#fake moon landing conspiracy believers

[hometoursandotherstuff]

[cringevalue]

eddie is a conspiracy theorist who regularly tries to convince steve that the moon landing was faked solely to get children's hopes up and make them want to become astronauts when they rgow up and eddie is just angrrynbecause his father woud not allow him to go to space camp when he was seven and he's taking it out on the rest fo hte world.

"dude, it was eral"

"thats what they WANT YOU to believe, stev ie. stevie stevie stevei"

"eddie why would they fake it just tp trick kids??"

"to fund the industry, duh"

"???"

"the ASTRONUGT INDUSTRY"

[gergthecat]

I just saw a TikTok video asking the comment section what conspiracy theories they believe in.

The responses included:

The butterfly effect

Reincarnation

Aliens (no specifications of whether the “conspiracy” was that they are being hidden from us by the government, the concept, or the probability of their existence)

Red string theory

Quantum Immortality/Suicide

Alternate realities/reality shifting

That companies make their products easier to break to we have to buy them more

Ghosts

Y’all…

These aren’t conspiracy theories.

[veryhungrycaterpillarr]

anyway space travel is one of the coolest things we've ever done as humans and if you don't see the wonder in these images then i don't know if there's any hope for you 🪐

[andrewmnyard]

my dad’s got a friend named george who’s really into conspiracies so now my equivalent of ‘that sounds insane’ is ‘oh yeah? you hear that from george?’

[pynkhues]

Do you think Channing Tatum is a good actor?

I guess it depends on your definition of good? I enjoy him in comedies and think he's got a better sense of comedic timing than a lot of his contemporaries have/had which is why he's probably one of the more successful men of the crop of actors he came up with. I think the role I've liked him best in was probably Hail, Caesar? But honestly, I think that movie's underrated in general.

I'm guessing this ask has been prompted by Fly Me to the Moon which interestingly makes it seem like he's been cast as the straight man to other people's funnier roles. I'm mmm, curious to see how it goes? It's got a bit of an odd cast and the tone's not working for me in the trailer. I'll probably see it though when it comes out since I go to the cinema every week anyway.

[butchsquatch]

i for one am glad they cancelled inside job

[bbbbbbbbatman]

you know that post that's like the best way to deal with conspiracy theorists is to suggest an even wilder conspiracy (ex. "did you know the moon landing was faked?" "you believe in the moon?")?

well that but with tim and bernard. every time bernard gets a little too close to the bat secret, tim suggests something insane and then goes to great lengths to find (or occasionally manufacture) evidence for his stupid theory.

-----

bernard: okay hear me out, what if the second robin came back to life and is now red hood

tim: okay but what if red hood is actually joker from a different dimension where he didn't go mad and his life of crime escalated?

-----

bernard: i think the youngest robin might actually be blood-related to batman

tim: maybe the youngest robin is a literal demon that batman summoned and bound to him

-----

sometimes he goes a little too deep down the rabbit hole and manages to convince himself of his theories. And, on one notable occasion, one of theories actually turned out to be true and helped solve a case.

[th3-c0rps3-r0gu3]

Y/n: *was having a normal conversation but it's now this* if you one up conspiracy theorists then they won't know what to do.

Y/n: "tHe MoOn LaNdInG wAs FaKe"

Y/n: so your one if those guys who believes in the moon?

Natasha: why must I love you?

[prigorie]

For my non-Romanian followers, here's why you might see Romanians on social media losing their minds:

(Context: we have a semi-presidential state and a 2 round presidential election system. if nobody has above 50% in the first round, the two candidates with the most votes go in the second round, 2 weeks after the first. in a spectacularly stupid move, we also have the parliamentary elections on the 1st of december (the romanian national day) (right between the 2 rounds of the presidential elections))

until the counting of the votes was finished, literally every poll showed the current prime minister (marcel ciolacu) (a corrupt idiot) to be on the first place. the second place was being fought for by:

1. elena lasconi - leader of the usr party (centre-right liberal)

