syscourse-mythbuster

[syscourse-mythbuster]

You're not immune to being the bully btw. You're not immune to being in the wrong

[syscourse-mythbuster]

One of the many perils of engaging with Internet Discourse is that sometimes you realize after the fact that the person you were responding to is a literal child who has mistaken their first big feeling about a wildly complex adult topic for an informed opinion, at which point you have to just stare wearily into the middle distance like: ah, yes, this is my cosmic punishment for having once also been fourteen and convinced I knew everything.

[syscourse-mythbuster]

Idk if anyone's posted this before but if you want a good primer on ACEs (adverse childhood experiences) please check out this online course. It's free & only 50 minutes, plus you get a certificate once you're done. I really recommend it for everyone. Especially because not many people understand dissociation and childhood trauma even though the basic information is right here.

[syscourse-mythbuster]

msg for those that harassed aspengenic

actually fuck all the people who harassed theory/aspengenic they did nothing wrong yet were harassed for doing stuff a LOT of ppl do but bc they called out a popular predator they got harassed and called terrible shit im so sad they deactivated but i understand its for their mental health WHICH IS WAYYYY MORE IMPORTTANT. idk if aspengenic deactivated i didnt check i just know theorygenic did, i will miss the posting cus they kept us entertained and also very informative and spread super important stuff, if your one of the pussies who hid in anons or sock accounts cause u know what u did was wrong; fuck you get off the internet since you are just so fucking misreable no one likes any of you

and if theory or anyone else in their system sees this somehow i hope u feel better and just know we support them, u were rlly nice and didnt deserve any of this and if u ever decide to come back we'll be there to defend u lol

whoever we are fronting idk out !!

ps: if you rlly did care about thinking they are predatory and took your bullshit accusations (which are life ruining and people killed themselves over for being falsely accused!!) you just said that shit to justify your shit. if you truly did care about calling out predators you wouldnt of harassed them into deactivating cause they called out a fucking pedophile zoophile.

[syscourse-mythbuster]

if ur going out of ur way to harass aspengenic/theorygenic your fucking pathetic and sad, what, cause you can't handle an opinion?so u have to make false accusations that are damaging in every way possible and send death threats? Actually fuck offand it's worse cause most this shit is over a ACTUAL PEDOPHILIC system being called out so no, you guys don't care about being "righteous"youre just mad cause ur favorite shitty system has been called out.

-uhhhhhh no idea tbh

[syscourse-mythbuster]

Here’s a scientific study about tulpas and non-traumagenic plurality:

We’re also waiting to see the results of the Stanford Tulpa Study, which specifically did experiments to see if there’s a difference between endogenic plurality and traumagenic plurality.

I'm going to get hate from this but I don't care at this point. Everyone on the SysCourse side of Tumblr debating whether or not someone has *specific diagnosis* is rather stupid and completely idiotic in my opinion. It's giving chronically online and jobless behavior. That shit REEKS.

If you've ever been evaluated — NOT by a therapist but if you've actually been evaluated and diagnosed, who the hell cares about what someone else is doing? ESPECIALLY on the internet where these internet people are MILES and even THOUSANDS of miles away.

I'm not gonna sit here and debate whether or not someone has DiD, BPD, etc. (Waving my index finger at you adult "systems" who attack younger systems. That's weird and a huge no-no. Why're you attacking people younger than you? That's WEIRD.)

You either HAVE it or you DON'T. Eventually, people's true colors upon "said diagnosis" will show. I sit back all the time, knowing what I know and know damn well most of y'all are bullshitting the internet.

It's hilarious.

And if most of y'all HAVE done y'alls research and shit like that and have been evaluated, everybody knows a Therapist can't diagnose someone. They can only nod, and send you somewhere to get evaluated.

Becoming medically recognized isn't the same as diagnosed. A therapist cannot diagnose you. If you've done your research you'll know that there's NO term out there in the system community that's labeled "Endogenic" at all. If you search up actual Endogenic research, you'll see unreliable sources by "Carrd" or "Wiki How" and weird shit like that — however, "Endogenic" does NOT exist in psychology in the way someone created the "endogenic" term in the system community.

Everyone needs to get off their high horse. This "DiD" and "OSDD" and whether or not someone has it and this endogenic shtick needs to be put to an end. Let people fucking life their life on the internet. It's the INTERNET for a reason. If you're questioning or anything, google has documents online from VERIFIED sources that you can get your research done if you're not eligible to get a diagnosis.

If you know — you'll know.

What else is there to debate on?

[syscourse-mythbuster]

verifying source credibilty: the CRAAP test

this is mostly a problem i see in CDD system-oriented discord servers, but i'm sure it exists on sysblr as well.

carrds are not credible sources. tumblr posts are not credible sources. did-research.org is not a medical website.

instead, for research and information related to systems specifically, it would be ideal to look at peer-reviewed journal articles.

but you can't stop there. you also have to consider the relevance of the article you're referencing, who the authors and publisher are, and whether or not the information even holds up to more recent studies. this is where the CRAAP test comes in.

