#concept and more like the endo community as it is right

[snowglobe-system]

Hi! Feel no pressure to answer, but I have a few questions (regarding DID)

So I'm aware of what an endo system is, but I'm a bit confused on why it would be considered valid since the condition is directly caused by trauma, which is the thing that endos lack. Could you please explain your perspective on it? And maybe your perspective before you became pro-endo?

Hey! I've been sitting on this ask for a few days now. I do want to start out by thanking you for reaching out to me and asking about my perspective. Please note that you are not obligated to agree with me, or to change your mind just from my answer to your questions. I like having you as a mutual, and I will continue to do so regardless of your syscourse stance.

I'm going to grab a term that some of my mutuals in the DID community have used, and say I'm really more pro syscourse conversation than I am pro endo- pro endo is just the easiest way to communicate my basic stances.

I think the most important thing to understand here is that a lot of the time, the "are endos real" debate suffers from both sides fundamentally misunderstanding what the other's stance actually is. While there is a small subsection of the endo community claiming that DID isn't trauma based- which I vehemently disagree with, DID is absolutely trauma based, and that's backed by all of the research- that's not the majority.

Most endogenic systems are not claiming to have DID. They are claiming to experience themselves as more than one. I am by no means an expert on this, but I know that it is a very western-centric view to assume that everyone subscribes to being one singular self. If you want to learn more about non-western views on the self and on plurality, I would recommend looking at @system-of-a-feather's blog. They make great posts on the subject!

And- here's a real kicker- not everyone with a CDD- CDD standing for complex dissociative disorders and including the likes of DID, OSDD, P-DID, UDD, etc- actually identifies as plural. Not everyone with even DID identifies as plural. So if someone with a CDD can identify as one, what's stopping someone who doesn't have a CDD from identifying as more than one? This post puts it pretty well, so I'm just going to link it here! And if you're looking for scientific backing on endo systems? Dr Colin Ross, one of the very well known DID researchers, believes in non-traumagenic self states.

Basically, I'm choosing to believe people when they talk about their subjective personal experiences.

Now you did also ask about my anti-endo days and I will also gladly talk about those. I will admit, I was the worst kind of anti-endo. I was the type of person who would throw even other CDD systems under the bus as fakers because I wanted to seem more legitimate. Everyone who didn't present the "right" way was a faker. And endos, my goodness. They were the worst fakers of them all.

It was an extremely reactive position to take. I was suffering from my plurality, therefore everyone who wasn't had to be faking. They were making a mockery out of me! At least, that's how I perceived it.

And then I started interacting with endos, and pro endos. I realized that they were also real people, not just an abstract concept to make fun of to make myself look more legitimate. And I started reading blogs that had the rawest, realest content about CDDs that I'd come across thus far... and they were pro endo. And the arguments as to why were really good.

Somewhere along the way, I realized that the things that were leading me to being anti endo were the same things that made me into a transmed when in the 2010s. I believed that people had to meet a minimum quota of suffering to be real. In a way, I was defining people by it. And ultimately, if they are lying? It costs me nothing to believe them. I'd rather believe some liars than not believe people who are telling the truth. I've had enough experience with people not believing me. It sucks. I didn't want to keep doing that to others.

That's about the end of this yap session! Seriously, thanks again for asking, I really enjoyed writing this post. I hope I answered in a way that makes sense to you!

[yourpeepysucksdotorg]

Looking back on my syscourse days with the wisdom of age, I feel as if I can pinpoint a single psychological concept that explains why syscourse is so prevalent to begin with, and why it’s so toxic and inescapable; group polarization. Basically, people are more likely to come to extreme conclusions or make risky decisions when in a group with those sharing the same ideologies, even though most members of the group will have the same core beliefs that aren’t nearly as radical.

In syscourse, this most often occurs when people debate the validity of endogenic systems. It also makes it impossible to have a good-faith discussion on the matter.

I’m not endo-neutral, and while my thoughts on the matter can be found elsewhere on my blog, I’ll remain neutral for the sake of this post making it to as many people as possible, because I genuinely believe so much fighting could be stopped if we just recognized the unhealthy patterns we’ve fallen into. Disordered systems who are anti-endo seem to blame endogenic systems for a lot of things, and while I’m not endogenic, I can pretty accurately guess that having a bunch of strangers tell you that you make their lives worse by expressing your identity makes you feel shitty. This keeps the two communities separated outside of verbal spats, and of course, after these spats, members of both communities will want support. Once again, I can’t speak from the endogenic perspective. But I know that anti-endos will continue to perpetuate that endos are bad, that you didn’t do anything wrong, that they’re just dumb and stupid. Which, I can assume this keeps endogenic systems in constant defense mode, as they constantly have to check which system blogs or servers are or aren’t okay to interact with, out of fear of being attacked by other systems, or worse, becoming some kind of lolcow for singlets.

When both sides feel like they’re being attacked, no productive discussion can be had. Once again, I do have my own opinions on the matter, but right now, I’m really just advocating for all systems to treat each other like living beings. If someone is being terrible to you, there’s no pressure to fight back. Just block them. While that one person might be an asshole, there are so many more people who care about you, support you, and want you to exist more than you even know. This is a saying as old as time, but don’t feed the trolls. Don’t aggressively retaliate, because you’re just giving them more material to bend to their will. And if you’re the one perpetuating assholery, just stop.

