neiviele

[neiviele]

And you can't be endogenic and say you're a system

Too late, we already have 😜

You can’t be a system if you’re still a minor.

And you can’t be endogenic and say you’re a system.

That’s not how it works, and y’all know that.

[neiviele]

i’m seen as someone stupid.

i don’t use big fancy words, i don’t type long, agonizing paragraphs. i’m very simple in the way that i talk so i can understand myself and successfully get my point across for everyone!

someone using fancy words, or typing a long winded paragraph, doesn’t show their intelligence. it just shows that they have a dictionary /hj!!! they do not know more than you, just for using bigger words, or having a more complex way of talking!

i appreciate those who use simple terms, or write things that are easy to read. it doesn’t make you dumb. it makes you inclusive, and it makes you show that, regardless of the long words, you still know what you’re talking about

don’t listen to everyone who uses complex words. don’t listen to everyone who just types up many, many paragraphs to seem like they know what they’re talking about.

just a few paragraphs will do, simple words will do. you’re smart, and you’re spreading that knowledge <3

[neiviele]

I can't think of a single instance of anyone in the tulpamancy community being forced to make a tulpa against their will. Nor has anyone ever advocated for coercing people into making tulpas this way that I'm aware.

It's happened before. Fordaplot (Jade, Jade and Aury) was a tulpamancer who was found to be distributing harmful hypnosis files to gain power over others. From what I've heard, she also had future plans of using tulpas to take over the world, likely via hypnosis too.

Evidence: https://www.reddit.com/r/Tulpas/s/alp7WDWiKM

https://eeveecraft.tumblr.com/post/646735013989253120/a-warning-for-the-tulpamancy-community

She was outsted from the community once this was found out, but that's why (outside of the ethical concerns) people are having such a negative reaction to the idea. It's happened before, and nobody wants it to happen again.

I think the tea consent video applies to current discussions

like sure it's not the best (it's old, times changed, etc etc.) but I think it applies very well in some places where it no longer works for it's original purpose

for example

If you say “hey, would you like a cup of tea?” and they're like “um I’m not really sure…” then you can make them a cup of tea or not, but be aware that they might not drink it.

could be

If you say “hey, would you like to build a box?” and they're like “um I’m not really sure…” then you can give them a book on how to build a box or not, but be aware that they might not build one.

while the original might not work great for modern contexts of relationships, you can definitely interpret it like

If you say “hey, would you like to make a tulpa?” and they're like “um I’m not really sure…” then you can provide them with resources to make a tulpa or not, but be aware that they might not use them or make a tulpa.

I mean obviously it depends on context but it's a decent analogy

That's a pretty fair take on it!

Something I'll also add about tulpas is that they pretty much have to be consensual. For a singlet, making a tulpa can often take days, weeks or even months of practice.

I suppose it's technically possible to coerce someone into making a tulpa if you have power over them, but I have never heard of this happening. I can't think of a single instance of anyone in the tulpamancy community being forced to make a tulpa against their will. Nor has anyone ever advocated for coercing people into making tulpas this way that I'm aware.

It just seems pretty obvious that certain people are inventing strawmen to get irrationally angry at.

[neiviele]

This is antitheist. And also just as culty as the fundamentalist branches she is talking about here. Sophie doesn't really seem to understand the fundamentalist beliefs she is discussing as a sect of christianity and not all of it. Not all christians are the Religious Right which is overwhelmingly fundamentalist.

Sorry for the shit quality, but, this is what allows us to see what kind of Christianity she means. The two most known denominations for going door-to-door are Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons. While marketing is a part of any group that is public, how it is used is more important than if the marketing is present at all. Fundamentalist christianity is a lot like sales- but not all of it.

The "God is your constant companion" stuff doesn't have to mean literally having someone else in your brain, and that should be okay. The entirety of the religion is not based on a need for internal companionship though. It's based on a need for people to rationalize their beliefs and actions. Most people are just raised in this environment.

What Sophie is proposing here, targeting people she knows are vulnerable in order to essentially preach her own way of life to them, makes her functionally no different than the people at church who say they need to replace the secular culture or to target hurting people to convert them. She is endorsing a form of religious cleansing, pretty much. She is arguing for fascism, to put it plainly. This is the same tactics fundamentalists use to convert.

Your antitheism target being a religion you can easily claim are all fundamentalists when that isn't true does not make your antitheism less bigoted.

