Wartime

You know what’s going to be the biggest factor getting in the way of soothing the extent that climate change will have on this blue sphere here?
The international community outside of the Western countries gives a fuck about so-called “green technologies”. They care more about their own development, which had been kept down for centuries by the plundering of the dominant European and North American countries. And that means, cheap energy accessible to the biggest mass of people and local industries carries more importance than making it as exclusive as it can get through applying complex and expensive technologies in the chain, which the bigger parts of the population in the first world countries are able to afford (in whatever way possible to individuals).
The mindset of the Western world and what they think of as “problems” is so far away from those of the rest of the world - literally elevated thousands of kilometers above the ground, figuratively.

So are many other issues such as that of a cultural nature, for example.
The rest of the world literally doesn’t care about the gender-fantasies of twenty-somethings in the US or Europe and their dreams of deconstructing the biological base of the two sexes. Or about rainbow flags, pride months and loudly celebrating LGBT minority rights like they would be a cure against HIV and cancer altogether (rights which quite a chunk of areas in the world don’t have anyway).
There are way more urgent problems to them than such boredom- and living-in-security-driven ergotherapy of emphasizing things that revolve around the aspect of the anthropocentric worldview to overestimate the social ongoings between humans in a society.

To the rest of the world, the classic aspects of the mindset of the anthropocentric worldview are important: Where do humans get a space to live, a roof over their head, food and water for humans, jobs to earn money and chances to procreate - as well as chances to feed that offspring and raise it into an adult.

If you want to get the rest of the world into the same boat as the culturally loony Western part of the planet, then you first rather need to get them to abandon their part of the anthropocentric worldview, in which all natural resources of the planet exist just to serve and be consumed primarily by humans. - Including your own focus where human business and social interaction still also overshadows everything, beside you talking about “wanting to save the world” and “protecting the environment” (inconsequently).

I think I get it why you need these “alternative” or “wider” terms to describe your sex role in society, whose terms for sex (which you mistake with the social sex role aka “gender”) you perceive to be too narrow to include you.

You run after this bullshit from US-style social sciences because the world wasn’t ever a place before to teach you a differentiated way of thinking and understanding about sex - socially as well as physically and psychically. You run after these terms because solely them fetch you from the railway station you’re at inside - lost and mentally confused about yourself as you are.
If someone else did, you’d use their terms instead and regard yourself through this pair of glasses.
It’s not like they’re truly scientific, they just close a gap within what society and public school taught you about life.
By closing this gap, they only become scientific to you, although you sure have no idea of what science truly is like and how it works to generate and validate new knowledge and recognitions...

Uneducated simple small man’s mind. That’s what all this is born from.

And the world doesn’t do a good job of correcting that...
(Because much can be achieved by the plebs remaining intellectually and emotionally as simpleminded as a child, unlike if they individually all have a bit of brains and common sense and can figure things out by themselves, in case of need.)

---

Complementary with: https://matrixmann.dreamwidth.org/280907.html

I figure it’s just as I suspected about “nonbinary” and all these terms...
Actually, it’s only about not meeting the expectations of one’s respective culture for male and female. That’s all about it, if not individually interpreted in a different way.

Well, as explored further here, not just that it doesn’t have anything to do with either physical or mental sex (the latter is, unfortunately, very, very much confused with the cultural expectations towards both sexes) - if seen through the lens of a different cultural upbringing, it leaves you behind with a couple of questions:

1) What is this about? What’s the big deal about this?
2) What’s so special about that? Isn’t it like self-evident that you don’t fulfill every socially expected character trait or supposed preference of your sex?
3) Why does such a circumstance need extra attributes and identities to wipe them in everybody’s faces?
4) Who wants to know this about a person at all after exchanging just a couple of words? Isn’t it so with everyone that you have to get to know the person’s individual preferences, character traits and so on because everyone wants things a little different than the other?

The more you try to understand it, the more you come to feel like it’s an issue of “a bag of rice falling over in China”. An actually trivial thing pumped up like a huge blister.
And the more you see some people turning over in their minds what kind of supposed “sex” (always expressed as “gender”) they belong to because of being or liking this or that which is labeled “untypical” of their born sex, the more extremely confused they get what side of things they actually are placed on.
That’s because mental sex and “gender” (the artificial term that John Money established) are mistaken to be one and the same.
In truth, these people find themselves in conflict what kind of expectations society directs at them based on their physical sex, associating certain personality traits, preferences and role behavior firmly with it. Not with their actual biological and mental sex.
But due to throwing those three - biological and mental sex and social/cultural expectations - into one and the same pot, not regarding them as separate subjects, they make the mistake to believe something is wrong with their biological and mental sex.