Maybe I’m just being an optimist, but I believe that so much syscourse could become irrelevant if we realized that the world isn’t black and white, and there aren’t good and evil systems. We’re all in this together, singlets are still gonna treat us like we’re nuts. We need to stand united rather than push each other further and further away.

[sophieinwonderland]

r/systemscringe: "Just because all the papers agree you can be plural without a disorder doesn't mean endos are real"

This was their response to this post of mine.

And it is truly wild!

A lot of endogenic systems are, in fact, plural for spiritual reasons. So if "all the papers agree" that some spiritual practices cause plurality then that's clearly validation of a lot of endogenic and mixed origin systems.

The second line goes on to... seemingly dismiss all spiritual plurality as racism? Is that right? That seems to be the only way that makes sense as a logical follow-up to them just casually mentioning that ALL THE PAPERS AGREE that spiritual practices can cause plurality. So therefore, the only way the racism line could argue against endogenic plurality is to say that it's all racist.

Which raises a question... do you just believe literally every culture that practices spirit possession is a closed culture??? Do you believe that all of these different cultures, across the globe, somehow share ownership over the concept of possession itself and no one else can touch it?

Like, you surely do realize there are a ton of neopagans practicing mediumship and spirit channeling right now with no direct ties to any specific culture.

Do you think these people are appropriating aspects of other cultures just by practicing possession?

(Also... if you believed these spiritual practices were indeed working with actual, literal spirits, it would be pretty weird if all the spirits in the worlds only chose to commune with people of specific cultures.)

The more I look at this comment, the more absurd and ridiculous it is!

Spirituality vs Psychology

Up above, I only talked about spirituality. But let's talk about tulpamancy for a moment.

Tulpamancy, to catch everyone up, is a Western practice that is largely not spiritual, and is viewed through a psychological lens. In one study, only 8.5% of tulpamancers agreed with purely metaphysical explanations for their tulpas compared to 76.5% with purely psychological views.

And this raises a new issue.

Because the papers aren't just affirming that spiritual practices are plurality. They're also affirming that tulpamancy, a largely psychological practice, is plurality as well.

And we have an actual fMRI study with review pending that can show that these sorts of phenomena have real effects on the brain, and that they can happen without any spiritual beliefs whatsoever.

And you can argue that this scientifically-recognized practice is appropriation if you want because it draws its etymology from another culture's spiritual practice. I personally think that's ignorant and is like saying "Hurricane" is appropriation because the word came from a Native American term for storm gods. But simply arguing that something might be offensive doesn't invalidate the science.

Whether you like the name or not, there is still a psychological practice that replicates the a lot of the experiences of spiritual plurality, without any spiritual belief whatsoever.

Big takeaways:

All the papers support endogenic plurality.

Tulpamancy studies are showing that experiences thought to be exclusive to spirituality can be experienced without any spiritual beliefs whatsoever.

r/systemscringe continues to be the most ridiculous hive of fools on the internet.

[discourse-by-candlelight]

Astra: Some more random syscourse ramblings to put my thoughts to paper:

In my response to anti-endos and other confused systems I often point out that tulpamancy isn't a spiritual practice but a specific type of endogenic plurality. This is actually kind of misleading, however. It's not misleading in that tulpas aren't a form of endogenic plurality. They absolutely fit by definition (although this is also a draining of nuance which deserves a post on our main blog @thecandlelightsociety ), but the majority of tulpamancers don't so easily fit by community and culture.

To put it simply, the tulpamancy community and the endogenic and plural community have very different cultures from eachother. These differences come from a few key factors that should be kept in mind.

Some of these factors are:

1. Separate community starts and development in isolation. For a long time the two communities only bumped into eachother on occasion, and at least on the tulpamancy side the plural community was seen as strange and misinformation heavy, but also seen with curiosity for what could be used to improve the practice. It wasn't until later in the community timeline that the two groups started to directly interact and mix, with mixed spaces now being much easier to find.

2. Different approaches to understanding plurality/tulpas and how that affects worldviews. Tulpamancers have a much more experimental and analytical approach to how tulpas work and develop, while the plural community often runs far more on emotion and empathy first, accepting a much wider slew of experiences without as much skepticism. Both communities have a wide range of experiences more and less believable than others, but tulpamancy culture promotes focus on what makes an experience, while plural culture will focus on assuring the validity of the experience.

3. Lack of exposure to non tulpa plurals leading to tulpa specific concepts, models, and advice being common which may be incompatible with wider plurality. Building off the first two's points, the tulpamancy community has beliefs and advice which can work well for us, but could be useless or actively negative to many plurals. Concepts like these include dissipation, host/tulpa dynamics, approaches to system health, and others. This certainly doesn't apply for everything, and we know many non tulpa systems who have benefitted from a tulpamancy switching guide, or have made tulpas for their system. There's just a certain amount of caution needed when adapting concepts from one group over to the other, especially for tulpamancy and CDD interactions.

4. Roots going back to 4Chan instead of Tumblr. This one doesn't need much elaboration. 4chan has a very different set of rules compared to tumblr, and some of those subcultural views persist despite tulpamancy mainly being a reddit and discord focused community now.

5. Different demographics leading to different things being commonly accepted or taboo socially and politically. For instance, the tulpamancy has a much larger center to right wing demographic than the plural community, even though both still have large left leaning populations. This can lead to more ideas and perspectives in the tulpamancy community which would be frowned upon in the plural community, and vice versa.

