#does this count as syscourse?

[iwillbreakyourfuckingskull]

just thoughts on the living openly as a system if it was safe or choosing to present as a non-system/singlet:

For me, it would depend on what openly means. Would it just mean that I can be open whenever I want to with no prejudices and only share who's fronting if I feel like it? Or does it mean that I would always share who's fronting, co-con, co-fronting, blurry, ect? Because the first one sounds ideal and the latter sounds fucking horrible. Hell, we don't even know who's there most of the time and that's probably on purpose. That's kinda the deal with CDDs, ya kno?

All that I personally want is for any type of plurality to be seen as just a thing that some people are. In an ideal world, other people would be open to experiences foreign to themselves. They'd not be scared when they hear terms like DID or "split personality disorder". They'd not be xenophobic when hearing about someone's cultural/religious/spiritual plurality. They'd not be ableist, racist, or just mean to someone for having a different lived experience that is completely harmless. We are not dangerous or worth less than anyone else

So ig my personal answer to that question is that I'd just want the stigma to fuck off and to live in a kinder fucking world

[sysmedsaresexist]

DOWN WITH OKIMI AND CORINE!!!!!!

Okiimii is a gem and you're fighting a losing battle, go away

[thecataclysmic6]

Peer reviewed literature exists and is very good brain food, cannot recommend enough.

[cloverstarsys]

Woo-hoo first time an anti endo has told us to "stop faking a serious disorder 🥰" (with that emoji lmaoooo)

Add it to the bingo card/s

In all seriousness, we do not claim to have DID/OSDD or any other form of disordered plurality. In order to be "faking", we would have to claim to have DID/OSDD. You can't fake something you don't say you have. Even if everything anti-endos say was true (which it's not), that would still be a fact.

Telling someone to "stop faking" does nothing. Especially if they're not even faking to begin with. If someone thinks they're, idk, "awakening" someone to the truth of their actions by saying they're faking, that's not how that works. Faking anything is a conscious choice. It's impossible to be truly faking something unconsciously. (<-there are situations where things aren't true and you are doing something unconsciously, but faking something is separate from that, if that makes sense.)

I'll never understand why so many anti-endos say endo systems are "faking". It's literally impossible to know what's going on inside someone's head, especially in the sense of, well... being a random person on the internet. It's one thing to claim someone's faking when you know them irl (still, don't do that), it's another when all you know of them is the text they wrote on the screen.

I know all of this has been said before, but I wanted to put it out there. I do not take kindly to anti-endos invading my space. I mean, I'll just block them, but I will vaguepost about them and reiterate our stances on this.

All of this over one silly post about stealing a rq's alter pack (which, btw, we are only calling an alter pack because thats what they called it)(and, i checked, they dont have a dni, so its not like im breaking it),,,, geez.

(Banners by @/lunaridae)

[killer-wizard]

"endos dni"

People wirj endometriosis

[amazingcircus]

Richie, from IT 2017

fictive

a LOT lmao

yup i have way too many- uhh my fav's probably literally everything that happened at the clubhouse

they're cool af ✨

yeah :D they're amazing

yupp but not the best experience lol

nah i have all my mates insys i dont need more XD

uhhh from the top of my head- im ace thats a Huge difference XD and im less Loud than in source? well besides around friends but yk lol big similarity is that im ✨gay✨

yeeee :D

me 💅 /j (i love everything abt it lol but would probs say my friends :3)

the bowers gang 😒 also the stan and eds things in chap2 but we dont talk abt that 🤐

i purposefully cycled into a bush. for like. no reason. XD

ehhh kinda? my hair's longer and its tips are dyed and im a bit taller, but besides that i look basically the same

im the host ✨✨ and also an audhd holder

YES idc bout clowns no more just take me to derry 😭

kindaa? penny isnt pennying- but besides that its mostly the same? (well 35 years later but yk 💀

convinced bev to lemme buy a hawaiian shirt so that one >:3

Too Much

24/7- i just summon my sourcemates and at least im depresso w them 😔✨ (or write/read fics cuz fics are awesome :3

The Story - Conan Gray

being outside, ice-skating, cycling...

ive watched my source 14 times(+ watched the other movies at least twice and read the whole ass book) does that answer ur question

yup a lot lol

theyre cool ✨✨

if someone likes my source pls interact lol

Introject Ask Game!