C - Currency When was the information published or posted? Has the information been revised or updated? Does your topic require current information, or will older sources work as well? Are the links functional?

R - Relevance Does the information relate to your topic or answer your question? Who is the intended audience? Is the information at an appropriate level (i.e. not too elementary or advanced for your needs)? Have you looked at a variety of sources before determining this is one you will use? Would you be comfortable citing this source in your research paper?

A - Authority Who is the author/publisher/source/sponsor? What are the author's credentials or organizational affiliations? Is the author qualified to write on the topic? Is there contact information, such as a publisher or email address? Does the URL reveal anything about the author or source?

.ac.uk = Academic institutions in the UK .com = Commercial sites .edu = Educational institutions .gov = Government .nhs.uk = Health information services in the UK .org = Non-profit organizations .mil = Military .net = Network.

A - Accuracy Where does the information come from? Is the information supported by evidence? Has the information been reviewed or refereed? Can you verify any of the information in another source or from personal knowledge? Does the language or tone seem unbiased and free of emotion? Are there spelling, grammar or typographical errors?

P - Purpose What is the purpose of the information? Is it to inform, teach, sell, entertain or persuade? Do the authors/sponsors make their intentions or purpose clear? Is the information fact, opinion or propaganda? Does the point of view appear objective and impartial? Are there political, ideological, cultural, religious, institutional or personal biases?

keep in mind this test doesn't at all look at whether or not methods for conducting experiments or studies are effective and valid, but at some point i'd also like to make a post about verifying credibility for academic studies specifically.

next time someone asks for sources don't give them a carrd amen 🙏

[syscourse-mythbuster]

starting off this blog with a bang by saying that, as a survivor of trafficking and organized abuse, the idea of 'programmed systems' is inaccurate to what conditioning really is, and has a history steeped in far-right conspiracy theories.

the horrors of ritual abuse, conditioning, and organized abuse are very real, but the mysticism introduced with the trend of 'RAMCOA systems' that were, somehow, intentionally created by some shady organization, only serves to discredit survivors, who already struggle to be believed about their abuse.

[syscourse-mythbuster]

Janus asked me to provide my input as an anger holder, so I am (K.D.W)

I truly believe that if you can't resist posting your meltdown over someone criticizing you once- especially when said someone wasn't criticizing you out of malice- then you shouldn't be online.

You especially cannot use the excuse that you are an anger holder to lash out on a public platform. You are making yourself vulnerable. You need to step away from the screen.

You are an anger holder. What you need to do is hold anger to keep the rest of your system safe. Lashing out publically and insisting to post said lash-outs is not doing that. That is only making you more vulnerable.

You are so obsessed with the pro-endo anti-endo trauma-endo bullshit, you forgot to heal from your trauma. You forgot how to protect your system. You forgot to ensure you don't end up like your abusers. If that is not a point of shame for you, then you have no sense of shame at all.

~💉

[syscourse-mythbuster]

Wanted to come in as a system who used to have MaDD, and currently has a form of Immersive Daydreaming:

due to how MaDD/ID works, it couldn’t “count” as immersive daydreaming to imagine headmates. The Immersive Daydreaming spectrum is classified by 2 things: dissociative absorption (the ability to “get sucked into” what you’re reading/watching/listening to- this is the same thing as the concept of “flow” ie when you get absorbed into a task and time flies by) and what’s known as paracosms (imaginary worlds with narrative and lore).

Imagining People Are In Your Head isn’t Immersive or Maladaptive Daydreaming, because paracosms aren’t involved. In fact, die to the dissociative element of Immersive and Maladaptive Daydreaming, one tends to “zone out” while daydreaming ie dissociate from reality (MaDDers often have the ability to be half tuned into a conversation and half daydreaming).

Parogenic/Willogenic systems can’t daydream having headmates, as the headmates need to react in real time to actual external stimuli. If it were daydreaming, the daydreamer would need to daydream both the stimuli and the reaction from the imaginary construct. In fact, one of the first things a questioning Paragenic or Dreamway System does is determine if a presence in their mind is another para (daydream character) or sentient and autonomous (headmate).

We also agree with @/reisspecialcorner that it’s gross to imply that all endogenic systems are actually MaDDers, in the same way it’s gross to imply they’re all actually psychotic/delusional/hallucinating/schizo, or Actually Secretly Traumagenic.

