>>2769645This is dumb thinking, at least as you present it.
First: because many people are more tolerant than you think, or at least more indifferent to differences which aren't relevant. (E.g. many theoretical racists are actually perfectly at ease with their minority co-workers)
Second: because things become normalized. Should female communists have eschewed trousers until someone else took the lead in changing tastes?
Third, because it's just plain bad marketing. People want interesting things, not bland ones. In politics this means it's better to have people love some parts of you and hate others than it is to have them be indifferent. The most conventional communist
possible is not a communist at all - he gave that nonsense up to fit in better.
Finally:
People's political sympathies are in large part rooted in their personalities. The average communist today is: high openness, high agreeableness, high neuroticism, mid-low conscientiousness (rule following), and extroversion is a wash. The average rightoid is low openness, low agreeableness, low-mid neuroticism, mid-high conscientiousness. By tailoring yourself as a conventional conformist you face a choice: conform to what? If you conform to the demands of "mainstream" society as it actually exists, you'll express your gay furry little heart out. If you conform to the imagined normie of your fever dreams (a much more right tilted balance than the actualité), you're trying to sell communism to rightists opposed both dispositionally and theoretically to you. Perhaps as your next step after that flops you could take up marketing mutton flaps to vegans?