#anti endos are anti intellectual

[clover-system]

[kinnie-coins]

SOULSUCKER // ST*RFUCKER

☆ Names + Pronouns ☆

Based on the characters of course, however some are simply based the album Intellectual Property.

Names -

Star, Soul, Angel, Lucifer, Nephilim, Faith, Seraphim, Ritual, Grey / Gray, Spirit, Virtue, Melatonin, Nyx, Aura, Crimson, Lilith, Lucian, Blaze, Rose, Halo

Pronouns -

star/stars, st*r/st*rs, soul/souls, cross/crosses, halo/halos, ven/heavens, vir/virtues, pray/prayers, angel/angels, demon/demons, wor/worships, dark/darks, night/nights, fall/fallen,

☆ / * / +

❤️/💚/🖤/❤️‍🔥

🪽/⭐️/🌟/🌓

✨️/🩸/💫/🫀

🔴/🟢/🟥/🟩

⚫️/⬛/🚫/❗️

[troonwolf]

How can you tell someone is one of these white middle class people you speak of? What should i watch out for

I feel like this is sarcasm and I can't remember who I was calling white middle class people + tried looking through my blog but it's too far back or in between memes for my impatient ass to find.

With that said I'm pretty sure you're talking about my criticism on endogenics because I've called them that a few times.

Obviously not everyone in a group is gonna be white and middle class even if the majority are, but as someone who used to be in endogenic spaces I noticed a few things

Grand majority of them are white Americans

Grand majority are from middle class backgrounds

Grand majority come from fundamentalist religious (Christian) backgrounds and have religious trauma in connection to it but they outright refuse to consider how that may impact their perspective and beliefs today.

Now as someone who is no longer in the community but still observes for critical reasons, things are genuinely not that much different today. Where do you think this whole weird approach to mental illness even comes from, my man? Christianity. Unironically it's from white Western fundie culture.

Fundies hate mentally ill people. In fundie circles you're taught either to approach mentally ill people like they're special and somehow blessed, or that they're fucking possessed by demons. This is an attitude that persists very strongly in Western fundie circles. They don't trust psychology, they think it's all a scam. If they think there's something demonic about being mentally ill, they will perform exorcisms and many people over the decades have died due to abuse during exorcisms and other "cleansing rituals."

The "positive" outlook of mental illness isn't much better. You're still denied treatment, and now you have the burden of being a weird Christ-like figure to your family and neighbours, essentially suffering for "the glory of God" because they think your psychotic audio hallucinations are actual angels.

Many endogenics leave environments where this ^ is the norm, and though they have enough critical thinking and self-awareness to recognise that religious brainwashing for what it is, they don't realise or care that they're falling into the same trap as before, except with liberal-friendly language.

They don't want to approach mental health symptoms as if they're mental health symptoms because they're taught that's scary, bad, that it makes them broken, that the trauma and illness "taints" their system. These are things you can easily find endogenics saying for why they refuse trauma labels. It's not because there's any logical reason to refuse those trauma labels, it's because something inside them is averse to it. Scared of it. Because that's what they were taught. That mental illness is scary and makes you broken.

And so you end up with thinking like this: (all yanked from sysmedsaresexist)

All this ^^^^ Is about spirituality. It's about faith. it's about ideology. Even the stuff that isn't explicitly about faith, is still about faith, because that's how they approach it. It's not about data, or what's healthier, or even what's probable, it's not even about having a good internal reason for yourself WHY you resist trauma labels. It's about what makes them feel the best. Because that's how fundie religious backgrounds teach you how to reason- with belief, and faith, not with grounded reasoning backed up by data.

Asides from that, there's also the very middle class white person thing of appropriating other cultures and bastardising them for your unhealthy anti-science belief system. A lot of the time when I vaguely make fun of white endogenics it's because of that.

[thekingnerd]

Okay seriously I've been seeing way too fucking many posts saying that us endos don't exist like wtf. I exist, my brain homies exist. We have had a wonderful life, so we aren't secretly traumagenic. I just ask, where is your proof behind these claims that we are faking? I could describe everything I go through, in immense detail, and you'd support me. Right up until you ask what disorder I have, or what my trauma was, and I respond with a lack of diagnosis and a lack of trauma. We experience most of the same shit you do! We just lose the support to handle it that you get, with your anti endo! I'm perfectly fine if you hate us, and think we are terrible and disgusting. I just cry inside when you say we aren't real. Some days we wake up not knowing who we are. Interests vary, confusing others. Even though we don't have amnesia between brain homies we still don't maintain all skills between us. Some of us speak in accents, and it's hard to control. I questioned it for years, wondering if I was sane, until a friend let me know he was a system, and explained what a system was without knowing we had same... Symptoms? Effects? Experiences? I don't know, I'm not the smart or charismatic one. Once I described what we went through he then explained that we were likely a system and we denied it for another year until we finally accepted it. So now, I ask you again. Where is your proof? What gives you the right to say we aren't real? You have no fakeclaiming in your tags, yet you do the same to us. How is it different? Bring me your proof that I'm making all this shit up, and then we'll talk. And when you get your proof, explan why it doesn't apply to you. I'm alright with insults and hatred, even revulsion. The only thing, that I cannot fucking stand, is blatant hypocrisy, justified through calling those you despise not people. Sure, we don't have trauma. But we still have extra people living in our brains. We fight with each other, we love each other, we converse. We suffer and feel pain, and we are not one individual mind pretending to be many. How would you feel, being told you don't exist, you aren't a person? Well that's how we feel. Bring your proof. You need to have actual proof if you want credibility.