We've seen a lot of these, but never one directed specifically at introjects (fictives, factives, fcktives, etc), so we decided to make one!

1. What's your name and source?

2. What type of introject are you? (Fictive, factive, etc.)

3. How connected do you feel to your source?

4. Do you have any exomemories? What's your favourite one?

5. What do you think of your source's fandom?

6. Do you have any sourcemates in your system?

7. Have you ever met any sourcemates outside your system?

8. Have you ever posted/sent a sourcecall anywhere? Did it help you find sourcemates?

9. What do you think are your biggest differences from/similarities to your source?

10. Do you like being compared to your source?

11. What's your favourite thing about your source?

12. What's your least favourite thing about your source?

13. Any funny exomemories?

14. Does your appearance differ from your source's appearance?

15. What other role, if any, do you have in the system?

16. If you could go back to the life you had in your exomemories/source, would you?

17. Does this universe differ at all from the one in your exomemories/source?

18. What's your favourite clothing item/accessory that the system owns?

19. Do you have any merch of your source?

20. Do you ever get homesick? If yes, what do you do to deal with it?

21. What songs remind you of your source?

22. What activities/things remind you of your source?

23. Do you like engaging with your source/content about it?

24. Have you ever created content related to your source? (Art, fanfiction, etc.)

25. How do you feel about doubles?

26. Talk about anything you want, relevant to rhe rest of the questions or not!

⚠️ This post is inclusive of all system origins ⚠️

[cksinsanitycontrodump]

You do not know how long I've been waiting to speak up about this as someone who lives under the USA's hEAlthcare system and under someone who doesn't take mental health seriously and as a result isn't able to even speak to a cheap online therapist, let alone get a professional medical diagnosis for anything, physical or mental and has no choice but to do extensive research and stupid online assessments

Still not gonna self-dx with any dissociative disorders, though

Also, I'm looking over this and noticing I spelled environment wrong in the comic :|

———–-•-–———

[ID: A two panel, poorly drawn black and white comic.

The first panel has a person wagging their finger dismissively with a stern expression on their face. The person says, "You shouldn't self-diagnose, it's bad! Go get an official diagnosis by a professional!"

The second and last panel has a person leaning on something, presumably the bottom border of the comic, as their hand is in the air and they have an annoyed, sarcastic expression on their face. They say, "Why, yes, because yea, everyone who self-diagnoses is in a position to see a medical expert..! They clearly have the finances for it! They're clearly in an enviro[n]ment that isn't ablest or anything!"

End ID.]

[sysmedsaresexist]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CwVXxS3tlKb/

