Wartime

Thinking deeper about it, there is a little aspect to point out which surely won’t be irrelevant to the protests against the Covid vaccinations and the conspiracy theories surrounding them all around the world - and in which, bizarrely, these have something in common with the “Fridays For Future” movement:

It’s that if a civilization reached such technological, scientific and cultural heights and masses of general means and gadgets that it starts to forget the very base it stands on.
It takes the safe bubble it created to live in as self-evident and as the original state of nature.
While actually it’s the most unnatural state of things. And you have to do something for it in order to exist.

For example: The effect of vaccines first becomes noticeable if they weren’t given anymore.
If masses of people didn’t receive them.
As vaccines against the famous diseases you can vaccinate against didn’t exist, people died way earlier than today, they died of way more trivial causes, a lot died before they got 18 years old (high rate of child mortality), and people who survived infections with either a virus or bacteria way more often carried lasting damages away from this (often: early childhood) encounter into their adult lives.
This is still the case in places on the earth where these vaccines aren’t available or too expensive for an average person to get.
So when they were invented and people realized infants as well as themselves stopped getting sick and die from those diseases after they were vaccinated, people became clear of a reason to do this for. - No more getting sick, suffering and dying from crap that can be avoided.

A huge example that people of all ages have a personal benefit from is the tetanus vaccination.
Before that, just a single scratch could lead to this type of infection, which in the end paralyzes the nerve tissue that controls muscles in the body and leads to death.
And it’s barely avoidable as the bacterium that causes it lives in nearly everything. It’s everywhere around you.

So so-called “skepticism” and active refusal and even claims like “vaccination is murder” are actually a call to fall back to these circumstances among the population.
How can anyone be so stupid to want that?
Well, the best answer to this is: Because people aren’t aware of why they can lead such a cozy life. Lack of basic education and a lot of manipulative info from sources that function no better than hocus pocus magical crap made to make money that was sold to people in the Middle Ages are to blame for this.

In common with “Fridays For Future” this state of the mind has: Also the members and agitprop activists of this movement aren’t aware of what the order they raise their claims on comes together from.
For example, they take for granted that smartphones exist, that the internet and their platforms to communicate on globally exist, that they live a life on earth where they don’t need to mind neither money nor material if they get sick of something and can simply throw it away as they please.
But all that first needed to be invented, then needs to be fabricated constantly and then needs to be maintained constantly.
Electricity isn’t produced by the wall because the wall is kind of bored and doesn’t know what to do with its time. It’s produced in a power plant, that power plant needs any type of “fuel” or gizmo that moves another gizmo, whose movement generates the electric energy in the end that they take from the wall socket at home. And that needs to be done constantly, not just whenever you want. - Or you’ll have to accept that electric energy isn’t constantly ready to use.
Means of saving energy for later aren’t invented yet, and as it it looks it will be like with rechargeable batteries: It ain’t lossless and the energy saved will vanish over time when not using it. - Unless you’d save the energy compressed in something material that you can easily store and backlog (that would be fossil fuels like coal, gas and petrol, for example).
Not to forget: A power plant producing electric energy first needs to be built in order to serve the purpose to supply you with electricity in the wall socket.

The self-evidence of the presence of the internet is another issue of that umbrella.
The internet comes together by thousands of servers (and, in a simple sense, “computers”), interconnected with each other, running 24/7 all around the year. If you think that you can only switch these on when you need them, then most of the time nobody will be able to read your crap.
Because these computers keep masses of data ready to access for whoever wants to read them at any time of the day. - All the viewers that checked your stuff in the meantime you slept, worked or were at school, they could do that because someone else keeps your data ready and accessible all the time.
If your data didn’t lie on someone else’s server, you’d have to keep your own computer plugged to the net all around the clock, even when you’re absent and not at home, or nobody could read the crap that you post and pay attention to you.