These are just some of the things to keep in mind when discussing the tulpamancy community specifically in comparison to the usual broader endogenic label and plural community. As always with this blog, please remember that this post does not contain nearly the full nuance of the situation and subculture. We are a stressed procrastinating college student who has worked on and off on this and other post drafts all year in short bursts. Some of it is definitely going to be biased and scatterbrained.

Thank you for reading, and we're always open to asks even if we're not the fastest at responding!

[protectingtulpas]

were an endo system, but we were wondering what a tulpa is! So we found a tulpa blog to ask! Currently cal and rose fronting!

Heyo, nice to meet ya Cal and Rose! You've come to the right place, cuz I'm what you're looking for! Thanks for choosing me to get info from!

A tulpa is a type of headmate under the created system umbrella, and we're also generally considered a type of thoughtform, which is any entity manifested by practice of consistent thought and focus on them. That's a broad category that includes everything from tulpas to some deities!! A tulpa is a thoughtform created in a singular body via a person's consistent focusing on their presence, talking to them, and treating them like a person, until they start to respond back and act on their own! Tulpas are individuals and we can learn to drop back into our headspace (the tulpa community calls 'em Wonderlands!), front with the host/creator's trust, and even more! It all takes practice and dedication. I've personally been here for almost 4 years now- my birthday is comin up the 23rd!

Some tulpas are more metaphysical, some are psychological, but it's the same mental processes either way! Psychologically, someone might say you're training the mental processes in your head to act independently, building up a habit until that psychological process begins to act separately and develop on its own, forming their own identity and personhood. Metaphysically, it's a very similar concept, but you're instead working with, coalescing, and forming mental energy into a new being. Either way, "tulpamancy" is still the term used for the process, and a "tulpamancer" is the person performing it. (It's also worth noting that tulpamancy is NOT the same process as the Tibetan Buddhist practice it has etymological roots in, and even the word itself and the "-mancy" suffix are entirely different than the term for the related practice. There are some that combine practices, though! We've seen a couple Buddhist Tulpamancers.)

I've always felt different than the other system members of other origins here, and the other new tulpa around I was just helping out working on gets it too. My identity, who I am at my core? That's my choice. I get to decide who I am - when I wanted to be a demon? I decided to be one. I focused on my own mindform until I was able to change it. I'm also way better at communication than some of our other members, like our soulbond with an exotraumagenic subsystem or host's median members. I can transfer info when others can't! It's pretty cool.

Hope this answers your questions! I've actually got further readings I can link to, so go ahead and give a look at these!

Tulpa.info - What is a tulpa?

Tulpa's Guide to Tulpamancy v4 - a guide and study into tulpas written by a tulpa like me!

The Tulpanomicon is the biggest collection of guides available - click the lefthand list to see it all organized by category! We've even been able to use a lot of these fronting/possession & imposition methods for non-tulpa headmates too!

Things tulpas can and can't do, by me!

[who-is-page]

I’m heavily pro-endo so that statement was meant literally (polytherian does not experience any form of plurality but calls themselves a system purely based on having multiple theriotypes).

Even if we were just talking about self expression. As a disabled person, does being radically accepting mean I have to accept nonhumans who are not disabled (who have said they are not disabled) using medical equipment to express their nonhumanity (i.e. someone using a cane solely for the purpose of showing they should not be bipedal). Because, it’s their right to express that way but it doesn’t sit right with me that I’m watching someone use medical equipment as an accessory. It’s not harmful but it’s also not something I can agree with.

I guess my point is. Where do you draw the line with radical acceptance? If we believe everyone about everything, if we accept every form of expression, at what point can we recognize what is harmful and not? If a couple people are hurt by it, is that harmful or just a personal opinion?

By no means is any of this meant as an attack. I’m really just trying to figure out where the radically accepting folks come from (as I once thought myself to be RA but found it brought on much toxicity and drama to spaces that weren’t that way before). As I said. I love Beastpunk for all its other qualities… just not the radically accepting (basically blind faith in my opinion) part…

Look, as someone who walks with a cane and wishes it was as well-loved and accepted an accessory as glasses currently are, so I'd get less shit about using one and accessibility for canes would be more baseline, I think you seriously need to reconsider why you can't agree with that. And why, even though you openly admit it isn't harmful, it's still being used as an example in this scenario.

Let's open the doors on this-- we're talking about a concept where we are trusting people to know themselves better than we know them, and where we are accepting the aspects about people that they cannot change, and where we are accepting people's non-harmful forms of self-expression. Where does any of that suddenly scoop your ability to think critically and deeply about information being presented to you out of your skull? I'm hunting through my essay and, you know, I simply just can't find the part where we yoink out your common sense or ability to question others.

Beastpunk is against plenty of harmful ideaologies and communities-- like pshifting, for instance, for historical reasons as outlined in the essay. You can be beastpunk and have opinions about what constitutes harm and what doesn't. But, as I said before, you're conflating radical acceptance as spoken of here with tucking tail and showing off your throat and belly, so to speak. You are confusing radical acceptance within this framework with an inability to confront others and to dig in deep to question why you are uncomfortable with something to decide if it really truly causes harm or if it's just internalized shit you need to unpack (re: the cane thing). And look, I cannot give you that skill. And being beastpunk requires that skill.

I cannot in good faith recommend beastpunk to you when you have so blatantly misunderstood what it represents, and seem to have a total inability to grasp one of the underlying, core principles of it.