[ghosting-plural-userboxes]

TEXT VERSION OF DNI!!

NOTE: Proshippers can interact w actually cant muster enough energy to care abt that/check. Does not mean we proship !!

NO NOT INTERACT/DNF

Bigot in anyway

Bodily 13 or under

Bodily 19+(this only applies to dm's)

Anti Endo

Pro Isreal

Queer Exclusionist

Truscum/Transmed

TERF/SWERF/Radfem

Transandrophobia denier

Fatphobic

Ableist

MAP/NoMAP/P.E.A.R./pedo

Self ID as "Antiship"

Pro Harassment

Pro forced recovery

Believe in PD abuse

Infantilize those with Intellectual Disability

Anti QAI/LIOM

Dark/Compship(aka ship Incest, Child x Adult, Animal x Human etc)

Ship real people

Use slurs u cant reclaim( including those who are neurodivergent but not able to say R slur but still do and try and excuse it )

Anti-Nonhuman/Alterhuman

Post any super duper fetish related or super duper nsfw related content

Against Multispec labels

Against Lesboys/Turigirls

TransID/TransX

Pro harmful para

Radqueer

All Lives Matter or are against BLM

Pro Cop/Anti ACAB

Believe in reverse oppression( Reverse racism/blackwashing, cisphobia/misia, heterophobia/misia )

:DDD

[sophieinwonderland]

Why focus on anti-endos? Or another way of putting it, why focus on the negativity surrounding plurality? Why not instead focus on how plurality helps people? i.e. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. The attention seems to only encourage them. If no one is paying them any attention, they no longer will have anyone to argue with and may lose steam.

I'm skeptical of the catching more flies with honey thing. At least as it applies to this. I think if it was true, you wouldn't see the mainstream media put so much focus on playing to people's fears to drum up ratings and clicks. (But I do find you need a healthy mix at least.)

Besides that, in my experience, it depends a lot on what attention you give sysmeds.

If you respond with hate, then yeah. That is going to encourage them. If you respond with sources and facts behind you, while asking them to provide the same, you'll probably end up blocked. This shows what type of attention sysmeds tend to not want.

Also, just speaking for myself, I tend to not be as good at classic positivity posts, but I reblog those when I see other people make them because I do want them to be popular. I would hate if literally the only plural posts on this site were syscourse.

That said, I enjoy intellectual challenges. Figuring out how to rebut and disprove sysmed claims is fun, even if a tad easy these days now that SAS and most of the intelligent anti-endos have converted to pro/neutral stances, and most remaining anti-endos are really bad at arguing their positions even half-coherently.

But also, I just think it's really important to drive home how anti-science sysmeds actually are. Because if you let them, they will spread lies and do their best to shape public opinion in their favor. Having sources to back our positions up means nothing if we aren't countering their misinformation. When truth and lies are at war, the sad reality is that the winners won't inherently be the ones with facts on their side, but the ones who can shout the loudest.

Finally, I still think of the relationship with anti-endos and pro-endos as being somewhat symbiotic. Yes, arguing with them can encourage them. But I think it can also encourage US.

In the longterm, I believe system medicalism needs to be eliminated as an ideology. But in the short-term... the louder both groups are, the more awareness it brings to system issues in general. I kind of hate that I have this utilitarian view of anti-endos because the cost is that real people are getting harassed and bullied by them, and they're doing real emotional damage to innocent people who definitely don't deserve it.

The Yaelokre incident, for example, destroyed a community that a lot of people loved and felt safe in because of anti-endo bigotry. At the same time, I can't imagine much better advertising for people to become pro-endo than sysmeds just harassing endo-neutral singlets for being inclusive, and making a nuisance of themselves wherever they go.

[endopropaganda]

The SAS blog is just about feeling intellectually superior for cherry picking sources on tulpas maybe being valid and misleading doctors into agreeing with them.

They are very much pro endo and try to seem like they're neutral to groom more people into being endos. It's disgusting, just block and move on.

I'm sorry you had to come across it ❤️

Thank you sososo sooo much i was getting so fuckin stressed over this

My top priority is keeping the askers of this blog as safe as possible and when confusing situations like these come up it can be stressful because I want to keep our fellow anti endos safe from that shit

-jes (magenta)

Below is a cute gif from my source just because I think it would be a neat change of consistency

[dissorkv]

Welcome to our cosmos（ゝ。☆）!

ᐟᐟ☆ — Principal Information:

My alters call themselves Vendetta, Cosmos or Dust, depending on the alter. They don't do sign offs apart from those names. Also, don't call us a system or anything alike, it makes us uncomfortable.

🐼— My name is Cyro, I'm 17yo. I'm a patient with complex dissociative identity disorder with +45 alters identified. I'm the original identity or the core, however you want to say it. Do not refer to my alters if you're not asked to. Don't treat me as plural unless I give you permission. My pronouns are he/they/it. I'm latino (🇵🇪) mixed with quechua. Bisexual greyaro aceflux gnc.

🍙— I have many controversial opinions about the "plural community", so I'll be posting about that.

🖇️— Posts will be in english only, but I speak spanish and french too. I'm sorry in advanced if I have bad grammar sometimes.

💌— Diagnosed with autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, high intellectual ability, dissociative, conduct disorder, complex post traumatic disorder, mixed anxious and depressive disorder, borderline personality disorder, +. And in process of diagnosis of complex dissociative identity disorder, antisocial personality disorder with narcissistic traits.

♡⸝⸝ — Principal DO NOT Interact:

Endos ans proendos and any non traumagenic origin believer

LOlisho • Anti LGBT+ • Zionist

block and unf freely, so please don't take it personally. I'm selective with who I choose to follow and interact with.