You're just going to abuse the people you recognize are vulnerable because in reality tulpamancy/thoughtforms does jack shit to improve the circumstances that make them vulnerable in the first place. Having a new person in their head when they live in a religion which overwhelmingly does not recognize plurality or calls it demonic will make things worse for the people who get found out.

[neiviele]

Those who care enough about their tulpas will want their tulpas to be able to front with whatever gender they identify by.

You're assuming that a tulpamancer in this situation would neccesarily care about their tulpa, or want them to be happy in this way. There are many stories of tulpamancers abusing their tulpas, or restricting access in some way to the outside world. Even if most tulpamancers now report positive effects, we have no idea how a strongly Christian population will react (and if those studies on how society affects the content and behavior of hallucinatory voices are true, it could indicate that things could go wrong in this population.) Tulpas aren't hallucinatory voices per say, but the studies may still be relevant.

(This is also assuming that a tulpamancer with an opposite gender tulpa wouldn't just turn more conservative, or not have gender dysphoria and start forcing their views onto everyone.)

Let's be totally clear here. Vulnerable people exist. And if we're not the ones to exploit those vulnerabilities, the fascists will be.

Should anybody be targeting their vulnerabilities, though? Instead of building them up and making them invulnerable to others, why prey upon them?

I'm not opposed to suggesting tulpamancy as a solution to certain problems, but someone needs to know exactly what they're getting into before they do it.

I saw someone complaining about my post suggesting we start marketing tulpamancy to youths in religious conservative households, accusing me of wanting to use the same tactics as the fundamentalists. To which I'll say...

Duh.

In case anyone hasn't noticed, liberal Christianity is dying.

This isn't true of evangelicalism. And you know why that is?

Marketing!

Even if someone from their flock does leave, fundamentalists can convert more people. They are willing to convert more people. It's their sacred duty as Christians to save lost souls from Hell.

Liberal churches are too passive. They choose to be respectful of other faiths to such a fault that they don't like converting people to their religion or political ideologies. While fundamentalists were preaching that Donald Trump was a hero for God battling the demonic forces of the Left, the liberal Christian churches twiddled their thumbs doing nothing because meshing politics and religion is "wrong".

They don't convert people. They don't market their religion. They don't use their religious platforms to try to push for positive change for marginalized communities.

They don't do these things because they view these tactics as things the "bad" churches do. And they aren't wrong. These are the exact tactics that fundamentalists employ. But these tactics themselves aren't necessarily immoral. And importantly, these tactics are why the fundamentalists are winning.

This isn't just a problem with liberal churches but the Left as a whole, IMO.

I saw this image going around and I feel it actually sums up the problem nicely:

This is true in a lot of ways. It's obviously a huge problem with our purity tests. The fact that many people were fine abstaining to vote because our candidate wasn't perfect by their standards when the alternative was a fascist who literally promised to be a dictator on day 1 of his Presidency is a great example of this.

But so too is our fear of using the same tactics that our enemies do because of some misguided motion that doing so is immoral or makes us just as bad as them. The notion that "pushing your political views on people makes you just as bad as fascists" has turned modern liberals into an ineffective joke.

And this finally brings us to tulpamancy.

We have a practice that...

Practitioners overwhelmingly report positive mental health benefits from.

While there are a couple edge cases of people having negative reactions, these negative reactions are far less common than you'll find for, say, prescription drugs. We're talking about maybe 1-2% of tulpa systems. And many of those will be because of avoidable mistakes. (People making tulpas that are designed to be critical of them, for example.)

The fact that many tulpamancers will create opposite-gender tulpas means their tulpas are likely to experience some level of gender dysphoria while fronting. In theory, going from a cis singlet to what is essentially a genderfluid system should make tulpamancers more sympathetic to trans rights issues. Those who care enough about their tulpas will want their tulpas to be able to front with whatever gender they identify by. Therefore, a child of a fundamentalist Christian who becomes a tulpamancer is just a bit more likely to vote in support of trans rights.

This is largely a net positive all around.

And what is the price of doing nothing?

The vulnerable people who are looking for something to fill whatever gaps they believe they have inside them will find something to fill those gaps with. Every person we don't reach is someone that the right-wing fundamentalists and fascists can.