Other folks are also welcome to chime in.

[fandomsoda]

(Note I'm genuinely looking for a respectful conversation.) May I ask, why do you support Endo systems? The whole concept of being a system, (specifically talking about DID/OSDD) is it's a trauma response. And Endos, most of them are systems that don't remember their trauma, yes. But also, a lot of them have another disorder, and refuse to look into that, and claim to be a system.

I support endogenic systems because mental conditions are never that simple, there is never one sole cause for anything in the human mind. The human brain is a very strange and unpredictable thing, so I believe that to assert that “natural plurality is impossible” is unrealistic. There has actually been documentation of naturally occurring plurality for a good while now, but systems as a whole are incredibly under-researched so of course not much has gotten out.

The human brain can do a lot of weird and crazy things and diverge in strange ways, so I believe that splitting and forming headmates on its own is in no way outside of the realm of possibility. There is no benefit to excluding or devaluing endo systems either, it’s literally just fake-claiming with extra steps. And, istg, how do you know they have a different disorder? How do you know they haven’t done research into that? How do YOU know better than someone else about their OWN BRAIN? It’s just so ridiculously entitled to assert such. And to claim that we know something as definitive as what can and cannot cause a very specific and under-researched type of condition is one of the most blatant displays of human hubris I’ve ever seen. Most endo systems do tons of research, it’s just like self-diagnosed individuals, most of them go through a lot of research and reflection and self-discovery to come to their own conclusions.

I don’t believe being a system is a choice, never in a million years would I claim that, and there are definitely fakers out there going under the guise of being endogenic, and I definitely believe that spaces for traumagenic systems specifically are important, but none of that means that endo systems don’t exist. Anti-endo rhetoric is largely reactionary and cruel, and like fake-claiming, does way more harm for the disabled / disordered / neurodivergent community than good.

If you say you’re a system, I believe you. I support you. And I’m here for you. Trying to deny and invalidate other’s experiences just because they don’t match your own or the status quo isn’t right.

[sysvandals]

₊˚⊹ ✚ PINNED ✚ ‧₊˚⊹

╭ ‧₊˚⊹

admin sys ┊➞ Blaster Brigade

adult/minor┊➞ adult (bodily!)

pronouns ┊➞ they/she

terms┊➞ fem/neu/masc

sign off┊➞ 💣

╰ ‧₊˚⊹: · . 𖤐

More under cut!

╭─━━━━━━━━━━━━─╮

ABOUT !

╰─━━━━━━━━━━━━─╯

╭ ‧₊˚⊹

sysvandals (moved from sysgrapesoda) is a multipurpose anti-endo account for systems to request userboxes, templates, names and pronouns, graphics, ask questions, meet other systems, rant about their experiences, and more! Our primary goal is to establish a sense of community away from toxicity while setting the firm boundary that we are for “trauma-originated” systems only.

╰ ‧₊˚⊹: · . 𖤐

╭─━━━━━━━━━━━━─╮

HOW TO REQUEST !

╰─━━━━━━━━━━━━─╯

╭ ‧₊˚⊹

Userboxes — To submit a userbox, please include what you’d like it to say and the colors you’d like it to be (if applicable).

• OPEN

Templates — For templates, I will need a theme/general idea of what to base it on, and the length. Also where you will be using it (pluralkit, tumblr, etc). I’m not too experienced in simplyplural, but I can try!

• OPEN

Names and Pronouns — All that is needed for these is an idea/concept, word/phrase, object/thing, or character/media to base it off of and what terms you’d like me to include. Fem, neu, masc, etc!

• OPEN

Graphics — Please state what character/s you’d like the graphics of, what you’d like it to say (if anything), colors, where you’ll be using it (rentry, discord, etc), so on! The more detail, the better!

• OPEN

Miscellaneous — This one really is depends on what you’re requesting! It can be anything but we have a right to deny it if we are uncomfortable (this goes for all of the above mentioned, too). Again, please include as much detail as possible!

• OPEN

╰ ‧₊˚⊹: · . 𖤐

╭─━━━━━━━━━━━━─╮

DNI !

╰─━━━━━━━━━━━━─╯

INTRO

We do have a DNI for those we wish to not interact with our page/use the things we make! If you see anyone under any of these categories using our content, please let us know as soon as possible!

GENERAL LIST

• Endos and non-traumagenic systems + their supporters

• Radqueers and TransIDs

• Proship/Comship

• Zionists or other anti-Palestine

• More will be added as necessary!

╭─━━━━━━━━━━━━─╮

ANON LIST !

╰─━━━━━━━━━━━━─╯

╭ ‧₊˚⊹

•

•

•

╰ ‧₊˚⊹: · . 𖤐

[desdecourse]

breaking down the "Debunking Sysmeds" carrd (just for kicks 😍) part 1!!

was sent this carrd by a friend and it's been a while since i've interacted with endo logic so here we go! <3 let's break it down section by section because whew girlie is chock full of bonkers misinformation! henceforth, i will be referring to the person who made the carrd as the "creator" and using they/them pronouns, as i do not know their pronouns (please let me know if anyone does!).

----------

THE "CLAIMS AND REBUTTALS"

if y'all don't stop using 20 different fallacies in your arguments... it'll be all over for you... seriously!