from dude @ other mods make it do the thing

And this one

https://www.instagram.com/p/CwIHTLzI0q2/?igshid=MTc4MmM1YmI2Ng==

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cwf40sbPtHE/?igshid=MTc4MmM1YmI2Ng==

~~~~

mod signal note: i could not make any of them do the thing bc i am also, fundamentally a boomer, deep within my soul. And also its my weekend and im what the cool kids call: half asleep from seasonal allergy medication lol.

But i recommend the below instagram links that absolutely did not fucking post correctly for some reason for:

cute birb meme

cute kitty meme

hard, cold facts about reality

[planetarymetals]

woohoo! we got a bingo! :~) elaboration for all the "?"s in tags

We love filling out DID FAKER bingo cards it's so fun sjsksjjsjsjs

(some of the stuff is genuinely ableist-)

[thecircularsystem]

Well, now I understand why people syscourse. There’s just so much wrong with this that I don’t want to leave it stand.

If you’re interested in a conversation, dissociative-misinfo, I’d be happy to have one. I don’t feel like you really listened the first time, however, so… know that this post is really for everyone else to understand the flaws of your argument.

A huge misconception I saw was people comparing their claimed plurality to DID/OSDD "plurality." People with DID/OSDD are not plural. People with DID/OSDD are 1 person with severe dissociation that causes them to subjectively believe they are multiple identities/people, but the fact is that they are 1 person and 1 identity.

While this may be the physical representation of CDDs, plurality is an umbrella label. The best definition I’ve seen is “the experience of having multiple autonomous agents in one body.” Would you deny that parts, in DID, work apart from one another and have their own goals, desires, and beliefs?

I’m an individual who uses and benefits from parts language over people-based language, but that does not deny the personhood of my parts. They are no less real and significant. To say they don’t count as plurality simply because they’re parts of a whole is to deny that personhood.

There is no harm in identifying as plural, even as a system of parts. I don’t personally identify as plural, but that’s because plural is an opt-in label, and is one that I do not associate with for personal reasons. One can identify as plural and still recover from DID.

Umbrella labels such as plural contain a large population. I agree with you that most endogenic systems don’t have similar presentations of systemhood as DID systems do! But they can all be considered plural if they would like. There is no harm.

I’ll start with the argument that there's so many endos claiming the same thing, and therefore they can't all be lying. Historically speaking there are many instances of millions of people claiming an experience that is scientifically impossible or blatantly false.

How wonderful, then, that endogenic systems have not been proven scientifically impossible or blatantly false.

Take flat earthers, for example. All known science about anything relating to the earth states and proves that it is round, and yet around 10% of the US believes it is flat, among other conspiracies such as the moon landing being fake. Hell, COVID showed us just how many vaccine and illness deniers there are, almost everyone has at least 1 family member they can think of who denied it.

The roundness of the earth is a scientific fact that can be proven. We can see it from space, and have before; we can study the shadows of obelisks and see the curvature through the angles used.

Covid is a scientific fact that can be proven; it exists, we can see it under a microscope and have, and we can prove the quality of vaccines.

Endogenic plurality is not a scientific fact that can be proven, or at least, has not been proven as of yet. It is a completely subjective experience inside one person’s own head. The sheer amount of people who share that experience indicate that something is happening. They indicate that people are experiencing something.

It would be foolish to suggest that all endogenic systems are DID systems, as the majority do not display the symptoms of DID.

It would be foolish to suggest all endogenic systems are faking, for many reasons (harassment, sheer volume of individuals, length of time claimed to be endogenic, etc).

It would be foolish to suggest endogenic systems are experiencing some other disorder, as many are not dysfunctional or distressed by their plurality.

Simply put, sometimes the easiest answer is the best one. Why not just accept, “That group of people over there say they’re experiencing that, and it does me no harm to accept that”?

As for, "I'm not going to deny someone's experiences." You may not, but science does. Would you "not deny someone's experiences" if their experience was beating cancer with essential oils? Maybe you wouldn't outright, but we can both acknowledge what an outlandish and impossible claim that is. Being an 'endogenic system' when a system is a clinical term for people with DID (an inherently trauma-caused condition) is an impossible claim.

Science does not deny endogenic systemhood.

There are no studies, no articles, not even opinion essays from psychologists, which dictate that endogenic systems cannot exist. Trust me, I had been looking for years (up until I realized that I really, really, could not give less of a shit).