Cogito, ergo sum. ⛤

Haters will hate.

Tags are used to reach the target audience.

[duskcourse]

I genuinely cannot stand anti-endos at this point it's incredibly infuriating trying to speak to someone who has a complete and utter refusal to accept factual scientific knowledge and then a refusal to even accept that other people are allowed to hold a different philosophical view of their own self. It also tends to come with a lot of antitheist bullshit that usually is just, quite frankly, racism.

The self isn't something that is an accepted fact.

For example, a massive part of Buddhism is the teaching that THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A SELF that every aspect of you as a being is a lie and falsehood as no selves are real or of importance. (This is severely dulling down the concept; here's one source and I'd advise you to look into more. It's something that you get taught about in a basic philosophy class but most syscourse people don't like philosophy it seems so I wouldn't be surprised if lots of people are unaware). Anatta as an idea that would be antithetical to a massive amount of the discourse in the sense of decimating the idea that one could even be multiple because one is nothing and nothing cannot be anything.

I don't subscribe to that philosophy myself, I don't find it to accurately define myself and I still need to learn more in the field to understand where my philosophical perspectives align. Descarte for example is someone I do have some similar beliefs to "I think therefore I am" as a self evidentiary proof that you yourself exist is something I use to provide evidence to ourselves that our alters/headmates are also persons. We know definitively we all think because we can sometimes hear our other alters thoughts. Therefore we know we are. It doesn't matter if anyone else wants to claim that we don't have a self- they are speaking on a very separate foundation of principles than we are and by our own philosophy we don't have evidence these others telling us otherwise are even real persons whomst think. Yes we act as if and presume they do, but our personal philosophy does not include solidified ways to prove the ability of others to be a self like we are. But we do assume that to be the case.

If someone were to talk to us about our self from the position of Buddhist teachings we would fundamentally disagree and be fully incapable of doing anything productive because our entire framework for the conceptions of reality and the metaphysical would be fundamentally different. Philosophy has absolutely no scientific proof. Anti-endos seek to dictate philosophical concepts and that itself is an antithesis to intellectualism and conversation. If all persons were to hold the same philosophies no conversations of value could be had.

Like another side note: We're a diagnosed DID system who's currently trying to make an endogenic headmate for our ENTIRE system, we are trying to make a new self a new being exist tangentially to us as a collective. That is seen as blasphemous to anti-endos. To try and explore the potentials of the complexity of the mind and the experiences of the inner psyche is to throw yourselves to the wolves. You are no longer a conformist you refuse to fall in line and keep your mind the way they want it to be for their own comfort. Do not listen to people who wish to control you and your expressions. That is a deeply abusive, controlling and harmful behavior.

Anti-endo rhetoric in whole is against intellectual discussions, introspection, self actualization, and is deeply abusive. Do not let them win. Be yourself.

[clover-system]

The longest list of anti-endo sources I've ever seen

While trying to find something else using Tumblr's infamous search engine, I came across this absolute gem:

NINE SOURCES!!! That's a record!! This is incredible!

@radpocalypse, listen. I am about to tear these to shreds, but before I do, I want you to know that you have my respect for not only compiling the longest list of sources I have ever seen an anti-endo provide, and not only doing so seemingly not directly prompted, but typing out every single link by hand, on mobile, without making a single mistake. Incredible work.

And also, to be completely honest, if I had nine sources supporting a belief, I almost certainly wouldn't look into them this closely. But, hey, that's what strangers on the internet with opposing views are for.

One more thing before the debunk: Endogenic systems do not claim to have DID etc. without trauma. They just don't. Whether it could be possible is often debated as an edge case, usually just to win an argument against someone of the opposing side, but really, it's irrelevant for 99% of the community. A good chunk are questioning OSDD based on later trauma, but as far as I am aware, no one on this website is claiming a completely endogenic plural disorder.

However, I don't want to dismiss entire pages based on this alone without further commentary, and it's a fun intellectual exercise regardless. So, whenever I use green text, I'm just playing Devil's Advocate under the premise of "If I was claiming to have DID without trauma (which neither I nor anyone else afaik is), would this source actually debunk that claim?" My syster will also occasionally pop in with purple, since she was cocon while I was writing this.

My dad just walked into my room and literally said "hey how it's going". You know, like. Like that one post. Amazing.

Anyway, civility established. Now come along with me on this long long journey of ten minutes of reading. Maybe put some music on in the background, if that will help you get through it. I had Near's Theme on while writing.

Here we go.

Link 1: McLean Hospital

Ok, main thing that caught my eye was

According to a 2010 Psychiatric Times article, only 5% of people with DID exhibit obvious switching between identity “states.”

Very interesting! Even with all of the "idk who's fronting" memes, 5% is really not that high. Though maybe online spaces like these help train the ability to identify it? The reference trail leads back to a book by Kluft but I don't really feel like going through dozens of pages for this. Definitely making a note of this though; I wonder if there have been any follow-up studies on this.

Not much to say here other than that. No mention of plurality outside DID.

DID is associated with long-term exposure to trauma, often chronic traumatic experiences during early childhood.

Dissociation—or disconnection from one’s sense of self or environment—can be a response to trauma.

Dissociative identity disorder—a type of dissociative disorder—most often develops during early childhood in kids who are experiencing long-term trauma. This typically involves emotional, physical, and/or sexual abuse; neglect; and highly unpredictable interactions with caregivers.

Why "associated", not "is caused by"? Why "can", not "is"? Why "most often", etc.?