----------

the first point the creator tries to rebuff is the argument of "DID/OSDD-1 is a trauma disorder." starting off strong, i see! their response is essentially that nowhere in the diagnostic criteria within the DSM-V or ICD-11 does it say that DID/OSDD requires trauma. immediately going to stop you there - it may be to the creator's benefit to read any other page of the DSM. the third sentence on the intro page for trauma-related disorders is:

"Placement of this chapter reflects the close relationship between these diagnoses and disorders in the surrounding chapters on anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, and dissociative disorders"

additionally, had the creator read the ENTIRE DID entry, not just the diagnostic criteria, they would have found this lovely quote, found in the "development and course" section of the DID entry:

Dissociative identity disorder is associated with overwhelming experiences, traumatic events, and/or abuse occurring in childhood.

within this section, the creator also discusses an article written by allen j frances, the person responsible for the changing of MPD to DID, in which he discusses the abundance of false diagnoses of DID following the recognition of it as a disorder after the release of the DSM-IV in 1994. firstly, the creator of the carrd incorrectly stipulates that frances renamed MPD to DID in the DSM-V. secondly, the creator uses frances' criticism of increased DID diagnoses to demonstrate that the diagnostic criteria isn't to be trusted.

what.

so, to reiterate, we should trust the DSM-V when it doesn't emphasize trauma in the diagnoses (false), but we also shouldn't trust the DSM-V because of an article written by someone who had nothing to do with the DSM-V?

----------

the second point the creator decides to rebut is "Science says Endogenic systems don't exist." now, much of this argument is rooted in a few "studies" the creator has linked, which i will analyze more in a separate section reserved specifically for source analysis. but! one really interesting part of this section is the comparison between endogenics (an internet community and internet term) to "marginalized religions such as Shamanism" which is a direct quote.

something i really need endos on the internet to understand is that you can't compare your just-realized "system" of non-traumatic origins to the spiritual practices of highly religious individuals who have been practicing their religions for decades, engaging in extreme asceticism, and doing really intense internal reflection. and you especially shouldn't throw in words like "marginalized" to your argument. at what point does that become cultural appropriation?

i also find it soooo interesting that the creator refers to the otherkin and alterhuman communities as something that has "existed long before the term DID/MPD/OSDD-1/DDNOS." the first recorded use of "otherkin" was in 1990 in a newsletter from an elf club in kentucky, and it has been predominantly an online community. the concept of DID (MPD at the time) first appeared in the DSM-III in the 1970s.

the creator also refers to endogenic systems as something people "believe" in, which is... questionable in it's own right. it is interesting that they brought this point up in the section in which they are trying to combat the idea that science does not back up endogenic systems, as religious beliefs (with no proof, something that people simply "believe" in) and science (which is backed up by decades of research) aren't exactly comparable.

----------

the third point rebutted is the statement "You're not a system, you're schizophrenic/psychotic." honestly, not a big issue with this one. i've never heard anyone say this personally, but i can totally see it happening, and it definitely shouldn't be done. no one can really tell you what you're experiencing, so i take no issue with the creator on this one! i don't think this at all supports the existence endogenics, though.

----------------

i don't want to make this too long, so i'm going to write out the remainder of the points on a part 2!

[tndn-btg]

gonna be honest the older i get the more insane i find gatekeeping discourse regarding identities and expression. the people in senate do not care about the xe/xem bisexual lesbian retweeting who considers themselves an endo system or whatever.

you can have your personal qualms and confusion but i feel like it's quite evil to equate people existing in a way you disagree with to the reason why people want us dead. nobody in the real world understands the complexities and nuances within our spaces and to act like that's something cemented in day to day culture is very brain dead of you to believe. even if you disagree with the concepts it's not activism to tell these people to die.

if you hate people in your circle more than you uplift you need to do a retroactive look on your priorities and figure out if you genuinely care about the rights of your friends or you want to just share pure hate out of spite and rage...community is forgiveness and you need to put aside differences in order to live and thrive. we are not the enemy. /they/ are not the enemy.

[sorority-system]

im coming outright and saying it because we dance around this topic a lot. im an alter who doesnt rlly care about being nice about this right now.

while i hesitate to say that being anti endo is outright being bigoted, i think its a really slippery slope into having that mindset. i think having your own minority status doesnt really change that either. i see a lot of internal (community wise) bigotry within communities that are more broad than this simple system space on the internet. and it reminds me of the concept of intersectionality (commonly used in critical race theory but im using it here).

a person may / will have intersecting circles of oppression they face but we cant stop denying that they also have intersecting circles of "privilege". everything isnt a perfect little venn diagram nor can be easily explained. but heres how i see it.

i should disclaim i dont see having a traumatic origin as a privilege nor do i see being a trans man as a privilege (terfs fuck off). but i will say that being traumagenic is being used as a leverage in the infinite internet game of "gotchas" in syscourse. this is inherently harmful. to weaponize your hurt like this doesnt help anything. to categorize your experience in a neat little box will not let you grow and recontextualize yourself in a way that matters.

i get that most of the people in the did system tag are baby plurals. but hurting other people isnt the way. hurting yourself isnt the way. its unhealthy to revolve yourself in this endless stream of discourse and hatred. it hurts.

as a system "elder", i have to say. spend some time outside of what other people think you are. stop categorizing your human experiences into perfectly marketable tags that serve nothing other than to brand you as an ideology rather than a person. go outside. idk! i just want you to be happy and the internet is not the way to do that

[bunnysuitconman]

Who is Vanny ?