In other words, the words of an outsider to this, this would be: It’s being stuck in human culture and not realizing its relativity. Barely anything of that can be factually undermined as “this is the right path” and “this is the wrong path”. And expectations and cultural images can also change over time.
So it doesn’t matter how you do things, how you want things and how you prefer things - there is no real right&wrong.
You are as you are as a personality, that doesn’t automatically negate your biological sex and your mental sex. - Unless you really want it to and actually aim at a different path (transition).
Nearly everyone harbors anything that its respective society would label as “untypical”.
The reason why not everyone makes a drama about this is: They can integrate it very well into their personal identity.
They’ve undergone the process of realizing this part of themselves doesn’t make them lesser a male or a female. Maybe they didn’t even have to do that because their early surroundings weren’t that narrow-minded about that!

The core thing about “nonbinary” and all the other attributes pointing in a similar direction content-wise is: Becoming aware of the wrongs and fallacies of one’s own culture. Even about the culture that the economy, advertising, popular movies, media on the whole and commerce create.
This is all relative and not be taken with a grain of salt. Neither it is cast in stone for all eternity.
All that is, in easy terms, a fantasy world created by human will and it doesn’t necessarily have much to do with biological and mental sex.
If those expectations and cultural norms don’t suit your character, don’t get a different identity scheme and leave it as it is - challenge it. Do your thing, progress in life with your head upright.
The bigger the number of people who do this and don’t hide in their illusion of “being a different kind of human than the rest”, the quicker such narrow schemes for how people have to be like will blur.

So, as a conclusion to this: If you already live in a headspace of not expecting much of what a person “is supposed to be like” without really knowing it more closely, and accepting nearly everything that it’s going to answer or reveal about itself, those attributes for “neither man, nor woman” are superfluous.

(This is trying to redefine some categories and terms in which the mainstream way of acting commits a couple of major scientific errors just for the sake of keeping up some important achievements of progress for certain human minority groups.
I shouldn’t ever calculate with anybody meaningful reading this and picking it up, but what the heck, you never know... And did all important pioneers in social issues ever aim or expect to become that kind of figures that they became later on?
Also, sometimes the academic sector needs a little input from the intelligentsia of the plebs in order to see clearly again.)

---

Sex (if talking about the human feature): That category should be divided into two - physical and mental sex.

Physical sex is the biological sex one is getting born with. It has two strict determinations for humans, just as for other mammals and a lot of other multicellular organisms.
If this determination somehow got twisted and can’t unambiguously categorized into one of the two for humans, then this is called “intersex” or “intersexual” and can’t be answered so easily.
You’ll have to go with what mental sex manifested in an individual then to assort correctly.

Mental sex is the psychical manifestation of a person’s sex.
As far as scientific studies go, it’s a determination resting inside the depths of an individual’s brain, with no specific organ or “spot” to be located. The determination is made pre-birth, inside one’s mother’s womb. Indications point towards the hormones of the mother throughout the pregnancy being responsible for which development a human fetus takes in this point.
It cannot be altered or changed.
Mental sex and physical sex can be opposed to each other - that’s what is called “trans” or “transsexual”, or “transgender” in the modern times.
Also they can “not match” in other ways - like an undefined dysphoria perceived by an individual, but which doesn’t fit this “oppose each other”-framework, or that an individual cares lesser about its mental and physical sex assignment at all than other people and, maybe, doesn’t mind if it had been born with the physics of the other biological sex. Those people are called “neutrois” - stemming from the term “neutral”. (So to say: People who feel “neutral”, “unspecific”.)
“Nonbinary” is another term to express about the same state of things, but is in scientific ways rather debatable because the verbal assumption of a “Nonbinary” as counterpart to the binary rule of male and female, if a species hasn’t originally been designed as sexless or as hermaphrodites, is like inventing an artificial category that naturally doesn’t exist.
If to be seen as anything factually “correct”, then this term should be better understood as purely “in social context” - meaning: As a personal crutch to express a perceived inner state of complex feelings and as means to communicate that towards other people with just few effort.
In nature without other humans near, this self-description/self-assertion is meaningless.

If people talk about a differing perception of themselves throughout their lives regarding their physical and mental sex, then this is also mostly due to a biologically undetermined conception of their brains in terms of mental sex, which they had already been born with.
Life and living itself are rather the means to trigger this, to make this finally come out and cause awareness of this circumstance.

