community isn't designed, it evolved as an adaptation. so did the rest of our human artifices, including the good ones like autonomy, consent, freedom, mutual aid, and anything else we could hold up as something as an alternative here. Given that it evolved, in a complex and participatory fashion among many interlacing components, I am incline to not regard it as either "good" or "bad". It has its features, which we can detail, and critique, but it may be reductive to frame it as something which is easily judged and accepted or rejected as consequence.

But, I think this is just an extension of what you are saying. In other words, what would anarchist life look like, without the concept of anarchist community as a universalizing or homogenizing force?

So, this to say, I don't think you're wrong. There are deeply toxic things, that have been inculcated so much as to be approximately inherent, to the idea of anarchist community. There's also just plain unhelpful things, for example the conflation of aesthetics with immanence. But I think perhaps as well, there is a way for people to relate with each other that can be structured by the participants to be positive, and that this can scale. I also see that happen too, minus the "scale" part.

Another matter is, it is necessary to wield collective force, in order to survive in this context. For example: unless want to be homeless, must live with other people, or exert so much capital violence on the world that you extract enough back to rent your own place. Even if you aren't forming a massive tenant's autonomous network/union thing, you still need to cooperate with others in order to get by, and domestic environments like that for example are where toxic things happen most frequently. We can try to change the conditions for that to an extent, but there's also this "yeoman" individual farmer ideology that can be destructive to genuine radical social changes, and at its worst is USA imperialism and victim-blaming patriarchy.

Getting away from abstractions about "community", and more into the concretes of specific and defined social interactions that we are compelled to engage in, I think is where discourse would benefit people. Because then, you can map how to escape.