GREAT QUESTION! Vanny is both super interesting and we have so LITTLE TO WORK WITH

Okay so Vanessa/Vanny is kind of an interesting situation it's highly implied that she's the same tape girl you hear in Help Wanted and she "explains" how you can defeat glitchtrap but instead leads the player astray and glitchtrap supossedly locks you, or perhaps part of your mind behind that door, and gives the player a totem of himself, that little green glitchy springbonnie. supposedly do to with being able to communicate with him? In order to get some secret dialog you needed to wear the bunny mask from dreadbear and also hold the glitchtrap plush. while this came back in security breach it was just kind of touched upon in the princess quest mini game and wasn't really explored. It's the player reliving her actions so, it's curious. So, Vanessa in her previous job, in help wanted, she's doing the game development and testing. One of her co-workers actually met a pretty gnarly fate, driven mad by glitchtraps possibly first attempt at possessing someone. Jeremy, cut off his own face with a paper gillotine and went straight back to playing. Vanessa desribes it as "a halloween mask" and "spilt ink that covered the front of Jeremys tshirt" but he turned to face her before she toddled off to work so he was presumably still alive at that time before he bled out! it's really interesting to me that it might of been Glitchtrap already possessing him, or in an effort to save what was left of himself he killed himself with what was available to him because he knew glitchtraps intentions. When Jeremys duties fell to her she presumably caught on to what Jeremy saw and tried do delete glitchtrap to no avail, presumably It's generally agreed upon somewhere along the way she switched tactics from glitchtrap being attatched to her voice files and trying to sequester them so only beta testers would think to poke around in there, to straight claiming to being able to kill him but leading you to the endings where you merge with him. So she's either thought she could kill him in this act of desperation, tried it and got possessed or Glitchtrap intentionally made her explain something that leads to the players possession!

it's later shown in FNAF AR that Vanessa (now being nicknamed ness) is still working and this might overlap with the events or it's shortly after help wanted, Vanessa, or atleast Glitchtrap controling vanessa is triggering the flagging system because she's searching for disturbing things that could be gently explained away or atleast is by Luis from the IT team. not too too much is happening it's just glitchtrap either in her body or in the system on her account looking up alot of stuff. especially things like, torture! which maybe agony or remnant factors into it? agony is a book only concept that i'm not overtly familliar with. Remnant extraction though is one side, perhaps wanting to know how exactly objects get possessed he's seeking to understand more. who knows!

Somewhere along the way Vanessa gets a position at the security team dispite a lack of experiance, if i remember right internal messages in SB describe her interest in the position as odd. but eventually she's basically one of the few humans on the nightshift, or one of the few humans that works there period, fazcorp having pushed to replace majority of human staff with STAFF bots presumably to cut costs, and possibly even straight murdering a whole portion of the staff! since the staff meeting "party" looks like it's been trashed, in the place where endo's rome around. it Also gives Vanessa a whole lot of free range to do what the hell she likes, including somewhere along the way killing atleast 9 kids! You know we don't actually know much about what she was doing with Glitchtrap? which is one of the major failings of Security breach, Burntrap was just down in the basement, she even had her own set up there with a bed! we're just left to think that she's been wringing out these kids to, feed him maybe? continue his legacy? Vanny is supposedly hacking into these bots and taking control of the pizza plex to, possibly rebuild burntrap? who knows if it's a design feature or not but i do find it an interesting aspect that burntrap might possibly be a bit of a ship of theasus in that he has aspects like nightmare claws that he wouldn't previously have, casing that doesn't belong to him. I'm kind of a fan of the idea he was going to "take over" Glamrock bonnie before things went astray somehow. people love the theroy that bonnie fought back, it's implied that all of the bots were under some kind of programming that brought them down to the basement! they all may have participated in those murders! and, vanny just kind of peters out a little? she appears now and then in the game but she isn't much of an actual threat. Vanessa doesn't do much either, there are nixed onesided conversations that i love, and she has some absolutely unhinged unused animations, she could of been a fantastic stalker character thoughout the game but they couldn't get her working.

it's more than likely that Vanny in SB as it is doesn't have much agency over her actions given what we're shown, while previously she was the reluctant follower who seeminly went along with things convincing herself it'll be "fun" supposedly not yet having killed, she's graduated to full mind domination were she doesn't have much agency over her actions and supposedly it's more william afton in Vanessas body than Vanessa having a secondary persona in Vanny i don't really know how to feel about it honest, i like her being reluctant but still getting dragged further inwards into this horrible plan even though i haven't an idea what glitchtrap wants to do other than be inside of other people. I can deal with a partial posession deal of Glitchtrap borrowing her body i would just like it to be more, developed! There is also this element that i partially like to incorperate that is more tangential but because Vanessa is searching all of these disturbing terms, she gets sent to corperate therapy and i'm still a beliver that it's all Vanessa, i don't know how the idea that it's both vanessa and gregory alternating and gregory is a kid hacker holds up and what is were, there might be book lore there i don't know. But the therapy discs state that Vanessa had participated in a divorce court case where she was coached by her dad to testify against her mother, and this was rather traumatic for her, she's consistantly shown as more, shrinking and soft spoken in these tapes that she wants to be a good girl. "I can't talk about this. He said he would always be watching. He could be here or there or anywhere in between" in cd 11, and the therapist is connecting it to her father when we can glean it's really about glitchtrap, and Vanessa explains that she's "compartmentalized him. He's locked away." like she's trying her best to manage and damp down him for Glitchtrap to only leak out in ways she doesn't understand. She's making her bunny costume in that same tape. I personally like to say that glitchtrap is actively using his own memories of his messy divorce and possible court proceedings and coaching of elizabeth to testify against her own mother. Vanny being this replacement for elizabeth, a favourite child, his daughter, Baby showed this malicious intent, both wanting to murder william for leaving her and also this, strange idolization of her father. Maybe william desires that back? hard to say. i like a father daughter dynamic between them in any case! Anyway, vanessas therapists keep on dying. like she burns though five of them and they keep getting mangled. I'm of the opinion that the tapes that we don't hear vanessas voice may be her possessed. the very last tape may even have her murdering her therapist there and then after she's confronted that the therapist had found out that she lived a relatively normal life and her parents are still together because william doesn't want his programming breaking. All in all, i love vanessa/vanny, she's seriously fantastic but she's also SO underused that the broadness of her character in SB is really unfortunate.