Why such weak language?

Not that it couldn't be weaker.

I vaguely remember McLean getting into some hot water regarding a video they posted about DID, but didn't find anything concrete. Half-remembered anecdote aside, the author seems well-qualified.

C-tier debunk of this position. It's not nothing but it could be a lot better.

Link 2: Psych Central

It occurs in women 9 times more often than in men.

Very interesting statistic, but no citation provided.

Alters can show striking differences. For instance, one alter may speak with a different accent or have a softer way of speaking. They might have different opinions or a different gender identity, and even physical differences — like left- or right-handedness, or the need for a glasses prescription.

That's quite a stark difference here compared to the McLean article. What happened to "alters aren't that noticeable"?

But whatever, these are just interesting tidbits. None of this has anything to do with endogenic plurality. Nothing like "this is the only way to be multiple", no comment whatsoever.

DID is usually associated with adverse experiences in someone’s past and traumatic memories.

Dissociative identity disorder (DID) is a mental health condition with strong links to trauma, especially trauma in childhood.

Bruh. This again?

In fact, the American Psychiatric Association reports that 90% of people with DID have a history of childhood abuse and neglect, based on research from the United States, Canada, and Europe.

Bruh. Seriously? 90%? You know what that leaves, right?

According to your own source, 10% of DID systems are endogenic.

But let's break this down. There's a big difference between the system being endogenic, and the DID being endogenic. This statistic is specifically referring to childhood trauma.

The wording's plenty vague though. This can absolutely be read as completely endogenic DID.

One review article from 2017 about the causes of DID noted that there was relatively little research on the condition to date.

The authors said researchers hadn’t yet investigated potential genetic and epigenetic factors. With epigenetic factors, the experiences and behaviors of your parents and ancestors can influence the function of the genes they pass down to you.

The authors of the review said scientists needed to do more research to investigate whether a person with DID might carry genes that can influence if they develop the condition or not.

This is particularly promising because studies have already shown that genes can influence dissociative disorders in general.

So you're telling me DID might be able to be passed down one or two generations? Wow. Again, this still has nothing to do with endogenic plurality, but I'm really glad I decided to play with this second angle, because it's so much more fun. We're certainly not at intentional self-inflicted DID here, but we are at this point a long way from certainly needing childhood trauma in all cases.

And also the reviewer is a military psychiatrist who specializes in ADHD. So uh. Not bringing our best here.

Link 3: Mayo Clinic

Gotta love an article that's nice and short. This is just a brief summary of a bunch of dissociative disorders. Again, nothing about endogenic plurality.

Starting to run out of things to say about this. This whole post could probably be a fifth the length if I didn't feel like playing on hard mode.

Formerly known as multiple personality disorder, this disorder involves "switching" to other identities. You may feel as if you have two or more people talking or living inside your head. You may feel like you're possessed by other identities.

Each identity may have a unique name, personal history and features. These identities sometimes include differences in voice, gender, mannerisms and even such physical qualities as the need for eyeglasses.

Hey, that reminds me of someone.

There also are differences in how familiar each identity is with the others. Dissociative identity disorder usually also includes bouts of amnesia and often includes times of confused wandering.

Again, McLean looking really odd with its declaration of DID's covertness against great detail like this. However, its author is so far the best qualified. This one just says "Mayo Clinic Staff". Can't even know which of them worked on this. Some of them are psychs, but if any of them specialize in dissociative disorders, it doesn't say so.

Dissociative disorders usually arise as a reaction to shocking, distressing or painful events and help push away difficult memories.

I won't bother quoting even more wishy-washy language because this post is already at an ungodly length (about 1300 words so far) and we're barely a third done. But yeah, suffice to say, no nail-in-the-coffin 100% link to trauma.

Link 4: Rethink

We are a trusted information creator and accredited by the Patient Information Forum (PIF).

Their bold, for once. That's an alarm-ringing corporate phrase if I've ever seen one. Also, first thing on the PIF's website is "balancing the risks and benefits of AI in the production of health information". So this article might've been written by GPT. Awesome. And yeah, a lot of this whole website looks to me like a bunch of interconnected pages with stupidly long articles written by stitching together LLM generations. Does pass GPT0's test though.

This one is so long. I'll take the ten minutes to read through every word, which I don't think @radpocalypse did, just to make sure there's nothing here, but one thing that does catch my eye scrolling down to near the bottom is that they misspelled their first citation.

A quick look at this Carolyn Spring shows a lot being sold and credentials nowhere in sight. Awesome.

So already I don't need to read this. The information here is not at a high level of trustworthiness. It's maybe better than nothing, but seriously, one can and should do better. But I'll read it anyway, just for bonus points. Thanks to AccelaReader for making this bearable.

Many people will experience dissociation at some point in their lives. Lots of different things can cause you to dissociate. For example, you might dissociate when you are very stressed, or after something traumatic has happened to you.

Some of the symptoms of dissociation include the following:

You may have clear multiple identities.

It‘s important to remember that you could have the symptoms of dissociation without a dissociative disorder.

So according to this, multiple identities can be caused by intense but non-traumatic stress, and might not necessarily be a disorder. So, while I admit this is a little bit of a stretch, we're four links in and this is the first mention of plurality in general, so I'll take it. One point for endogenic plurality. (And again, none of this really matters anyway because this is the worst source so far.)

Dissociative identity disorder (DID) is sometimes called ‘Multiple Personality Disorder.

If you have DID you might seem to have 2 or more different identities, called ‘alternate identities.

Two missing closing quotes. Really not a good sign.

They suggest that DID is caused by experiencing severe trauma over a long time in childhood.