Thousands of computers running at the same time, waiting for somebody to seek a connection with them with his personal computer or cell-phone - anyone who isn’t stupid gets an idea what kind of huge effort that is to keep up every day?
The internet isn’t “simply there”, it’s a complex infrastructure, like a net of tarred roads that you can comfortably drive on, and to be “there”, it needs to be made to come into existence.
Another thing that you have to keep ready to use and cannot just switch on and off whenever you want to use it yourself. The effort made in order to keep it up has to be constantly the same at all times or it won’t work as well as you know it.

Not even to get started on the third example: Their own lifestyle and the lifestyle of the family they live in...
Their parents go to work daily, in most cases don’t share a car because they’ve got to go to two completely different places, their parents don’t work near their home but in other towns and commute, they want to make it to buy a nice house, own a big car, save money so each of their kids can have a driver’s license and an own car as soon as the kids are legally permitted to drive, want 1 or 2 family vacations each year at least - and they don’t want their kids to miss any trend in order to not be socially excluded among their peers.
Last but not least, they also try to save up money from anywhere, on top, to send their kids to university (like university wasn’t something which you have to have the brains first and you can’t tell that from the first day of a child’s life).
All that until the kids get “aware” (their “Fridays For Future”-type of getting “aware”).
Anyone of them who pointed it out to themselves how much of an ecological footprint that already is until they reach “awareness”?
And that’s not even counting their own behavior in this calculation...

Reduced and collected in a short summary that is: No, kiddo, you’re not going to save the world now by going vegan, eating meat-replacement made from soybeans, peas and wheat!
Which, by the way, doesn’t reduce your footprint very much if they actually come from Brazil, like the beef steaks you ate before. (Anyone who praises the meat-replacement products asked where the substance they’re made of comes from?)

And, talking about “recycling”, how about that you wear the clothes of your elder siblings that are still alright - like poor people do?
Or that you use a technical gadget for 10 years or more? Repair it? Tinker around with it, so it can still be of service with new technical standards? Use it until it literally falls apart?
“Learn from the poor” is the correct motto in this issue, just as a reminder, not holding big public speeches and claim whatever the heck comes to your mind from adults how they shall behave.

By the way, skipping school to march on a rally - do these kids have any idea what kind of privilege they throw away thoughtlessly for just a little stomp on the ground of their inconsistent minds?
Kids in Africa and India and whatever places on earth not as rich as the first world dream of going to school instead of having to go to work and already earn some, so the family, including them, has something to eat and doesn’t need to freeze.
School is like the key to a better life, to more life quality and to a better job - and these kids take it so much for granted that they think they can spare it!!
Not even to speak of that they seem to think school without paying hundreds of bucks for it is a world standard!
If their rallies had a connection to something that went wrong in school, but no... it’s about “pointing the adults at doing something to stop climate change”.
Like - next time they go on a strike because the pocket money is too low...

This is social relations, making a plea, not doing something for a certain objective.
And then formulating one’s plea on a pretty high niveau of prosperity. Leaving one’s own role aside, acting like one doesn’t exist and does nothing wrong, but only all other people.

...You see how both have a similarity here?
Avoiding to mind one’s own base of a living, sect-like structures that want to make everyone convert, but they have very few to really say if you check them in the details.
If you fact-check them or check for doability, you find them two live in a dreamy world made of soap bubbles. Harboring an image of the world that doesn’t correspond with the reality.

When do you encounter such phenomena?
Mostly when a civilization is almost at its end. When people forget what their life as they know it is based on and take it for granted that they can eat grapes all day long (figuratively). And, on the other hand, can afford to dive deep down into their human interactions all day long. Be busy with the “he says, she says” and what is the correct way to worship and appreciate whatever the heck.
Act like their human quarrels are the most important thing in the world, like someone is watching and only waiting to interfere and deliver them from their anger towards each other.

(Someone discovers similarities in this description too?)

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.

Die neuste Idee aus dem Corona-Verzweiflungsmanagement: Ausgangssperre.

