The clarification of "sex", "mental sex" and "gender" (and why "gender" IS NOT "mental sex")

Sep 17, 2020 11:25

(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.

menschen, male female, science, reform, nature, gesundheit, psychology, biology, lake, system

Previous post Next post