Aha! Finally, something concrete against endogenic DID! Too bad it's buried in the worst source yet. If we believed we had DID, we would absolutely not reconsider that based on a sketchy webpage with suboptimal syntax and no credentials.

Ugh, finally done with that one. What a slog.

Link 5: DID Research

Aha! The infamous psych student's blog! That's what Sophie said, anyway. Not taking her word for it though. Let's see what we can find here, independently.

Dissociative identity disorder (DID) is the result of repeated or long-term childhood trauma

Why wasn't this first? First sentence, so crystal clear. No two ways about this, transDID destroyed right out of the gate.

DID cannot form after ages 6-9 because individuals older than these ages have an integrated self identity and history.

Why wasn't this first? It's so plain, so refreshing after four pages of strategic ambiguity. Nothing left here for green. But still no mention of non-disordered plurality.

The author is impressively credentialed but doesn't seem to specialize quite near this area. She's certainly better than most, high above any random Tumblr user talking out of their ass, but the good stuff would be to get a DID specialist to explicitly spell out that endogenic systems are not possible.

Also should make note of this big fat legal disclaimer:

While the author strives to make information on this website as complete, reliable, and accurate as possible, the author makes no claims, promises, guarantees, or warranties about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of this site and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in the contents of this site.

If we did claim to have DID, this would rattle us a little but could ultimately be brushed aside.

Link 6: SANE

As usual, literally nothing about endogenic plurality. I'll just greenmode this.

The majority of people with DID have been through severe trauma in early childhood

And now back to our regularly scheduled nondefinitive language.

Fun fact: highlighting text on this website turns it invisible. Awesome.

A person needs to meet the following criteria to be diagnosed with DID:

- Two or more distinct identities or personality states, each with its own way of thinking and relating. - Amnesia and gaps in the recall of everyday events, personal information or traumatic events. - The experiences are not part of normal cultural or religious practice, or part of childhood imaginary play. For example, a child having an imaginary friend does not mean they have DID. - The symptoms are not because of substance abuse or other medical conditions.

Ah finally, a direct quote from the good ol' DSM. Notice the lack of a trauma requirement.

Funny enough, using only these criteria in isolation, we actually would count as having DID due to our grayout memory gaps when switching. DID is also listed in the dissociative disorders section of the DSM, not the trauma disorders section, so there is no implied criterion there either. However, there still remains the universal criterion of distress, which we do not fulfill. We are quite happy with ourselves.

DID is caused by severe childhood trauma, such as physical, verbal or sexual abuse.

Well, which is it?? Is it a majority association or a direct cause? Why the contradiction? Or is the emphasis on early childhood trauma?

Eh, whatever. Point is, green is once again shut down. But there is still no mention of endogenic plurality anywhere here!!

And no indication of who wrote this article, though the citation for direct cause is a dissociative disorder specialist. Does he actually say that in the cited paper, though?

Dissociative identity disorder (DID) is multifactorial in its etiology. Whereas psychosocial etiologies of DID include developmental traumatization and sociocognitive sequelae, biological factors include trauma-generated neurobiological responses. Biologically derived traits and epigenetic mechanisms are also likely to be at play. At this point, no direct examination of genetics has occurred in DID. However, it is likely to exist, given the genetic link to dissociation in general and in relation to childhood adversity in particular.

I hope you have a dictionary on hand. That sure is a lot of big words that aren't in Firefox's built-in spellchecker. Still, after making sure I got everything, it's clearly not so cut and dry here. And we're back on the "it could be genetic" point.

Tangentially related: I do like the dismissal of the iatrogenic model on the basis of the brain scans.

Neurobiological differences have been demonstrated between dissociative identities within patients with DID and between patients with DID and controls. Given the current evidence, DID as a diagnostic entity cannot be explained as a phenomenon created by iatrogenic influences, suggestibility, malingering, or social role-taking. On the contrary, DID is an empirically robust chronic psychiatric disorder based on neurobiological, cognitive, and interpersonal non-integration as a response to unbearable stress.

Anyway, we're not even on the original page anymore, so I'll call it here. No mention of endogenic plurality, and the citation that claims to dismiss endogenic DID doesn't.

Link 7: NAMI Michigan

While the causes [of DID] are unknown

I'm tired. Aren't you tired?

Treatment for DID consists primarily of psychotherapy with hypnosis.

Yeah I'm calling BS on this one

And no citations on this entire page, nor even the author's name.

Statistics show that DID occurs in 0.01 to 1 percent of the general population.

Research has shown that the average age for the initial development of alters is 5.9 years old.

No sources listed. This is definitely the worst link. Literally on the same level as a rambling Tumblr user in terms of credibility.

Doesn't matter that it says

This disorder is believed to be triggered by physical or sexual abuse in childhood

Couldn't even get this dogshit source to be firm.

This one gets an F.

Link 8: The Psychology Practice

Got scared for a moment there that it said ai. No, that's AL, a name. Also this was written in 2022, so we're definitely safe. Can't actually find any other info on this AL character, but at least we can look up the co-author.

Hm, can't find anything on her, either. Well, at least this is a step up from the previous link. Let's see what it has to say.

According to the Dissociative Identity Research Organisation (2018), DID is formed in childhood due to repeated trauma in early childhood (before age 10) before the personality is fully integrated.

I do like that these later links are direct with this. They don't seem to have a citation for that DIRO, though. Unless...

No. Oh no.

Ok, so this one was written by a couple of clowns who definitely didn't do their homework. Cool. I'm getting tired of humoring awful sources like this, so moving on to the grand finale.