2. george simion - leader of the aur party (far-right nationalist populist)

surprise suprise! the first place was won with over 2M votes by călin georgescu, an independent candidate. he's an ultra-nationalist, anti-eu, anti-nato, pro-russia, openly supported the legionarists (romanian fascists), openly believes in bizarre conspiracy theories (water is not h2o, the moon landing was fake, coke and pepsi have microchips, coronavirus isn't and was never real). this is doubly insane because another candidacy (diana şoşoacă) was invalidated by ccr due to her statements that opposed constitutionary values

the second place was won by lasconi, at a difference of 2740 votes from ciolacu

since monday, there have been anti-fascist and pro-democracy protests all over the country

today/yesterday (thursday), the constitutional court (ccr) decided that the votes will have to be recounted until friday at 14:00. this is an insane deadline and everyone in the country except ccr thinks so. also, independent observers aren't allowed, and we still don't know what will happen if the order of the candidates will change. ciolacu announced that he will step down from the race even if it turns out that he got 2nd place. the options are: re-do the 1st round, go forward with georgescu vs lasconi, go forward with georgescu vs ciolacu. i sincerely hope that an automatic georgescu win isn't an option. this confusion also comes after one of the 14 (!!!) candidates stepped down days before the 1st round and announced his support for lasconi but the ballots were already printed and the votes for him counted.

I'm sure I'm missing a lot of things because this has been a frankly insane week. Romanians, feel free to add whatever you want

tl;dr: the romanian public institutes are profoundly undemocratic

[foldingfittedsheets]

Oh. The Russian lady in my training class thinks the moon landing is faked and was asking which conspiracy theories we believe.

[my-castles-crumbling]

Sirius and James would absolutely go hard about conspiracy theories (lizard people, fake moon landing) not because they believe them, but because it would drive Remus and Regulus insane.

[evilwickedme]

I said I'd never do jumblr content again and yet here I am because this keeps coming up and it's like the only thing I can think about. That said I will not hesitate to turn off reblogs if y'all are horrible in the notes again, and be warned that I will be blocking anybody who supports any of the theories I mention immediately

There is no such thing as a conspiracy theory that isn't antisemitic. There is no such animal

Antisemitic conspiracy theories go back thousands of years. The ones that still have the most hold on culture to this day are the blood libel, and the protocols of the elders of zion

The blood libel was an accusation that would be brought against Jewish populations in Europe often but especially around Passover claiming that we were killing Christian children for ritual purposes, usually to use their blood for baking matza or other nonsense (it is important to me that you know that this is nonsense. It is horrible and damaging but also to the core a ridiculous lie that never at any point made any sense. They just didn't care). Debatably this trope is present in the merchant of Venice. Undebatably Jews were killed because people did and still do sincerely believe this

The protocols of the elders of zion is a fictitious document published in Russia at the very beginning of the 20th century, supposedly detailing the meetings of the Jewish people who secretly run the world. The protocols were almost immediately proven to be a rip off of another document - ah, plagiarism - but that hasn't stopped antisemites from embracing it wholeheartedly (special thanks fuck you to Henry Ford for publishing them in his newspaper, spreading it across the USA). It built on previous antisemitic tropes, from the greedy banker trope (Jews were forced to be money lenders in medieval Europe as it was forbidden in Christianity and Jews weren't allowed to join any guilds, preventing them from making money in any other capacity - the reason why there are so many Jews in Hollywood is identical, but in the early 20th century) to the concept of dual loyalty (i.e. Jewish are loyal to ourselves above all else and cannot be trusted to be loyal to the country where we live, see: modern trope that every Jew is probably loyal to Israel and the subsequent idea that it's okay to ask every single diaspora Jew how they feel about Israel immediately upon meeting them). It's also worth noting that the word cabal, used to denote the shadowy organizations that supposedly control the world, comes from kabbala, which is Jewish mysticism

The idea of lizard people, created by a guy literally named Icke because he is a gross human being, was designed to repackage the antisemitic shadow cabal concept to be supposedly more palatable

Most qanon theories also build on all of this, such as world leaders preying on children (remember pizzagate?)

But more importantly conspiratorial thinking always positions you as the good guy standing against a mysterious "them", an other which is influencing things behind the scenes. The Jew is the ultimate other, and specifically an other that supposedly forms a shadowy world government, controlling everything and yet somehow not managing to get rid of antisemitism (see: protocols of Zion, lizard people, we control Hollywood and the government which is of course conspiring against you). There is no way to decouple the idea of an evil shadowy organization (usually also referred to as a cabal to really hammer it in) from antisemitism and antisemitic tropes

And this means that even supposedly "harmless" conspiracy theories attract antisemites and train people who aren't necessarily rabid antisemites to confirm those kinds of biases. Obviously Qanon and lizard people are antisemitic, but what does the moon landing have to do with Jews? Well, it was Hollywood and the government that faked it, obviously. Hell, even the conspiracy that Taylor Swift is secretly a lesbian and is either still secretly dating or is exes with Karlie Kloss is riddled with antisemitism -