Liebe Politiker (eigentlich sollte man das "liebe" schon streichen, weil ihr verdient das schon längst nicht mehr) - so wie die Bevölkerung jetzt in der Fläche durchseucht ist, ist es das Schlimmste, was man tun kann, die Leute auch noch zuhause einzusperren!! Dann gibt es nämlich statt einem Infiziertem pro Haushalt alsbald 3 oder 4, weil sich dann alle anderen Haushaltsmitglieder bei dem Infizierten auch noch anstecken!
Was hat man denn bitteschön damit positives gewonnen?!

Zudem - nahezu alles, womit man sich vergnügen könnte, hat eh schon geschlossen wegen eurer letzten Verordnungen. Wo soll man also noch hingehen, wenn die Lebensmittelgeschäfte Feierabend haben?

Oben drauf - es ist Winter. Egal ob Schnee oder nicht, es ist kalt draußen. Die Leute verziehen sich zum größten Teil eh nach Hause, weil sie es warm und gemütlich haben wollen.

Wie viel von dieser gewünschten Ausgangssperre ist also sowieso schon auf anderem Wege Realität? Und eure Scheiß Infektionszahlen gehen nicht runter?

Oh, da fällt einem ein... Hieß es nicht noch in wärmeren Tagen, dass die größte Sorge davor gilt, was ist, wenn die Leute sich wieder in geschlossene Räume zurückziehen und sich das Leben dort abspielt, bei schlechterer Belüftung und Luftzirkulation als im Sommer, weil es kalt draußen ist?
Habt ihr schon wieder den Scheiß vergessen, den ihr noch vor Monaten selbst öffentlich geäußert habt? Oder die Wissenschaftler?

Nicht nur, dass seit dem nichts passiert ist an Orten, wo das unumgänglich ist (Stichwort "Schulen"); jetzt kommt ihr euch noch mit dieser schwachsinnigen Idee an, die Leute zuhause am besten noch einsperren zu wollen!
Etwas, was vor Monaten noch als "besorgniserregend" und "bedenklich" eingestuft wurde!!

Kriegt ihr eigentlich noch mit, was los ist, oder stehen alle Uhren inzwischen nur noch auf Wahlkampf?

Das Kind ist in den Brunnen gefallen, ganz eindeutig. Das geht jetzt auch nicht mehr mit Nachbesserung abzumildern.
Ihr habt im Sommer geschlafen und euch darauf verlassen, dass das Virus zum Herbst wieder verschwunden ist. Ihr habt euch in eurer Arroganz über euer angeblich besser funktionierendes Gesundheitssystem über den grünen Klee hinweggelobt (welches schon mit so vielen ausländischen Fachkräften für die Kassenpatienten aufrecht erhalten wird), und habt dabei vergessen, nach wie vor nach weiteren Erkenntnissen zu suchen wie man die Verbreitungsketten unterbrechen kann. Auch, ob der letzte Verbreitungsweg, der ein großes Thema wurde (die Aerosole), wirklich der Weisheit letzter Schluss ist und es sich nicht doch auch noch auf anderem Wege weiter verbreitet.

Das Ganze erinnert in diesem Punkt an den Prozess des Erkenntnisgewinns zum HIV-Virus in den 80er Jahren.
Zuerst entdeckte man Häufungen innerhalb von bestimmten gesellschaftlichen Gruppen (Schwule, Prostituierte), die einen, in konservativen Augen, äußerst verwerflichen Lebensstil gepflegt haben und die deswegen keiner mochte. Man tat es geradezu als "himmlische Strafe" ab für diese Sünder und kam sich sehr zufrieden mit dieser Deutung vor.
Irgendwann, da tauchten die ersten Infizierten auf, denen man keinen unzüchtigen Lebensstil mehr unterstellen konnte, weil sie diesen nicht hatten - und als Erklärung fand man heraus, das Virus überträgt sich nicht nur durch Sex, sondern auch durch Blut. Nichts mehr da mit "das kriegen nur ganz bestimmte Leute, die sich unmoralisch verhalten".

Wer sagt einem, dass es bei Corona nicht genauso ist? Dass man bei diesem Virus bis jetzt auch noch nicht alle seine Übertragungswege kennt? Und dass vielleicht der ganze Maskenball zwar Linderung des Problems bringt, bei weitem aber doch nicht alles ist?