Also it's kind of weird that in the PQ ending or the burntrap ending where she's released from glitchtrap she's kind of, instantly forgiven in the narritive, you did some shit girl go to jail

[sophieinwonderland]

A Long Road Ahead And The Usefulness of the Tulpa Label

I try to be a goal-oriented person. As a long-term goal for the community, I believe we need to fight for plural acceptance. But getting there is going to be hard. We will get there, but we have to be strong, we have to be smart, and we have to be united. How quickly we can make this dream a reality will depend on our actions.

Scientific Validation

This is going to be a big point in gaining validation for all plural systems. Not just in syscourse, but from the general public. And the tulpa community is really the only non-spiritual endogenic community being studied today.

There are other very broad studies into "multiplicity" that might include endogenic systems. But these aren't specifically into endogenic systems. If the Stanford tulpa study shows neurological differences from singlet controls, this will be a huge boon for the endogenic community gaining acceptance.

I don't know for certain what the result of that study will be. It could be nothing. But right now, dismantling the narratives around tulpamancy is integral for being able to disseminate these studies and use them as evidence if they do show affirmative evidence. Because anti-endos will try to claim the science itself is offensive as a way of plugging their ears and silencing people. (I've already seen this multiple times when they're presented with studies into tulpamancy.)

And if people believe them, they'll feel uncomfortable sharing the research.

It won't matter what the science shows if nobody is out here actually sharing the science and spreading it around. It would be as good as if there were no studies to begin with.

Visibility

The tulpa community exists in this unique niche. Google "sentient imaginary friend" right now and see what you find.

All of the top results are about tulpamancy. And that's great. So many systems initially come into the tulpa and plural communities by researching imaginary companions, ourselves included. The fact that we've monopolized the concept of the sentient imaginary friend means that the tulpa community can provide a gateway to the larger endogenic and plural communities.

If a divide exists between these communities, it would severely inhibit our ability to introduce new systems to the plural community. "Thoughtform" doesn't have the same connotation. Terms like parogenic and willogenic are only going to be found after you're already searching for system communities. But the problem is that most systems don't because they don't realize that they're systems.

Obviously, the visibility for the individual system is great because it gives them words to describe their experiences and validates their headmates as real.

But it's also great for the plural community as a whole because more plurals means more normalization of plurality. Which brings me to...

Propagation

Like I've talked about before, tulpamancers have spent over a decade cultivating resources. We have the most advanced and detailed guides in the plural community for headmate creation. For prospective systems who want to create headmates, the best resources for them are tulpamancy resources. None of the alternatives offer the resources the tulpa community does, not just for headmate creation but even other plural skills like inner world immersion, imposition, switchingand partial possession.

And like with the visibility, this is not only important for the individual system but also for the community as a whole.

If someone is a prospective system, it's in the plural community's best interest to give them access to the best resources to create headmates. The more efficient the process is and the less questioning they have to do, the more likely it is they stick with the process instead of giving up.

Every prospective system who doesn't make it through headmate creation is one less plural in the world. And the more plurals there are, the more normalized plurality can become in society, and the more power the plural community will have.

Conclusion

I'm not here to tell people that they're wrong for not identifying as tulpas. That's a personal choice. But the community pivoting away from that label is not going strengthen the plural community. It will only weaken us.

Supporting the tulpa community is incredibly important to supporting the endogenic community and plural rights.

This is the strategic choice. This is the best path for the plural community on our road to acceptance.

The anti-endo and "endo-critical" community wants to divide us. They want to take away our power. They want to silence us. And they would love nothing more than for more people to be "pro-thoughtform, anti-tulpa" because they win if we're fighting amongst ourselves. They win by being able to distance endogenic systems from the science that supports us.

And know that this will only last a decade or so until a strong thoughtform community forms, and they have to make up lies to shut that community down too. It's the classic anti-endo move when they're scared.

Don't believe for a moment their promises that any labels you use won't be targeted. It's not like we haven't seen this already with anti-endos recently pretending the word "endogenic" is ableist, and pushing the repeatedly-debunked lies claiming that "system hopping" is stolen from RAMCOA survivors.

[circulars-reasoning]

I’m really happy you’ve been able to call yourself pro-endo now. If you don’t mind answering this, I was wondering: there’s folks out there that argue you can’t be pro-endo if you don’t support Tulpamancy. What are your thoughts on that? I’m on the fence about Tulpamancy.