An endogenic system claiming to exist is not the same thing as someone beating cancer with essential oils. One is a personal experience, and one is scientifically not happening. Moreover, scientifically “outlandish” does not make something scientifically impossible; I would make sure you use the clearest language possible.

As for “clinical term…”

System is not a clinical term. At least, it hasn’t been for decades now. It’s a community term to discuss the individual parts collectively… collected. The term was taken in the early 2000s from the natural multiplicity movement — but as that happened, the usage of system took less and less prominence in CDD circles. System had grown in all circles to be an identity, rather than a medical term, and not as many people “identified” as systems.

To discount the communal nature of the term System is to discount countless of endogenic plurals from the 2000s and 2010s who had no other terminology to use. They were told they were systems with DID who did not know their trauma, because what other options were there?

Regardless. The term system hasn’t been a strictly medical term for strictly CDD systems for quite some time (or, even, ever; to see more history, I would suggest this post, along with the sources and links in the post).

(If you're going to claim plurality, that is a spiritual and personal claim, and should not involve you calling yourself a system with alters, because those are clinical terms for pwDID/OSDD, people who are not plural)

Unintentionally — or at least, I hope it was unintentional — you’ve said here that pwCDDs cannot be spiritual or have personal claims to plurality.

Again; “system” is not a medical term. “Alters” is not solely medical either. And this is coming from someone who agrees with you that it would be far better if endogenic plurals used “plural” and “headmate” preferably, to delineate experiences. But that’s not a demand I can make of thousands of people. Nor should I; to delineate that would be to out systems who have trauma based on the words they use.

What harm does it cause? If it is known that endogenic systems exist, that they are different from CDDs, and CDD symptoms are actually discussed, then what harm does it cause to identify as plural? Your entire basis here boils down to, “I don’t like that there’s no science behind it.” To which I respond, you must feel great about xenogenders, contradicting labels, and neurodivergent labels.

Another common argument I saw was comparing endogenic plurality to being transgender, a comparison that will always be offensive and upsetting to me as a trans man. Particularly the terms "sysmed" and "traumascum" I find horrifically offensive.

I have discussed at length my thoughts about sysmed and trauamscum. Thankfully the latter of those two terms has seen a sharp fall in popularity as individuals have absolutely realized how ableist it is.

I am a queer individual myself, with a multitude of gender identities, and consider myself to be under the trans umbrella. I also am frustrated when people compare plurality to gender, particularly as someone who chooses their gender.

However. It must be acknowledged that a comparison is not the same as saying, “these two things are exactly the same.” It’s saying, “there are similarities between these two things.” For instance, the similarities in that plurality and gender are both identity-based labels, meaning both are something someone chooses to identify with. Another would be that those who experience plurality openly are prejudiced against, same as those who display their genders openly.

I’m not saying that gender and plurality are the same, or even the most similar. But comparing bigotry, labeling, and community styles of behavior is not a bad thing inherently. People who are trans are allowed to feel their plurality is similar to their gender identity, and you're allowed to feel uncomfortable about that. Both can be true.

As I understand it, endogenics don't claim to have DID/OSDD. So then, why do they claim to be systems? Systems with alters, who split? A multiple system is a clinical term used for people with DID. "Sysmed" implying that being a system is a clinically defined experience is true, because being a system is exclusive to DID/OSDD. Being a system is not being plural.

This is just a repetition of your earlier point, so do we really need to rehash this?

I will say, again, sysmed is a stupid term and I think it should leave the vocabulary of all those in syscourse. Fuck sysmed as a term. All my homies hate sysmed.

As I keep reiterating, people with DID/OSDD are not plural. They are 1 person experiencing a dissociated identity that may feel like being multiple people, but is objectively not. So with 'system' being a DID/OSDD term, endogenics using it are claiming a non-plural DID/OSDD experience, and thus countering their claim to "not be a part of the DID community" or "be a separate community."

Something being objectively true does not erase what feels true. And sometimes, what feels true is better.

For me, for instance, back to the gender examples: I am, objectively, female. But what feels true sometimes is that I am male. Does that mean I am objectively not male? Does that mean I cannot claim to be male when I feel male?