Link 9: NAMI

Wait, this is the same group behind the zero-citation article from Michigan! But that was just Michigan. Maybe the main site can do better.

Ugh, it's just another list of dissociative disorders instead of DID specifically.

The symptoms of a dissociative disorder usually first develop as a response to a traumatic event,

Aren't you tired? Aren't you tired? Aren't you tired?

Often these identities may have unique names, characteristics, mannerisms and voices.

Often? Wow. Sure is a far cry from 5%.

Dissociative disorders are managed through various therapies including: - Psychotherapies such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT) - Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) - Medications such as antidepressants can treat symptoms of related conditions

No mention of hypnosis, allegedly the primary method of treatment?? (/sarc)

and there was no mention of plurality being exclusive to dissociative disorders

Oh, and no listed authors either.

So, after three thousand words of analysis, all we've come up with are nothing burgers, dogshit, and dogshit nothing burgers. Out of nine links, only one briefly and indirectly touched on endogenic plurality, and it was in favor. Even the argument against the traumaless DID strawman is weak at best. These sources are bad, to put it lightly.

@radpocalypse, if you're reading this, firstly, thank you for powering through your ADHD and dyslexia to read thousands of words dunking on your masterpiece. Secondly, if you have any more sources that you think are backing you, feel free to send them my way. Just uh, maybe read them more closely next time?

And that goes for everyone here. If you think you have a better source, or if I made a mistake or missed something here, I am open to correction. I am open to the idea that I'm wrong and I have some unknown trauma to work through, but I certainly won't go digging unless I have good reason to believe it's there, and I haven't seen any good reason. And if you haven't either, maybe it's time to reconsider your position.

One last thing before I go.

Have you ever actually seen a pro-endo carrd, let alone one cited in standalone? I haven't.

Here's a much longer list of much better sources than yours supporting endogenic plurality compiled by the traumagenic Guardians System. I don't expect you to read anywhere near the whole thing; just pick a few links at random. And yes, while many of them are peer-reviewed papers, some of them are Tumblr posts, but those Tumblr posts cite peer-reviewed papers, so it's all good.

Thanks for reading.

[sleepy-shutin]

@avianadonis sorry, for whatever reason i can't reblog and reply to your post directly even though i'm fairly sure you don't have me blocked, so i'll just screenshot and put it here. if you DO have me blocked, feel free to ignore. if you don't, here's a fair warning: this is kind of long.

for context: this was avianadonis's reply to my post criticizing two of sophie's biggest talking points in a recent post where an anon in an ask criticized her for moving goalposts on discussion of tulpamancy, and refusing to listen to tibetan people when they spoke out on the discussion of tulpamancy and cultural appropriation. i don't agree with everything anon said because some things were wrong, like the location of tibet, but i like that they actually bothered to criticize her for these things.

and well, i'm pretty sure i clearly outlined all of the problems i have with her arguments in the original post i made, which would qualify as my arguments against hers, but sure, i have the day off so i will elaborate further.

my arguments against hers are the following:

a) she's speaking for tibetan people when she doesn't live in tibet or understand the political climate of tibet and what activists in tibet are doing to try and liberate themselves--it's more than likely there are tibetan activists in and out of tibet fighting against the CCP because where there is oppression and propaganda, there are people fighting back against it with everything they've got, even in small and non-violent ways; such as referring to the chinese takeover of tibet not as "the peaceful liberation of tibet" as the CCP refers to it, but rather as "the chinese invasion of tibet". this shows you plain as day how tibetan diaspora view and understand the situation.

you're telling me that she can't listen to tibetan diaspora, (in this incredibly niche discourse, where it may be difficult to find many tibetan buddhists or tibetan people/diaspora on tumblr getting into this discourse, mind you), on how their culture is treated by westerners? all while she's continuously citing a book written by a white woman in the 19-fucking-30s.

she is speaking as a white person, presumably in the west, and speaking for tibetan people, and saying that she can't even trust them on their own issues because of the CCP propaganda.

and yet she, in spite of all this, believes that she has any authority to be speaking for a group of people currently under chinese control against their will, and their diaspora.

that is white saviorism at its finest.

i'm not going to pretend to be an expert on tibet because i'm not. i did a rough wikipedia page read on a couple of things related to tibet and the chinese takeover and went from there.

but what sophie is doing, and i know this because it takes an ignorant person to know an ignorant person, is outright pretending she has more knowledge and understanding than she actually does on the situation, and has decided that the tibetan people, living in tibet or not, are not reliable on what does and doesn't harm them and their culture because of CCP propaganda and because she disagrees with them, then used a vague quote from the dalai lama to justify taking aspects of tibetan buddhism, where she truly has little understanding of the actual practice it comes from.

at this point, i care less about the discussion of the word tulpa itself and more about the racism and white saviorism and pseudo-intellectualism that sophie uses to justify using the word and what that says about the people that follow and agree with her. because jesus fuck, it's kind of horrifying.

and every time a tibetan buddhist comes in and criticizes her, she ignores them because they're anti-endo, or because she assumes they are and labels them as anti-endo regardless of if they are or not.

and b) she's openly admitting to refusing criticism for citing papers that don't support her arguments. at all. be it because they are assuming tulpas/non-dissociative systems exist in the first place without proving it, because they're clearly about complex dissociative disorders and not endogenic systems (and by clearly, i mean outright referring to trauma an dissociation), because they're outright trying to disprove the existence of complex dissociative disorders with the fantasy model, or because they're about psychotic people hearing voices, and the alternative treatments outside of medications to treat the voices, (not herbal remedies; talk therapy and engaging with the voice(s) with a trained professional).