Okay so I need to explain my position on this because I fucking hate this conspiracy theory, and the fact that most people simply won't acknowledge that that's what it is. Firstly, Taylor Swift has stated that she is not gay or considers herself an ally at least three times off the top of my head, and specifically denied that she was dating Karlie Kloss. Secondly, outing people is wrong. Thirdly, the conspiracy theory hinges on the idea that she would be risking her career by coming out, except that she's proven that basically no controversy can come in the way of her career, she's already "come out" as an ally, donated to glaad and the equality act, promoted queer musicians & artists & designers (there was a song in the reputation tour that was dedicated to a gay designer every single night of the tour). So what's stopping her from coming out at this point? Mysterious forces, clearly. The antisemitism in that I've already explained, but also the virulent antisemitism among Kaylor shippers aimed at her husband and at the fact that she converted to Judaism is fucking disgusting

Again: even a supposedly harmless conspiracy theory leads to antisemitism and attracts antisemites

A few years ago I tried to rewatch white collar cause I remembered really enjoying that show as a preteen and after around a season I just couldn't stand it anymore, because all I wanted to do was jump into the universe and yell at Mozzie to shut the fuck up because these conspiracy theories were barely presented as a joke and never challenged even once by any of the characters. When I rewatched that 70s show it also fucking sucked, but at least it wasn't showing up in every single episode. The blacklist focuses entirely on a literal Cabal, that's what they're called

This stuff is so normalized and it's fucking everywhere and it's exhausting. Jews are to this day being murdered over this. I can't change the world by myself, unfortunately, but if you don't have a specific person to blame for your troubles, shut the fuck up. Just shut up. There is no conspiracy against you. Sometimes life just sucks. Or definitely does for the Jews who get shot at over this shit

Again, I'll be blocking anybody who parrots this bullshit in the comments but especially fucking gaylors y'all are one of the main reasons that being a fan of Taylor Swift's music is fucking unbearable. Just accept you can connect to music made by somebody different than yourself it's not that difficult of a concept

[teaboot]

quick question: i'd like you to explain how the conspiracy theory of the moon landing being fake is "Frustrating, but understandable". understandable being the worrying part of the sentence, of course. Also, how is science... half a liar?

This post, for context, asked, "if your spouse believed in one of these conspiracy theories, which one would you be least bothered by?"

My response was, essentially, breaking down what kind of thought process would have to exist in order to believe in these conspiracy theories,and then explaining why I personally thought one was less harmful than another.

The idea of the moon landing being fake, to take your example, shows tht someone doesn't trust the government and doesn't belive space travel is scientifically possible. The government has lied about things before, and space travel is difficult and scary, so I can understand how someone might believe this conspiracy theory. They would be wrong, but I understand how they might come to that conclusion,and I find it to be a less-harmful fallacy than, say, believing aliens built the pyramids, which implies sooooo many other, less-harmless beliefs and biases. Between the two, I would be less upset about the moon idea.

Second, what I wrote was, "Earth is flat: Trendy but stupid. "The government and science are both liars". Half points for being half right". I assume this is what you are referring to. This was a joke, saying "if you were to say that the government and science were both liars, you would receive 1/2 points for accuracy, because only one of those things would be true." I was saying that the government lies to the populace, but science isn't fake.

The unsaid part of my response was that understanding why someone might believe a lie is very different from believing a lie yourself.

I understand why someone with zero education in science, geography, history, or mathematics might look at an empty field and believe the earth is flat. They'd be wrong, and I know why they'd be wrong, but I get how they might come to that conclusion.

[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.

[beardedmrbean]

My mom has really gotten into conspiracy theories and now sincerely believes that no one went to the moon. Nothing she says can change my mind but it’s super annoying to hear her talk about it. We even saw a real moon rock in person last summer!

I've watched hours of stuff with people trying to explain that we never went to the moon.

Biggest tell that we actually did it is that nobody that worked on the project ever said otherwise, someone from the inner circle would have said something.

That and I refuse to call Buzz Aldrin a liar

Trying to think where you might have been to see and touch one, Air and Space Museum and the Saturn V complex at Kennedy Space center are the main places, National Cathedral in DC has one in their "Moon Window"

That little black dot in the middle of there is a moon rock that was brought back too.

One in San Diego at their air and space museum, Johnson Space Center (Houston) USAF museum in Ohio has my guess about where you went since Ohio isn't real either.

But seriously though, we have pictures that both Russia and China took of the different landing sites and even the Soviet Union didn't say it was fake which they were our competition in the space race, they'd have wanted to prove it fake if they could.