If we put this in context of CDDs, then obviously, the comparison falls apart. After all, DID isn't something I "feel" like I am. It's something I have; an affliction. But plurality is not that way. Plurality is a feeling; a belief system. To say that CDD systems cannot have a belief system... Well now, you're starting to fall into some serious ableism there.

Endogenics are not claiming a plural CDD experience. They're just claiming a plural one, and they (occasionally, with rapidly decreasing popularity) use the term "system," a term which has been community based over medically based for over a decade now, closer to over two.

As far as "traumascum," I genuinely hate anyone who uses that word. Trauma scum? What has to be wrong with you to come up with a slur for people who have experienced childhood trauma and believe in the disorder caused by childhood trauma? Once again it boils down to plurality not relating to trauma or DID/OSDD, because systems are not plural. They are singular people experiencing severe dissociation.

Agreed with you on traumascum, but again, almost everyone agrees on this, regardless of their stance on endogenic systems. If you really want to rally about it, go to ActingNG and complain. They're who you're actually upset about.

Regardless, once again, plurality is something systems can identify with, and you've never identified any harm in identifying as plural.

It's currently well-known that a LOT of autistic people meet the criteria for, or are diagnosed with, (C)PTSD, and it is uncommon for autistic people to survive childhood without trauma. There's rudimentary theories that autistic people may be more likely to develop DID because of their likelihood to experience childhood trauma either due to low tolerance of negative events, and/or the normalized abuse and neglect of special needs children.

Side note, my therapist fully agrees with this, and the way my systemhood interacts with my autism is... HOO. I could go on for years.

I think with that in mind, it makes sense that being autistic might make you more prone to developing DID, but it doesn't make you mixed origin. Even if your autism is what caused you to experience trauma, the trauma is still what caused you to form dissociated parts/a system.

Cool! That does not mean people are not plural. What harm is there in an individual identifying as mixed-origin? For instance, I identify as mixed origin from time to time, when it pleases me to share that. I have a part who split during a nightmare and resurfaced when he was needed. I have two parts who split due to intentional creation. All of them are traumagenic, but knowing why they split and how has been vital to our steps towards FM. Why is it then wrong to acknowledge those origins, if it's helping me heal?

Saying your system is 'neurogenic' because your autism made you vulnerable to trauma would be like me saying my system is 'moralgenic' because my strong morals are often why my mom abused me. It doesn't make sense, and the trauma from the abuse is what actually caused the symptoms, not whatever about me caused me to be abused.

Again, very interested in your thoughts on xenogenders.

Shoutout to anyone who chooses to identify as a xenoorigin to help them better define their system. If it's helpful to you, more power to you.

And lastly a common argument I saw was people saying the endogenic community is simply nicer to them, which doesn't prove their validity, but is really sad. I personally had this experience when I was pro-endo as a kid, because anti-endos seemed so gung ho about their opinion and pro-endos had an 'accepting everyone' vibe that a child me found comforting.

Nothing is going to "prove" endogenic validity, especially not in a way that most anti-endo systems will accept. I think this should be far more of a red flag to you; the fact that so many said that the pro-endo community accepted them, that so many are pushed away from the anti-endo community due to the sheer horrendous quality of that group.

I say this as someone who was hurt immeasurably by pro-endo systems, and found more solace than elsewhere with anti-endo systems.

But then I got older and I realized why anti-endos are so adamant about endogenic systems not being a possible concept. It's because pro-endos will tell young people struggling with dissociation that their trauma wasn't enough and they must be endo, with a smile on their face. It's because endos will use our DID/OSDD terms like system, alter, split, and insert themselves into our healing spaces, with a smile on their face. It's because endos will conflate DID/OSDD experiences with dissociated parts, to the subjective and unproven experience of plurality, with a smile on their face.

Sigh.

As I got older, I realized why anti-endos are so adamant about endogenic systems not being possible. It's because anti-endos look at endogenic systems existing and rally against them. They look at adults and call them horrible, disgusting, spit in their faces, simply for daring to call themselves a system -- a term which has been community based for longer than the term "endogenic" meant "formed without trauma." It's because anti-endos are traumatized, and many of them refuse to realize they are projecting their fears and abuse onto endogenic systems, never knowing how to stop, how to heal, how to grow.