Wenn man nämlich mit dem Frühjahr vergleicht, bevor die ersten Maßnahmen in Ländern eingeführt wurden, mit jetzt, wo die ganze Welt in Schutzmasken herumläuft und Abstand hält, und die Infektionszahlen sind proportional zu der Anzahl der Tests nicht besser, dann hat man doch offensichtlich noch nicht die Wurzel allen Übels gefunden!
Jedenfalls drängt sich dieser Verdacht auf.

Daran könntet ihr mal ansetzen anstatt euch alle paar Wochen selbst zu widersprechen und zu glauben, dass es die Bevölkerung vergessen hat!
Wo ist da nämlich "das Land der Dichter und Denker", dass früher dafür mal von der Welt geschätzt wurde, immer einen Schritt voraus zu denken?

Wenn Panik und Dummheit heiraten und ein Kind kriegen würden, dann wäre es genau eure Art von Populismus, die dabei herauskäme!

(This is a text trying to draw back attention to something which has totally dropped into oblivion during all the modern discourse about “gender”, but which once had and still has its legitimation in the spectrum of sex.
It should be also taken as a reminder why slight non-conforming mustn’t be taken as an indicator to being “trans” and having to undergo the way of changing one’s physical appearance in order to get happy again and become able to manage one’s life.)

---

Addition to this one here: https://matrixmann.dreamwidth.org/262809.html


Since the adoption of John Money’s definition of “gender”, and by that the misconception of mental sex being something that one gets nurtured into, the science about human sex has very much shifted from recognizing different degrees and motivations for sex non-conforming to focusing on transsexuals - people who can’t live with their nature-given physics because their mental sex is psychically wired opposed to that.
This you can even legitimately call “transgender ideology” or “transgender industry” - because, whenever an individual shows behavior and thinking patterns non-conforming with the established figures for “what a man is like” and “what a woman is like” in its respective culture, it doesn’t show accepting of that in the context frame of the person’s original physical and mental sex; it very quickly gets to telling people “you’re “trans””, even if the person in question never even heard of that word before or never considered itself to be “trans”.
In other words: That’s the more formal and more differentiated wording for the modern phenomenon when people appear to “get pressured” into adopting a trans identity and when they undergo reassignment, they find they don’t get happier with their lives.

What happened there exactly is that: Someone who isn’t actually “trans” got pressured (by whatever entities) to feel so because those entities wouldn’t accept him/her in in his/her sex identity, they’d negate it to that individual out of a similarly narrow-minded view about sex which they hold as a reproach against conservatives.
Like “there can’t be a non-alpha-male or even sissy version of a man; if he is, then he’s actually a female” or “there can’t be a butch version of a woman; if she is one, then she’s actually a man”.
Doesn’t that structure of the world sound a little familiar?
Right, many people with a non-average character may know such things as insults from the school yard.
That’s actually also how primitive this way of thinking is.

“Trans” people rather took these “insults”, if they got to hear it back then, as a compliment, and get insane from a modern society that tolerates and even accepts everything, without ever drawing a line where femininity and masculinity begin, always denying them the recognition “okay, here is where one of the two ends, I get it that you’re positioned on the other side of the spectrum”.

But people who instinctively aren’t “trans” or who are still insecure about themselves, about their own personality, for those this way of talking becomes toxic - because they get influenced, talked into and perhaps even pushed into thinking patterns and patterns to feel which they actually originally don’t have. This sends them on an odyssey which is damned to lead them to no additional happiness.