Let's be totally clear here. Vulnerable people exist. And if we're not the ones to exploit those vulnerabilities, the fascists will be. Abstaining from reaching out to people in need and offering something that could make their lives better doesn't protect the people in need. It just means someone else will target them instead and lead them down a worse path.

It's been said that the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing. And sadly, a lot of liberals have made an ideology of doing nothing, so crippled in the terror that they might do the wrong thing that they avoid actions that both could help people in need and progress their political agendas at once.

[neiviele]

This is antitheist. And also just as culty as the fundamentalist branches she is talking about here. Sophie doesn't really seem to understand the fundamentalist beliefs she is discussing as a sect of christianity and not all of it. Not all christians are the Religious Right which is overwhelmingly fundamentalist.

Sorry for the shit quality, but, this is what allows us to see what kind of Christianity she means. The two most known denominations for going door-to-door are Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons. While marketing is a part of any group that is public, how it is used is more important than if the marketing is present at all. Fundamentalist christianity is a lot like sales- but not all of it.

The "God is your constant companion" stuff doesn't have to mean literally having someone else in your brain, and that should be okay. The entirety of the religion is not based on a need for internal companionship though. It's based on a need for people to rationalize their beliefs and actions. Most people are just raised in this environment.

What Sophie is proposing here, targeting people she knows are vulnerable in order to essentially preach her own way of life to them, makes her functionally no different than the people at church who say they need to replace the secular culture or to target hurting people to convert them. She is endorsing a form of religious cleansing, pretty much. She is arguing for fascism, to put it plainly. This is the same tactics fundamentalists use to convert.

Your antitheism target being a religion you can easily claim are all fundamentalists when that isn't true does not make your antitheism less bigoted.

You're just going to abuse the people you recognize are vulnerable because in reality tulpamancy/thoughtforms does jack shit to improve the circumstances that make them vulnerable in the first place. Having a new person in their head when they live in a religion which overwhelmingly does not recognize plurality or calls it demonic will make things worse for the people who get found out.

[neiviele]

A "host" is just the one in control. Not the physical body, but the first person in control of it or the original identity/person/soul/whathaveyou. It's why a host can change - and really, this isn't even isolated to endogenic systems, DID systems have host changes all the time. I don't know why this seems to be strange?

Isn't someone possessed by a spirit also called a host? Weird thing to gatekeep.

😐😑😐 I'm begging you to use your critical thinking skills on this one actually.

If I was the only person in this body. And got possessed. Yes I'd be their host. Specifically, my body is the host. However when it comes to a lot of endogenic people, they claim their host can change. Meaning somehow their body or they themselves as a person have become a completely different person. Because a spirit or separate identity can't just become the body. It's the way the term is used specifically not that y'all use the term please use a little bit of critical thinking

[neiviele]

we're just trying to talk abt our experiences and find people who we can connect with and relate to

You have the anti-endo community, and the DID/OSDD community. Why do you want to come here?

but you cannot take away an ENTIRE TAG from us like we didnt go through trauma and want a sense of community

Why are you searching for a sense of community in a group that contains people you're against?

just because you have different views to us does NOT mean that you get to be rude and gatekeep a tag

But pro-endos and endogenic are the ones who created and primarily use the tag. Technically, the ones who created it and use the terminology do get a say in who uses it.

man atp just make your own app for endos and pro endos because you so obviously love excluding people

I mean, we have our own communities and groups, the plural community. Why do you feel excluded from a group that doesn't share your beliefs or ideas?

can anti endos stop fucking posting in the pluralgang tag. your bigotry will never be welcome here. you only come off as a piece of shit desperate for validation every time you invade our tags. thanks

[neiviele]

interact with endos believe them understand they are traumatized with syscourse they ARE systems they aren't BAD

[neiviele]

Something weird I see sometimes is when sysmeds will just like... assert their spiritual beliefs about dissociative disorders as facts.

Like, "if you have DID, you don't have multiple souls in one body. I'm just correcting misinformation here."

Hun... are there studies I don't know about where we've empirically proven that human souls exist, that more than one soul can't inhabit a body, and that dissociative disorders can't cause this to happen?

I've said before that I don't really believe in spirits... but if they exist, it would be pretty silly to assume we know anything about them or how they work to speak on the subject with so much certainty.