this is all part of a larger pattern with sophie. she bullshits, she pretends to know more than she actually does on these subjects, and acts like she has any ground on which to stand and call herself an authority, and when people have genuine criticism that she can't bullshit against and twist to make herself look smart to her followers, she ignores it. and people eat it up because she seems nice and polite and seems educated, even when responding to horrific vitriol.

nobody bothers to read the papers she cites, nobody bothers to check her sources, they assume that she will do all those things for them and that she is a trusted source without looking into it themselves. i know this because i have had people cite to me papers that are not valid evidence for endogenics existing, (such as the survey that finds people with tulpas have better mental health than they did before, without proving they exist and even outright stating that this survey can't prove they exist), and a friend recently had someone in a discord server openly admit to citing a paper without reading it first. there are carrds compiling "evidence" that endogenic systems exist where the people openly admit to not reading the papers, and very even if they did, they obviously aren't being critical about it because they're acting like a survey that doesn't attempt to prove the existence of endogenic systems somehow proves the existence of endogenic systems.

i can't remember if she still has this paper on her list or not, but someone emailed the author of it and said that not only was her paper not about endogenic systems, she didn't approve of her work being used in this manner because it was about functional multiplicity as a valid healing option for DID alongside final fusion. not endogenic systems.

look, i don't hate endogenic systems. because of the fact that there's a lack of research into whether or not endogenic systems exist and because i choose to believe in the ideology of live and let live, i mostly don't care what endogenics are doing with themselves as long as they're not actually hurting anyone, and while many people have varying definitions of what that means, i personally don't find the existence of endogenic and nondissociative systems to in and of themselves be harmful. i just hate that so many of them are so desperate to prove themselves against the hate that they're becoming ignorant in the face of how science actually works in order to do it.

leaving everything up to one person that they uncritically follow.

many of them are buying into the pattern that sophie has consistently been putting out for a couple of years now, and i find it so disgustingly disingenuous because she's giving many endogenic and nondissociative systems a false sense of hope to prove themselves when that's not what's actually happening; from repeating debunked arguments to citing papers that actively go against what she's saying, to consistently, time and time again, showing us that she has not read a lick of literature on complex dissociative disorders. all the while, ignoring any and all criticism that she can't twist to make herself look good.

all this to say that sophie has a long pattern of pseudointellectualism--pretending to know what she's talking about when she doesn't, and bullshitting herself every which way to make herself sound smart and educated. then, most infuriatingly, refusing to respond to valid criticism that actually bothers to bring her claims into question, and referring to all of her critics as anti-endos whether they actually believe in endogenic systems or not.

so, do you actually have an argument as to why she's correct or are you another uncritical follower of everything she says, who never bothers to bring any of her claims into question?

[troonwolf]

thank you for speaking up about the cult tactics used in the pro endo community. even though i Was mostly syscourse unaligned leaning anti, the pro endo community gave me a really bad vibe. seeing a lot of shit they say screamed “cult” to me too but i didn’t feel comfortable enough calling it out because i’m not a cult survivor and i don’t know a lot about cults. i was also never pro endo so it’s not like i could speak from personal experience either. so i kind of brushed off my gut reaction and told myself i’m overreacting about something i don’t know a lot about. so i’m glad to know more now and know that the pro endo community does harm beyond what i even initially thought. i’m definitely more anti endo now because the pro endo community is absolutely the anti vaxers of the neurodivergent community. also notice how many of them support the demedicalization of autism too. idk if you remember that but i’m referencing specifically the time a few months ago when some prominent pro endo bloggers were jumping down the throats of autistic anti endos because they called their autism a disability.

Ty for your input anon! Interesting to read other folks perspectives and experiences on all this.

The funny thing is I literally only started talking about how I myself am a cult survivor because everytime I try to talk about cults in the system community, people have this knee-jerk reaction of having to respond to you with essays on how unless you're a cult survivor, you shouldn't be talking about cults.

Now first off that's obviously not true and pretty stupid. Tons of academic professionals and researchers and etc who are involved in widening our understanding of cults, were not themselves victims of cults. That's like saying I can't talk about the black plague because I wasn't there.

But literally just to make people stop having that response to me I was like welp guess I'm gonna have to talk about specific details of my trauma of being lured into a doomsday bunker in the mountains by my mother even tho both sides of this debate are constantly talking about how we shouldn't pressure people to have to talk about or reveal their trauma.

The idea of cults and cult victims have a weird status of reverence in the community, we're almost treated like a mythological creature. "Oh no, don't talk about cults! There might be a...*whispers* cult victim here...." It's very very bizarre.

Cults are an age-old phenomenon with tons of research put behind them. We actually know a fucking lot about cults. Saying you need to have been in one to be able to understand them is ridiculous.

Comparing this to other things: you don't need to have been abused as a child to have a good understanding of child abuse. We have a pretty informed understanding of what child abuse is and how it functions by this point. You can still call something out as being child abuse without having experienced it yourself.

With that said I'm glad there are people who understand my point, but honestly after this experience I've concluded both sides of the anti/endo discourse are a bunch of clowns who just want a tumblr pvp social club. People are involved literally just to be part of the community, whether anti or endo. Folks actual reasons for being against endos is dumb shit like "they're just dumb teenagers who don't know what they're doing", when if that's really the case then why are you "anti" in the first place? Idc what dumb teenagers are doing, why do you?

I hate endos because they cause harm but most people in this discourse legitimately seem like they're just anti-endos because they think it's cringe and want to be a cool tumblr hater.

