quoigenic-anon

[quoigenic-anon]

Who was going to tell me endo-safe-block-list is still here and posting.

How sad it is that they actually sometimes post decent warnings, but it's 1 okay post for 10 stupid BS.

[quoigenic-anon]

To be honest, I see it as irony, poking fun at yourself. Whether it's healthy or not, depends on a person. I'm rather a (sort of stable?) person with humour as coping mechanism, so it doesn't hurt me if I do it on myself. Can't talk for others.

I think it's mostly about stupid reasons for fakeclaiming, from common to rare.

Can't say if it's completely harmless. Some people might not get it and see it as real fakeclaiming? I don't know, really, I suggest it as a possibility.

And I think I would dosuch a post, as for me it's really only ironic and nothing else.

one trend i've seen on multiple social media platforms among systems is listing what alters would get you fakeclaimed and why.

i'm very blurry today so very mixed feelings. but i wanted to ask.

what do you think about this trend/meme? is it harmless or not? what message do you find being conveyed from such posts? would you create such a post yourself?

[quoigenic-anon]

heterophobia is not the outlier there. the anti willo anon doesn't think that fatphobia is legit, they think it's as ridiculous as heterophobia and willophobia. that's why it's mentioned. that was an attack on fat people as much as anything.

Oh. I kinda forgot they're fatphobic, oops. Felt the vibe, but didn't get it fully.

Anyway, my post still stands! We gotta fight all of these kinds of discrimination.

[quoigenic-anon]

I hate how people don’t take willophobia seriously. It’s just as bad as fatphobia and heterophobia

(I got this ask 2 days ago, but I didn't see it. I have an idea who could send it (considering possible context), so the tag is here. I'll just take this ask as a general thing.)

Tbh, quite baffled by comparisons picked, but whatever. Fatphobia bad, homophobia bad, transphobia bad, heterophobia bad.

In syscourse though, with appearing of anti willo stance (caused mainly by a certain anon), there's now actually more awareness about it, I think. A lot of people now express their support towards willogenic plurality, make accent on it. And it's great! More awareness about different kinds of plurality and their unique experiences!

But created and endogenic plurality were so often considered as one inseparable thing (reasonable with "other than trauma" part, but traumawillos also exist, yeah) that this separation is... Quite a new narrative. Like, how did we even get here. It was just "anti endos vs pro endos (and wider spectrum of stances)" about validity of non-traumagenic plurality, what the heck? Why is there now a branch of "is created plurality valid", if system community hasn't come to agreement about the bigger topic yet?

There's still controversy about non-traumagenic plurality.

But what's even more important, there's still a lot of huge controversies about subcultures in society outside of Tumblr. Queer, otherkin, plural - these parts of identities are still not safe from judgement, harassment and damage. Disabled people, fat people, POC - they're also not safe.

Willophobia is just a drop in the sea of lack of acceptance and freedom.

Your personal struggles with different not accepted parts of you are very important, still. Keep speaking up about issues that worry you.

[quoigenic-anon]

How does syscourse impact your day-to-day life, if at all?

Depends on what you mean by "syscourse impact".

Short answer: not really.

Longer answer: sometimes I get upset about fakeclaiming, ignorant and stubborn people, but not in personal "oh nooo what if I'm not valid" way. Instead it's "I have no respect to those who think my headmates are not real". Like, it makes me value them even more, it makes me protective.

But outside of syscourse tag? Not really. I don't participate in it on other platforms or in real life (where it's non-existent, lol). Besides some rare physical discomfort from feeling upset, it doesn't have any impact.

[quoigenic-anon]

May I get some syscourse/sysconversation asks, please?

I have two drastically different headmates, confusing origins of plurality, I most probably have undiagnosed ADHD and autism, and I'm Russian. I dunno, you can do anything with this information.

Also, please no silly asks about favorite food/pokemon/other things. This blog is specifically for syscourse, but you can send silly asks on @dreamworld-creature.

[quoigenic-anon]

Using this as a warning to anyone else who may have gotten similar asks: If someone is coming into your inbox saying there was a study done on something that proved this thing but doesn't link or even name the study they are talking about, be skeptical about that. Especially if there's other red flags (like the ones I listed below) indicating it is not a real study.

So, I got an anon in my inbox today, claiming to be a participant in a study that was soon to be released. The ask claimed that it did a survey and brain scans on CDD systems, endogenic systems, created systems, and a healthy control group- and the brain scans found that CDD systems and endogenic systems had signs of multiple consciousnesses, but created systems appeared 'practically identical' to the control group. The ask then says that the researchers concluded that created systems are not possible in any way.

So, I'm going to put it bluntly: this claim of a study existing is complete bullshit. For a few reasons why:

A. If there was a study like this happening... it would be being talked about. Studies like that take a lot of planning and reviews (not to mention money for funding) before they're actually conducted. Plus they need to be peer reviewed before they are at the stage where they are 'about to be published' in any reputable scientific journal.

B. That's not how brain scans in general work. Even brain scans on CDDs (mainly on DID) did not show something as specific as "signs of multiple consciousnesses", and, in fact, the brain differences caused by DID are shown to have a lot of similarity to the brain differences in PTSD and BPD. I literally just did a whole research paper over this kind of thing, come on.

C. Participants in psychological studies generally do not get the full results of the study before it's even published like they are claiming to have gotten.

D. Generally, most scientific studies, including psych studies, do not speak in absolutes like they claim the 'researchers' in this study did.