Because endogenic systems do not hurt people.

Can abusive endogenic systems hurt people? Yes! Obviously. But that does not mean every endogenic system is inherently doing the things you listed (just like how not every anti-endo does the things I listed above). And, again, I cannot express enough how I had those same exact experiences.

I just managed to not project them onto every single endogenic system.

To me, it's very reminiscent of how conspiracy theorists will tell you all about their insane beliefs but because they're kind and welcoming many people fall for it. A community being open and welcoming doesn't say anything to the validity of their beliefs. Anti-endos are more assertive because we have so much to lose in the meaning of our disorder and the danger levels of the online community (the danger being endos grooming people into their beliefs and delaying their healing, such as what happened to me), similar to how people hate COVID deniers because many of them have lost people to COVID or have the potential to lose people as a result of anti-masking and "COVID parties."

I wasn't "groomed" by endogenic systems, but I was told I was endogenic repeatedly. This led to me sticking by my abusers for far longer. This does not negate the possibility of endogenic existence. I crashed by car due to endogenic systems feeding me misinformation. This does not negate the possibility of endogenic existence. I was kicked out of the endogenic communities for not being Plural Enough, Pro-Endo Enough, Kind Enough, etc, and so forth, and so on.

And none of that negates what people are experiencing. That's just people being hurt, and newsflash, traumatized people will get hurt, regardless of what origins the person has, if any, who hurts them.

Is there value in discussing the problems with the online community of endogenic systems on tumblr? Absofuckinglutely, and I do so often. But that doesn't negate what people are experiencing, and doesn't somehow prove that endogenic systems don't exist. It honestly just speaks to me how horrible syscourse is, and how everyone needs educated on CDDs -- something you consistently fail to do on your blog left and right, as you refuse to acknowledge the autonomy of CDD systems repeatedly, even just within this post.

LET PEOPLE FUCKING LIVE THEIR LIVES. I beg this of you.

It genuinely is not hurting us, anymore so than a normal ass person could hurt us.

I see you mention therians. You don't mind them cause they aren't medical. Neither are endogenics. Please just.... stop. Go focus on recovery -- not on endogenic systems and telling DID systems they're not allowed to be plural.

[sillyfreakx5]

I don't actually care for the common pro endo attitude of trying to "prove" that endogenic plurality is real

plurality is a label you can place on any subjective experience that you think counts as plural. it doesn't matter whether or not you can "prove" that it's real, it's an EXPERIENCE. no one else can dictate what you experience. it does not matter whether you can measure differences in brain waves, or if you could actually locate the different identities within the brain (same as it doesn't matter for proving traumagenic plurality).

(i find the potential studies on tulpamancy brain activity fascinating as a psychology nerd, but I don't think they should hold any weight in syscourse)

people experience that!!!! that's literally all that matters!!! the reason for why they experience that doesn't fucking matter!!!

i probably have this attitude due to being primarily alterhuman lol

[sophieinwonderland]

Hi, we wanted to ask why you target anti endos so much (you know, traumatized people) instead of just existing in your own space and we exist in ours? We don’t mean any harm, just a genuine question we have. Like, what’s your thought process? Can that be explained please?

Because hate and ignorance are infections and if you allow them to fester, the consequences can be disastrous.

And because, like it or not, we all share the same space...

More than ever, in such an interconnected world, separate spaces don't actually exist. There are, at best, isolated spaces where you can spread a ton of hate, but that hate is going to spill out and end up hurting people who aren't in those spaces, just as it did with Aimkid.

Or more recently, the Yaelokre server:

In my opinion, separate spaces are a myth. You can try to divide them for a time, but there will always be spillover.

Besides that... my end goal is conquering that globe.

I have this dream. A dream of a world that's aware and accepting of all types of plurality. It will be slow going and we'll need a lot of support to get there. And people need to be able to feel hope that it can and will happen.

I'm not sure how common knowledge it is in anti-endo circles, but if you've seen people saying "the future is plural," that started right here with me on this blog. (As far as I know. I suppose others could have said it first.)

But getting to that acceptance means we can't be content in staying in our own isolated corners. It's not viable for the future we want to build.

And when pondering the path to that future, one of the things I've thought a lot about is the response certain firsts will get.