First, I’m happy I can too. It’s been a long time coming, haha!

Second; that’s a pretty nuanced topic! For the record, I’m anti-Tulpa as a term, but not the concept of focusing to create alters/parts/headmates/what have you. I think the term is not a good one for people to be using unless it directly reflects the original concept that was bastardized from Tibetan Buddhism (which, having looked over that practice briefly, I don’t feel fits the ‘plurality’ label the same way other forms of systems do).

I believe one can be pro-endo without being pro-appropriation. Pro-endo means that you believe in endogenic plurality, and has an added definition in my eyes of supporting the community (however that may look like). For me, it supports the community far more to change the language being used to be more conscious of past flaws in language. For instance, people moved away from ‘healthy multiplicity’ as they realized the potential ableism and negative connotations of the label. I see no reason why, in likely a long couple years, Tulpamancy can’t change as well. There’s plenty of people trying to shift that language now, many of whom are endogenic — it would be ridiculous to suggest that those endogenic systems, who often fight for their right to exist, somehow cannot be pro-endo at all due to that singular belief.

I hope that makes sense!! If you’re on the fence about supporting Tulpamancy, I would suggest researching the Tibetan Buddhist practice (I would suggest the use of search terms like sprul pa, tulku, and nirmankaya, and research into the eightfold path and enlightenment — this is a white person’s post commenting on the practice, and I am NEVER going to do it justice. If I’ve said something incorrect here, please let me know, those who know better than I).

Side-note: I feel it really is not my place to speak to tulpamancy. The times I do are when it relates to myself (such as, if I am "valid" as a pro-endo if I do not support tulpamancy as a term). I may have created alters, but from what I've been told by others, the process of creating Debra was nothing like the process of creating a Tulpa. As such, I can't give advice on how to do it.

[cripplerage]

Sex ed starts far too late in a child's life, in my opinion. School systems rely too heavily on the concept that a kid's parent will pick up the slack in education on far too many areas.

Idealy I'd love to live in a world in which sex ed occurs in Grade 1 all the way through to Grade 12; each year reminding, increasing and building upon last year's content.

At the very least, children of all ages should know about consent, boundaries, hygiene, the basic anatomy and names for genetalia, the basics of lgbt+ stuff, and childrens rights and where to go if those rights are being denied.

By grade 10, I'd love for kids to be properly educated on queer identities and history, nonmonogamy, porn, sex work, masturbation, sex toys, kink, sex (inclusive of various genetalia combinations and disability inclusive,) STDs, pregnancy, abortion, protection and sexual assault. In no particular order. Grade 11 and 12 would be for revision, discussion, and Q&As. (Where I live, grade 10 is when kids can drop out which is why that's the cap)

I also think everyone should be taught about symptoms or situations that you might not talk about because you assume it's normal, or you're embarrassed, or you just didn't notice it, and what to do if you do notice it. (UTIs, STDs, intersex things, PCOS, endo, etc.)

And no, I don't mean we should be teaching kids everything about everything.

For example, teaching about kink can just be "This is the definition of kink. There are lots of diferent kinds of kink. Communication, consent and boundaries are very very important, here are some warning signs of what might be an unsafe kink environment or partner. Also, here are some relatively common kink things that can potentially be harmful (e.g. strangling) this is what you need to know to make an informed decision and to make it as safe as possible, if the time ever comes."

Teaching about sex toys can just be "These are the diferent kinds of sex toys and what they do, make sure to clean them regularly."

I think if this gets seen by more than like, 3 people, I could get a lot of heat for this but as someone who was raised in a bunch of scenarios in which this kind of education would have been almost lifesaving to me, I don't see why everyone seems to want to teach kids as little as possible. We all know that teens and young adults are learning and doing this stuff, but we all seem to want them to learn from tik tok or something. Anyway, I'm happy to elaborate on anything and I'm very interested in discussions.

[sophieinwonderland]

I think smonk-wonk makes some decent points, but to be honest, anti-endos need to accept that the word / term "tulpa" isn't going away at this point as it has been in use for too long and is too popular. 15-20 years ago maybe, but not now. Good or bad, it's here to stay. The best the tulpamancy community can do at this point is just explicitly state that they are distancing themselves from buddhism (which they have for a long time). It's honestly just anti-endos trying to justify fakeclaiming.

Yup.

I also firmly believe that cultures is something that should be shared, and that policing the sharing of culture will ultimately create more division.

There are some cases where I believe taking from other cultures can be harmful, such as in cases of colonizers stealing from those they've colonized. But largely, I don't think people have the right to police what aspects of culture others can use. And if you give ground on something like this, it only emboldens them to go further.

If they convince people tulpagenic systems are appropriating a culture, how long until they decide fenigenic systems are too, since the name originates from the greek phoenix?

As ridiculous as that would sound, I remember an anti-endo I argued with a while back arguing that godspouses were appropriative for marrying Norse gods, when that religion is completely open. Some of the r/systemscringe fools were claiming I shouldn't mention Tartarus in a conversation because we're not Hellenists. And I've seen queer exclusionists try to claim Faegender is appropriating Irish culture.

While there are circumstances where cultural appropriation is real and harmful, we also need to acknowledge that the concept is being weaponized by exclusionists with the intent of hurting other marginalized groups.

In the end, that's what the anti-tulpa narrative is really about.