[the-sour-patch-crew]

I filter tags because I don't want to see bullshit. But I do want the choice to be able to see post that friends and intellectuals make to counter them. So fully removing visibility of the tag ruins my chance to learn more about CDDs, trauma, and other topics that often are *exceptionally* explained as an outcome of correcting the ignorant things Antis say. But those replies still carry the original tags or have anti-endo in their post. So I'm either stuck seeing *everything* or I get the chance to choose what I see and when I see it but get flooded with nothing but grey post.

Once again, Antis love saying that endos can't exist and that we are faking OR need to educate ourselves because of all the misinformation. Well, we personally love learning more things and wanting to stay informed. We'd love to continue to analyze ourselves and reevaluate our opinions or understanding as much as possible.

BUT WE CAN'T DO THAT BECAUSE OF THE MISUSE OF TAGS.

ALSO, WHO WANTS TO LEARN ANYTHING FROM SOMEONE WHO IS ONLY SPEWING HATE???? ANYONE WHO TAGS "FUCK OFF" DOESNT PRESENT AS A RELIABLE SOURCE ANYWAY. WHY WOULD WE LISTEN TO YOU OVER SERIOUS THINGS LIKE TRAUMA, HEALING, AND ABLEISM?

I've made a few post in frustration about this, but here's some lovely visuals for any anti who thinks this is how Tumblr should work and how they obviously have systems in their best interest WHEN THEY DONT.

This is what I see in EVERY CDD tag. It's bullshit.

[calamityquellerei]

new pinned! pretty similar to the last one just with some added clarification as well as a DNI/BYI.

my name is Ei. i also go by Aoi, Baiyu, and Arabella!

in terms of marginalized identities i'm a bit all over the place. i'm a POC (Black, Falasteeni, Chinese, Japanese + others*). i'm queer as in fuck you and also as in lesbian and grayaroace. i'm intersex and transfeminine. i'm physically disabled and chronically ill. i'm Mad/mentally ill, including schizophrenia, personality disorders, and others. i'm a traumagenic disordered plural system. i'm intellectually disabled, autistic, and adhd.

*others refers to racial identities that i am not as connected to, and therefore am not comfortable listing.

full disclosure that i am also thin, hearing, seeing, non-religious, and usamerican. i only list these so people know what experiences i cannot speak on.

i'm an activist! i'm currently part of @bfpnola's advocacy committee, advocating for intellectually disabled, intersex, and Falasteeni lives.

i'm semiverbal (all the time not "go semiverbal") and a full time TTS user. i have been semiverbal my entire life.

i'm also a cult/OA survivor, although i don't talk about it very often and would prefer to not be asked about it.

DNF/BYF under the cut!

Before You Follow: - i support all plurals including nontraumagenic, nondisordered, median, spiritual, etc. plurals - i support the full decolonization of Falasteen. i do not support israel's existence as a state. - do not ask who is fronting or which alter made a post, even if we are good friends. - i support and love transmascs! i believe in transandrophobia and i firmly believe transmascs face unique oppression/discrimination because of their transmasculine identities. - i do not believe in TME/TMA labels, as nobody is "exempt" from any form of oppression. - i reclaim some slurs but not a lot and not often. if you reclaim a lot of slurs very often i support you! - i use support needs and severity labels for my autism (i have medium support needs/moderate autism).

Do Not Follow: - people who are going to drag me into syscourse. i'm pro endo, but i also don't mind interacting with most anti endos and neutrals and idc if you follow me as an anti as long as you're not going to harass me or try to make me do syscourse with you. - israel supporters, two-state "solution" supporters, anyone who doesn't support the full decolonization of Falasteen. - people who don't believe in transandrophobia - people who use TME/TMA labels - people who think support needs labels for autism are useless or "dividing the community" - anyone who regularly posts about shipcourse or is going to drag me into it - people who say "go semiverbal" or "go nonverbal". this only rly applies if you've been educated and choose to ignore the people educating you, if you genuinely didn't know and are open to education that's different. - people who use the term "theyfab" outside of an educational/reclamation context. even if you think the person deserves to be called it or if you claim it's not a derogatory term.

[syscourse-confessions]

the sysmed shit strikes me as deeply unserious like... i remember when transmeds were a massive problem, but you know what i never saw tucutes do in the midst of it all? treat people like they are lesser, innately miserable, or ontologically evil for talking about having gender dysphoria. when people talked about how dysphoria ate away at their life & how pursuing transition made them so much happier, no one in the tucute community was chomping at the bit to demonize them.

meanwhile, the ugly truth is that whenever the endo/pro-endo community are doing all of that trauma survivors, it's a day ending in "y". y'all aren't righteous or "tolerant", you're a bunch of anti-intellectual zealots who will eat up fucking ANYTHING if it makes you feel momentarily validated.

DISCLAIMER: Posts may or may not reflect accurate information. More info here: https://www.tumblr.com/syscourse-confessions/728819621058232320/disclaimer-treat-posts-here-like-you-would-any

[sophieinwonderland]

i still find it really funny how the one yelling that endos are ableist ended up being ableist themselves, prioritizing intelligence as a superiority thing. they got called out about it bc someone was like "hey this isn't good, you're ignoring people with intellectual disabilities" and it made me chuckle like.... anti endo singlets are some wild shit

Competence too!

Can you imagine the sheer gull of running a blog about disabilities and neurodivergences, getting called out about spreading misinformation against a marginalized neurodivergent group, and responding by ignoring all the source and instead bragging about being "infinitely" more intelligent and competent than the person calling you out??? And then calling the other person ableist in the same post???

I just can't with them!