If Aimkid faced such harassment just being an influencer with a moderate following for being a pro-endo traumagenic system, can you imagine the harassment that the first real celebrity to support endogenic systems, or even to come out as an endogenic system themselves, will have to endure?

What will the response be to the first scripted television show that explicitly acknowledges endogenic plurality by name as a real phenomenon? (I mean, the Chicago Med tulpa episode did that with tulpas but slipped under anti-endo radar since anti-endos don't watch Chicago Med.)

Currently, the science and opinions of doctors is overwhelmingly on the pro-endo side.

But it means nothing if that knowledge never breaches the spaces where it's needed most to correct misinformation.

For example, did you know that Stanford University funded an fMRI study into tulpamancers, taking scans of their brains during switching and possession? (Possession is a tulpamancy term for taking control of the body or part of the body without fully switching into front.)

There was an AMA a few months ago about this on r/tulpas.

The budget for the fMRI study was about $50k not counting the pay of the researchers.

This does a pretty good job illustrating how much interest there is in tulpamancy and endogenic plurality that they were willing to invest so much into this project.

And the study actually found neurological changes during possession!

But if you go into most anti-endo spaces, they'll tell you that this research doesn't exist. That not only does the science not support endogenic plurality, but that absolutely nobody is researching it because it's not real.

And they're able to claim that because they don't bother looking, never listen to the other side, and refuse to accept anything that contradicts their worldview.

These studies are real though, they're being conducted as we speak, and we're going to see far more of them in the future!

Where we are right now though, all three of the creators of the theory of structural dissociation could release a joint statement with the ISSTD that endogenic systems are real and valid tomorrow, and anti-endos would not hear about it in their echo chambers.

In short, I target anti-endos because lies will prevail wherever truth cannot breach.

[thefeathercollective]

seems we do share that opinion! just goes to show the importance of having both shared and separated spaces.

I will say though that lurking in traumagenic tags has really helped us deal with our trauma and that we've watched disordered systems discover some of the joys of being plural and even find resources to help with the disorder part through the endogenic community! most of what comes to mind is DID systems using tulpamancy guides to improve communication and build innerworlds.

the overlap between the communities makes all of us stronger, I think. plenty to learn from each other :]

thesis statement: given the information about your experiences that you have shared in your post, i think your statement of "[we] fit the DSM-5 OSDD criterion" is false. HOWEVER, i think that you should be able to explore the OSDD label anyway, whether that means that you are just using it as an identity label or using it to better understand how to treat your trauma symptoms better (this does not mean treating your plurality! this means treating your reactions to triggers and the type of dissociation that impairs your life).

but i said i was here to give you info about OSDD diagnostic labels, so let me start there first.

you might already know this, but the thing about diagnostic labels is that "clinically significant distress or impairment" is a very important, but also vague criterion that is put onto all disorders in order to label them as a disorder. even with all other criteria of a diagnostic label met, without this criterion, an individual cannot be said to fit that label. that being said, i think diagnostic labels are a very tight box that are used for very specific purposes (insurance, mainly), and can be wholly irrelevant to how a person identifies and what their personal experience is.

another thing about the OSDD diagnostic label is that it kind of is a "miscellaneous label" for clinicians to diagnose patients with a disorder when they dont totally fit the criteria for DID or something else. the purpose of the OSDD diagnostic label is for people to be able to tell their insurance, "hey, i have a mental health problem, but clinicians can't explicitly say DID, so here is a catch-all diagnostic code for you so i can prove that i need medical/mental health care." the label is specifically for disordered people to still get help, essentially.

or, it originally was. now, people have kind of taken it and made it into a sort of identity label, which, while understandable (wanting a label to understand your personal experience makes sense), makes things a little confusing as the CDD community (a population of people seeking mental health help for their disorder) collides with the endogenic plurality community (a population of people who have similar experiences regarding plurality and want to celebrate this identity)

i dont think "[your] experience fits the DSM-5 OSDD criterion, given that [you] do not experience clinically significant distress or impairment" is necessarily an accurate statement, and i think your post is a little misleading on that point.