Gender whereas, as used in most modern contexts, is mostly misunderstood and confused for mental sex. For the biological and hormonal determination in one’s brain regarding one’s sex identity.
The mistake already stems from its original conception made by John Money - that sexologist which practiced “research” methods and harbored views like a pedophile in hiding and was responsible for the tragic and inhuman David Reimer case, where he unsuccessfully tried to turn a boy into a girl, resulting in both the affected person and its twin brother later killing themselves as adults -, which introduced the “Sex and gender distinction”, but made the fundamental error in its concept to declare cultural norms and roles as the sole factor of influence for the development of a person’s sex identity and, in its very worst point, it ignored, in favor of these cultural norms and roles, the neuropsychological embodiment of sex that is already firmly “burned” into the depths of an individual’s brain as soon as it leaves the body of its mother.
The Anglo-Saxon part of the world seems to have internalized this idea of “gender” and “mental sex being entirely constructed from cultural norms” for whatever reason, proving that by still keeping on using the word “gender” in such contexts without really remembering its creator, what context it arose from and, especially, what horrific “researches” on living people are the base for this false assumption.
For whatever reason - maybe because of the excessive talk about human culture in general at some point in time and not just the aspect of it to act out one’s mental sex -, it forgot the actual meaning of the term “gender” at some point, or totally adopted it and surrendered to the idea of exuberant voluntary choice (perhaps because it wanted to believe in the overrated myth of man’s capability to conscious choice) - even through all other studies and proclamations of individuals that rather indicate that human culture can’t erase some “base programmings” of animal nature that humans are also subject to and which they still carry within them.
Even if reduced in their forms due to the huge brain that humans developed over several thousands of years, these given basic programmings remain intact, otherwise humans had no physical reflexes or inborn instincts.
So to say, humans aren’t completely “blank” if they get born to this world.
There are some determinations that have been made before that, those stem from the progress of one’s mother’s pregnancy and one’s own genetic code.
If those weren’t made before, the newborn human would be unable to develop a personality of its own, would be unable to develop own cognitive skills and have no reason to ever grow into an adult. For survival, independent and individual cognitive thinking is necessary.

Mental sex is a part of those determinations that originate from man’s animal nature.
No matter how much humans actually change and adapt their environment to suit their own (partly even self-created) needs, humans are never separated from being a part of nature.

So gender can, by its own definition of being “changeable” and “fluid”, just only be a cultural thing, a matter of behavior, a thing of self-expression inside each individual’s local culture, but not a component which is an original feature of the human species.
This also reveals itself very openly by “genders” differing in various human cultural circles.

Because, from an evolutionary point and from the point how the human species is naturally designed, mental sex cannot be fluid or inconsistent.
If it was, humans would die out because, for example, masses of males would choose to behave like females, but without their respective reproductive organs, and/or masses females would choose to behave like males without featuring their respective reproductive organs.
The organs are designed to function correctly with a specific base mental condition.
As mainstream behavior, it won’t be the males choosing their partners for reproduction exceptionally wisely because they produce too much biological means to actually create an offspring. This even causes them physical pain if being kept inside for too long.
Vise versa, it will only be few females which generally promiscuously sleep with every male they can get. Because the genetic material at hand to procreate for them is rather limited compared to males. If they adopt this behavior, it may more have to do with hearing their so-called “biological clock” tick and finding it to have remained unsatisfied until this moment.

So that’s why it becomes no mainstream in any culture (and by that, also in gender) to switch the mating behavior, even though according to human will it would be perfectly choosable as one pleases.
As painful as it may sound, but both biological and mental sexes follow the patterns nature had intended for that specific determination, in order for the species to survive.
And no-one urges these two manifestations to do that, they do that all by themselves. Out of an own motivation which they don’t know about what it actually stems from.
Just as stated - like a “base programming” that is inborn to them. Like an instinct that works on its own without needing to consciously think about it.

So, pin this as it is: There is biological sex, there is mental sex and there is gender. There are three components in this topic section, not just two.
Gender is the human-made part. Culture, personal upbringing, personal self-expression, individual choice, residential region, local customs, capitalist marketing, zeitgeist.
Gender and mental sex are two different things.
While the first is not fully independent of the latter, the latter has nothing to do with the first.

Or, in short: Gender ≠ mental sex.

Mental sex is determined (no matter to which “option” it is determined to be, even if “set” to “neutral”), while Gender is your own choice.

And lest not forget, in the majority of humans their physical and their mental sex match.
They may even have no real reason to consciously think about choosing their gender because they feel fine with who they are or what role they’re socially embedded in.
This should not be marginalized in all that.