E. There's multiple types of brain scans, which are used to show rather different things. Kind of difficult to believe there was a brain scan study on this when there's 0 mention of what type of brain scan is being done- which IS typically something the participant would be told, because certain types of brain scans can come with certain risks or requirements for who can safely be scanned with them. So in almost any case where a brain scan is done, it would be required to tell the person what kind of brain scan is done to properly fulfill the requirements of informed consent, which any ethical study has to do.

So yeah

Please do not come in my inbox trying to bullshit psychological studies. Or, if you're going to do that- at least understand the basics of how these studies function first.

I hope this helped if anyone else got similar asks, so that no one else falls for this kind of thing either.

[quoigenic-anon]

The thing about Tumblr syscourse (origincourse, again), as far as I can tell, is that people only read and interact with posts they want to see and users they at least tolerate.

You can bend over backwards writing a meaningful reblog breaking down every point you don't agree with. And the OP can block you and then write a vague post in "all of you ____ are stupid" style. And they will block everyone who disagrees. And they will reblog everyone who agrees with them.

And you have no active way to make a change without being accused in harassment.

Your own vagueposting won't work too! Because you're blocked by people who you want to reach. And even if you aren't, you won't be taken seriously anyways.

[quoigenic-anon]

it is ever so sad to me that people see systemhood as such a vile disease that their ideal future is everyone being a singlet.

but please remember, dear reader, that you can not persuade people who have no desire to change.

it's okay to be selfish and seperate yourself from such people.

[quoigenic-anon]

well i love a lot of your opinions!! your origin is the last thing that would make me think differently of you!! i hope your break is swell <3 :3

Thank you, anon, very much appreciated! /gen

[quoigenic-anon]

I was taking a break from syscourse (and I'm still kind of doing it!) since there's not much for me to say. But...

To be quite honest, I only wish my origin didn't affect the perception of me. It doesn't matter that much to me, my headmates are real and it stays this way.

But when my opinion, my words are immediately seen as less, invalid, not worth reading, when all my effort to explain stuff in the most respectful way is brushed off because I'm not completely traumagenic and/or non-disordered... It's disappointing.

[quoigenic-anon]

I've had to tell three newer syscoursers this today ALONE so I might as well make a general statement about it.

If you get asks from someone trying to say that willogenic systems aren't real and suggesting they're a form of transID or similar nonsense DO NOT ENGAGE. This person is a very well-known troll. They've been going for literal months at this point. The only time they stopped is when they stopped getting engagement.

But I think they're getting smarter and moving on to newer syscoursers who just don't know better yet, because all of the seasoned syscoursers have already learned this lesson. So be careful, don't feed the trolls and don't give them the satisfaction of your engagement. Y'all got better time to spend and you're not going to convince anyone, unfortunately. I appreciate all the good-faith attempts though <3

[quoigenic-anon]

stares at you so squirrel like with squirrelly intentions. 🐿

.

.

.

can i have a nut? please? OnO

[quoigenic-anon]

And it's also a result of "endos dni" actually meaning "everyone who's not traumagenic and not anti endo dni" in many cases. Which is. You know. Not that intuitive.

And kind of isolating.

I don't identify as an endogenic system. The origin of my plurality does not matter that much to me.

And yet I have to follow the "endos dni" part. Because the origin of my plurality matters to someone else more than my opinion and the plurality itself.

hashtag origincourse is stupid send post

[quoigenic-anon]

I don't identify as an endogenic system. The origin of my plurality does not matter that much to me.

And yet I have to follow the "endos dni" part. Because the origin of my plurality matters to someone else more than my opinion and the plurality itself.

hashtag origincourse is stupid send post

[quoigenic-anon]

Sorry, did not check, that's on me. Just saw the post in plural tag.

I'll stop interacting, but if you're genuinely interested in plural history, here's the coining post for plural and you can also check @/pluraldeepdive and @/sysmedsaresexist blogs as they are better than me in citing sources and retelling the history. I personally searched "plural coin" on the second blog to find the link.

Have a nice day/evening, bye.

I noticed u are anti-endos bc someone can't have a dissociative disorder without trauma, and that's true.

But what you think about just plurality? Like, not disordered ones? /genq

Non-disordered plurality is also not possible, simply because plurality inherently refers to "multiple in one body." We personally don't like plurality as a way to talk about OSDID, but it's widely used as such. Anybody calling themselves plural without OSDD/DID/UDD is either having psychosis or lying (or not remembering their trauma, but we stopped giving people the benefit of the doubt).

-Nyro

[quoigenic-anon]

Sorry to break it to y'all, but "plural" was originally coined for non-disordered plurality. Later it became an umbrella term for all "more than one" experience, both disordered and not.

For disordered plurality there was "multiple", from "multiple personality disorder" which is the old term form DID.

So, "plural" tag is really inclusive for non-disordered. And saying otherwise is incorrect.

I noticed u are anti-endos bc someone can't have a dissociative disorder without trauma, and that's true.

But what you think about just plurality? Like, not disordered ones? /genq

Non-disordered plurality is also not possible, simply because plurality inherently refers to "multiple in one body." We personally don't like plurality as a way to talk about OSDID, but it's widely used as such. Anybody calling themselves plural without OSDD/DID/UDD is either having psychosis or lying (or not remembering their trauma, but we stopped giving people the benefit of the doubt).

-Nyro