BUT, i also think that you should have the freedom to explore the OSDD label and see if your personal experience can be fit under the OSDD umbrella, because who am i to say who can and can't claim that their experiences line up with those who have OSDD? i don't know anything about your experiences beyond what you've shared about them on one post. (1/2)

ohh I get what you're saying. yeah, I think our post (here for anyone confused) wasn't worded that well.. it does sound really weird if you take it as "we fit the label that needs distress and impairment but we don't have distress and impairment". would be like saying, I dunno, "I'm a fork but I don't have tines"

the intent of the post was more like "huh, we could be calling it osdd if not for the distress and impairment criterion"

but disorders are called disorders for a reason, I see where you're coming from.

ty for encouraging us to explore the label anyway :D! and feel free to share your views on our stance, you've got me interested :]

[blksorrows]

syscourse take:

I think faking disorders publicly does more harm than fake claiming, as someone who for years felt alienated in system communities cuz of the amount of misinformation and lying. I'd rather be told I'm lying or see someone lying be called out than see people spreading the most outlandish and false claims about DID

i kinda have a nuanced take on this, but generally, i agree with you.

while i think both things are bad, i feel like there's a bit of nuance on both sides. because in a way, fakeclaiming can be a way of spreading misinformation, especially if you're fakeclaiming someone for things like having introjects, having little to no amnesia, having a high alter count, etc.

but spreading things about DID is also a very big issue. it can lead to a lot of problems with ones self, but also, some misinformation can be used to harm others (take "system hopping", for example. lots of stories online of that idea being used to harm others.), things like misinformation can entirely lead people down a rabbithole of self-doubt/self-destruction, mistaking their symptoms, etc.

but fakeclaiming isn't... that serious in my opinion. it's still a shitty thing to do, but it's not that big of a deal, at least not to me. a stranger on tumblr dot com saying "you don't have DID" doesn't really bother me. and i will forever believe that if it does bother you, then you likely shouldn't be in these specific spaces.

hopefully this all made sense.

tl-dr; i agree with you but there's a little nuance in my opinion.

[syscourse-shmiscourse]

I’d argue that all plurality is so under researched and underrepresented in psychology, that bringing ANY science into the “are endos real” discourse is about as useful as arguing about what some niche dinosaur may have looked like. Does bringing science in help? Yes, of course it does! It always will! But acting like science is going to be some instant and immediate “See, here’s proof!” is ridiculous (plus there’s the fact that saying “this scientific article proves-” about anything is extremely anti-science as no article or study can “prove” anything but I don’t think anyone’s ready for that conversation yet) because at the end of the day, 90% of the argument isn’t about science. It’s about morality and the human nature of “If I do not understand something, I am scared of it or perceive it as a threat”.

Anon I 2000% agree with you (and sorry for taking a couple days to respond)! We actually typed up this post specifically because of this issue in system spaces. It's something people don't like to keep in mind because in areas of discourse, we've found it's mostly that people want objective experiences (things we can measure and identify with absolute certainty) as opposed to subjective experiences (personal experiences that may or may not be quantifiable in science). Which honestly blows my mind because while things we can measure and count are 100% important, the subjective experience is so fascinating and I wish that syscoursers kept that in mind with good faith.

Have a wonderful day <3

[ellipse-society]

Can we please stop it with the tit for tat behavior in syscourse? All it will do is make things worse. And I know it's easy to go to well they hurt me so I should hurt them back but guess what with all likelihood someone who is willing to hurt you in the first place is likely to hit back as well when you attack. Both sides of syscourse are in a "but they did it first" stalemate because no one can remember who threw the first punch anymore and both sides perpetuate the same behavior by continuing to do it. You stop the behavior coming from your side you stop a decent amount of the justification the other side has to continue doing it.

And yes there will still be nasty people on both sides who are pro-harassment but you just block and move on. I can't count the number of times that I've seen "but the other side did it first" as a justification. It's petty. The other side did something that was wrong so rise above it don't stoop to their level. I know what the other side does to you hurts but all doing it back does is make more people on both sides hurt. If someone hurts you they don't need to be in your life even as a victim of the same behavior they do.