.