The core point that could help here is remembering that old term called “transvestism”, which hadn’t been coined just for nothing.
“Transvestism” means all people who like to dress and behave like the opposite sex (fully or in parts), but without wanting to modify their body via drastic measures such as surgeries or hormones or feeling instinctively dysphoric about it.
This also includes all people who adopt “parts” in general from the “world” of the opposite sex - like specific pieces of clothes, specific items that one sex tends to use more often than the other, fields of personal interest - and integrate them into their lives without that causing them to feel unwell in their born sex (physically and mentally).
A specific term that was once introduced here in the scientific field was “cross-dressing”, but that just covers only a small field of the entirety. (Especially the forms of cross-dressing that only apply to females, for the most part, don’t get regarded this way anymore these days due to differing cultures having accepted the view of a woman dressed in something else than a dress or skirt - without negating her sex because of that.)

( Read more... )

A critical question that slowly but surely comes to mind the longer this pandemic persists all around the globe:

Why the heck are all making the biggest fuss about acquiring a vaccine against the disease?

Arguing with the facts, no country in the world has either a reliable vaccine, nor a med or a reliable treatment against Covid-19 (the vaccine that Russia claimed weeks ago will still have to be prove if it works).
So that makes two construction sites with nothing to start with, all has to be achieved from scratch.

So why furiously betting everything on just a vaccine?

If the current studying of antibody production after an infection solidifies, it might also be there is no lasting immunity to the virus because it keeps changing steadily, like all cold and flu viruses do.
Better it would be to try to achieve both.

So... why do all desperate hopes for “getting the old way of life back” just look up to this pathway?
Is it the money which has already been invested into it?
Is it a possibly shorter development period?
Or do the investors look up to better financial gains through a vaccine than through a med?

I mean... from the point of pragmatism, there are obviously two things that nobody has - and which are deeply desired.
So let’s try to get both things.

Every handbook of basic strategy tells you that it’s always better to have more than one leg to stand on.
Don’t base everything on just one thing because you’ll be fucked if just that one thing breaks or fails.
And we’re talking about millions and billions of human lives here, not just about a mere statistic in a simulation that isn’t real.

Lately microplastics have become a hot topic in the section of "environmental pollution caused by humans".

Well, let's put this short and straight: If anyone was so concerned about this being around everywhere, get the fuck down to ask yourself who introduced this wide range of plastic materials anyway? It didn't drop from the sky, neither was it there from one to the other day out of the blue. Someone made it so that it's there where it is today.
And, just like always there have been early indications for nearly everything that something "man" thinks of it is handy, but actually it's harmful, don't say that this hasn't been known before! Don't say this is something new!
The warning voices have only been silenced or bought by whoever made profit from the plastics.

...One thing that all people being tempted with electromobility need to reconsider: The age where one general technology can be used all over the planet is over. There are too many people who are in need of using an automated vehicle in any kind - and whether this is fueled by fossil energy sources or electricity or even water, it doesn't change the fact that these many people daily consume a substance and produce waste along with it. This needed amount to consume must be produced anywhere and doesn't drop from the sky!
Producing electric energy in this category of masses is no cleaner than burning rotten dinosaurs and plants! Needless to say: It doesn't make a general price for electric energy drop around the world!
You thought that somebody of the reigning system currently would do that for you - or for anybody in the poor part of India?

If you rely on one source of energy supply, strategy lessons already tell: It makes you vulnerable to people disturbing that circle.
This as the first thing, then go on with the second: While technology must be able to take the outside circumstance of the climate zones you want to erect it in, also you need to make sure that the new technology is accessible to all the people who used the previous one. Or your fucking logistic system of the days before breaks down.
Wishing alone doesn't donate power poles to Africa, neither does it gift them power stations!
And third: What do you think how all that energy gets produced that also needs to share its purpose with you wanting three computers, a mobile telephone with computer functions, a big TV and intelligent furniture in your household? Only because people drive electric cars, they don't give up the rest of their equipment they want to afford themselves...
So, where's the crap supposed to come from? From energy suppliers who boycott solar energy 'cause they don't want cooperatives owning photo voltaic cells on their roofs to supply energy as a collective to them to distribute? From power suppliers who take their sweet time to link one windmill in the Baltic Sea to the power energy grid? From "producers" who don't want to change anything in their system - who don't want to share profit, who don't want to work the slightest bit in the interest of the rest of mankind? Who just say goodbye and disappear, leaving you without supply, if something isn't as attractive to them anymore?