[neiviele]

stepping in to defend sophie

sophie's tulpamancy practice isn't racist, nor should she experience death threats like that. she's a human, and human's deserve respect.

misgendering her is foul. saying her practice is racist, is wrong. as a tibetan, you need to stop speaking over us @melloncommie . you obviously don't know what you're talking about

i dislike sophie as much as the next person, but she does not deserve this.

do better.

[neiviele]

Hey, new challenge: how about no one tell other people to die. It should be an easy challenge, setting the bar awfully low and some of y'all are doing the limbo under it anyway.

[neiviele]

Lol that's a flat out lie. Interesting how you interpreted "no safe space for hate" that way though.

‘I didn’t say partial D.I.D dosent exitst!”

what you said : “partial did doesn't exist”

this all started over Sophie saying systems who don't support endogenic should kill themselves btw

I said partial did doesn't exist in the form of half did half endogenic as was the context of the argument and then I said it's essentially OSDD at best outside of North America which.... Is a fact that is true

[neiviele]

Any space for anti-endos is a space to spread hate and bigotry about us for our existences.

I don't believe there should be any safe spaces for hate.

[neiviele]

"Anti-endos are a hate group"

Well yes... if your definition of hate group includes "anybody who disagrees with me", in the same vein as anti-artists, anti-kin, and anti-radqueer, to name a few random examples. If hate group refers to "an organized group focused on systematically oppressing another group of people" then no, anti-endos are currently not a hate group.

Anti-endos are generally not organized. They don't have one core belief, besides not believing in endogenic systems. They don't even gather as a group - there may be anti-endos with completely different views on life and identity, and some might hate each other. It's like saying pro-endos are a liberation group - there's too many people with differing views and identities to make that generalization.

They also don't affect the physical world as much as a typical hate group would. Most hate groups have some (typically organized) real-world activities that negatively impact the group they're against - the KKK has been rallying against black people since its inception. Anti-queer groups push harmful practices and force LGBT+ people to hide themselves in an effort to live a religious norm. But anti-endos... don't really do any of that. They're not rallying in the street to take away our rights. Most people are not getting physically attacked for being endogenic by anti-endos. Pluralphobia may exist, but even then many anti-endo (systems) are not actively trying to hurt the rights of endogenics, especially since many rights are shared between the two groups.

Lastly, anti-endos (when focusing on anti endo systems) are a group almost defined by trauma and their attempts to heal from it, which no hate group does. The KKK is not organizing to help heal from their traumas surrounding black people. Nazis are not seeking therapy for their hateful beliefs. These groups are not actively trying to get better any way they can, and that to me is a crucial difference between anti-endos (systems) and hate groups. Many anti-endos calm down once they can access proper therapy and be reassured of their needs, which won't happen in a real hate group. If we want to really "eliminate" anti-endos, we should make it easier for them to access safe and helpful therapy.

Many anti-endos have changed as time's gone on. Remember, some plurals in this community may have very well been anti-endo at a point. Your friends, your family. We can't fire at them as if they can't get better. Wouldn't you have wanted a chance if you were in their shoes?

I'm not ignoring the hurt that anti-endos have caused to endogenic systems and even some of their own. I've had some negative experiences myself. I don't think you need to be nice to anti-endos who suicide-bait and threaten you - you can do what you want with them. Most anti-endos would not condone this behavior if they knew. They're not all like that, and those that aren't, aren't really harassing or hurting endogenic systems. They're not a hate group.

Please don't self-radicalize yourselves.

[neiviele]

hottest take: but white people shouldn't get to choose what's racist and what's not. racist isn't a word i like to get thrown around, but when someone genuinely is being racist, i call them out for it.

if you're posting racist rhetoric, YOU ARE RACIST. racism isn't just "i hate this race", there's tons of microaggressions. saying "all asians are smart" is racist. it's a stereotype.

and, oh i dont know, saying a chinese system is spewing CCP stuff when they're obviously not.

bringing up CCP whenever you talk to a chinese system, is racist.

[neiviele]

Implying that an Asian user Sophie finds disagreeable might be schilling for the CCP considering the amount of anti-chinese racism that has permeated the zeitgeist over the past few years is wildly, WILDLY fucking irresponsible. Hitting it with a chaser of 'but don't harass people, okay guys? 🥺' is pathetic.

Sophie, you have thousands of followers, and that means you have to be really really *fucking* careful with your wording. And not in the way to wriggle out of responsibility like a coward, and use the struggle of Tibet as a shield. *THAT* is fucking disgusting.