You're pretty naive in thinking just change the materia that supplies energy and all of mankind's problems with mobility producing waste will be solved...
Ever heard about "diversity" not in the social meaning?
'Cause that's what you need here. Each place of the earth using its own method of producing energy, adapted to the circumstances the local surroundings offer.
Wouldn't that be better than trying for another time to make nature fit into the concepts mankind has thought up in its fairy tale fantasies in its stupid little bird brain?

Goddamn drop that idea of all places in the world being the same, people living under the same circumstances and being equally rich everywhere!
'Cause that is what your "one energy source"-concept is based upon! It works only where people have nearly the same circumstances around and where all people can afford that crap. And this will be the first world, just like always!

The Matrix is something that is real.
No, you're not stuck in a computer game wired onto you for your life, so you don't notice you're a battery for a machine.

All that you believe in, all that you think is right and wrong, all correlations that exist materially between one and another thing, that is The Matrix.
The way you got taught the path functions like, the way your mind thinks, based on these lessons and experiences, the way the world works like, and the way you believe - loosely based or even melt with these thoughts - the world functions like.
In other words: The imagination in your brain that you have about the world. That is The Matrix. The REAL one.
You don't even need a computer simulation for that as your brain is already capable enough of fooling itself and keeping itself in a dream world that is not as the reality is like.

Materially spoken, this equals as if you believe in gravity and that humans can't jump a 100 meters far, just like in the movie. Only with the difference: The reality surrounds you even though, dictates the base for the impressions your senses make. You can try if the belief in gravity is nonsense, but if it's there, it's gonna strike you dead even though. There is no computer simulation between you and the reality that feels real, but isn't.
The belief in nonsense is gonna bring up consequences for you right away. There's no second try or "Wanna continue?"-question. Dead is dead.

Speaking in terms of which the reality is full of virtual constructs that create a Matrix in your head that exists unconnected to the reality, that becomes a virtual dream world like in the movie,
it's, for example, if the doctor tells you that the pills help, but you feel more and more physically miserable. If you think, in plundering and destroying a supermarket you harm the big players in capitalism. If you assume that hard work alone makes you become someone someday.
Or, if you believe that buying things make you happy. If you think owning a house and a fat car, a spouse and children adding to that, are the universal recipe to make everyone happy. At all, if you think that it's perfectly normal that all people need to be married when they're 30, and so you need to be too. If you think every follower of a religion must wear the visible symbols of this religion just to be a member of this belief.

All of these things that you assume to be true without asking, create The Matrix for your head. The virtual reality you live in, the world which you think is true, but that is only like a full-scale computer simulation.

If you want to awake from it, want to know what is real now and what not, consider: There's no-one like Morpheus who can tell you that this overall thing you got running in your head is a lie. That there is some other reality and this is the one you can hold onto because it's real.
Even reality is only what people discover to be factually wrong, the way it was previously assumed.
There is a lot of factually-based recognitions that can help guiding you on your way, which you can trust because they've been proven to work this way, but it's not like all of reality has been cleared that way already.
In your search for a world whose concept is logic again, you've gotta walk many ways and open up your senses.
The famous question "Why do my eyes hurt?" - "Because you've never used them before." remains vital for all of your existence. And you can't always choose which one becomes the bitter truth for your life. If you got a deadly disease or cancer, you can't also choose to just have a stomach ulcer, can you?

The Matrix is... the cage you lock your own mind in. The prison you set for your own thoughts and feelings. The factual truth that you don't want to see - as well as the weird fantasy you declare for yourself to be true, even though it isn't.

The way out of this is... observing what happens to the left and to the right of yours. Going researching on your own. Wanting to know things exactly. Accepting at all, when something you got taught to be a certain way, is totally wrong factually.
When you don't want to stay with what you've been given as information from the world.
If you notice, things aren't correct that way you got told, and you don't decide for ignoring or blaming yourself for not understanding it or not being able to fit in.