Sorry if this seems rude, I'm simply uneducated on the subject

I'm a DID system and have a theory on endogenic systems, which you seem to either be or know quite a bit about

Please tell me if there are any aspects of this you might agree/disagree on

(pls say if you agree/disagree, I'm not trying to invalidate or anything it's just a theory 😅)

Soo my current theory is that tulpas, willogenics and any kind of 'created' system are some form of maladaptive daydreaming

So, maladaptive daydreaming is a disorder (currently not medically recognised last time I checked) where one has a complex world in their head that they are actively making, imagining, with characters, a plot/plots etc. it impairs the ability to function because beings with the disorder want to always daydream/may act out the daydreams

So what if 'created systems' was a form of maladaptive daydreaming where instead of daydreaming and the plot/world, the main focus is the CHARACTERS

So consciously or subconsciously the maladaptive daydreamer or 'created system' 'switches' into the different characters and the characters all have their own identity and the 'core' of the 'created system' consciously or subconsciously acts like the characters made, thus thinking that they are multiple/plural

Idk I get the feeling I might be onto something, but who knows

Might just be my yapyapyapyapyapative AHH spitting utter nonsense

PLEASE TELL ME YOUR OPINION ON THIS IM NOT TRYING TO BE RUDE ITS A GENUINE THEORY IM NOT BEING HATEFUL IM SORRY IF I CAME ACROSS THAT WAY :[

-R

no, you dont sound hateful, and this may be controversial but in some cases, and without other coping mechanisms for stressful situations, this could be the case in some instances

i dont think this applies to all created systems obv but i do agree you may be onto something, that in some cases esp in cases where systems are created on purpose as a coping mechanism. not all systems but i do think many who identify as having intentionally fostered the creation of a system likely did so as a means of companionship, stress relief, or aid in daily activites. and like all things, that can become maladaptive. the key is that maladaptive daydreaming is inherantly HARMFUL, so this only applies if their systemhood becomes a detriment to their life.

in my opinion, it could be possible for someone to develop a system as a result of maladaptive daydreaming, and also for the maladaptive daydreaming to BE the systemhood/members if that makes sense. Caused by the thing (and still present once the daydreaming subsides) versus being a part of the thing (and going away once the daydreaming is treated)

DISCLAIMER, however, i want to emphasize that you not fall into the trap of trying to go for people and specifically suggest that they might be a maladaptive daydreamer. that just seems all too similar to going into someones acc and saying "youre delusional" and feels hurtful and devalidating to many. this information is useful, but it is not your place to claim that specific systems are experiencing this, unless they say so publicly themselves first.

rei isnt fronting right now so apologies if i sound a little different, but i havent opened tumblr in a hot second and this has been marinating in the askbox for a while so im just going to answer it (also!! i see you are anon and i do not want to blast you publicly if you dont want to bc this community can be hateful at times, but if youre comfy, dm me!! You seem like a very interesting person to talk to or at least follow, i wanna know who you are 🙏)

[syscourse-mythbuster]

Just to clarify, Katherine Reuben didn’t come up with the Theory Of Structural Dissociation, Kathy Steele, Onno van der Hart and Ellert Nijenhuis did via “The Haunted Self: Structural Dissociation and the Treatment of Chronic Traumatization”. All Katherine Reuben is doing with did-research.org is compiling sources and sharing information in her own words- not unlike a tumblr blog.

endo systems never cease to " amaze " me when they excuse why its valid. you are either denying your trauma so hard that you falsely identify as one, or you've just forgot, somehow. i believe that trauma is different for everyone, people can be traumatized by different things to different degrees and that is okay, but having some sort of DID requires severe trauma. you are spreading misinformation. no, i am not going to fakeclaim you if you identify as one, but i will see you as ignorant/gullible/harmfully coping.

yes i think you can have 400+ alters, sys within sys, and inner worlds. i also agree that you can have 4 alters and no inner world. i think its possible to become a system 4 - 8. i dont think its possible to gain a severe trauma disorder without the trauma. you are watering down something already demonized.

[syscourse-mythbuster]

This is us yelling @ Anon like a Dad yelling at the tv during a Sports Ball Match. This isn’t directed at @/the-splitted-syndicate.

Mod Dude of SAS made a post about a year ago stating they were no longer anti-endo, but were now pro-endo, and the beginning of this years long journey of changing SysCourse stances began with an email exchange between them and Colin Ross, whom has a hand in creating the DID diagnostic criteria. In the exchange, Ross had essentially explained there’s no reason not to believe endogenic plurality, that just because CDDs exist doesn’t mean endogenic plurality doesn’t exist.

The thing though?

Colin Ross was striped of his license because he was implanting false memories into patients about the very things people claim RAMCOA is about: Satanic cults abusing and trafficking victims.

Mod Dude is essentially backing up Ross because the whole reason they switched SysCourse stances basically started with Ross saying: yeah but endogenic plurality could exist, there’s nothing out there to say it doesn’t. Dude doesn’t want to acknowledge that Ross is wrong- and artificially manufactured via medical abuse -claims that consist of what people consider to be under the “RAMCOA umbrella”, because if they admit that Ross Was Wrong About RAMCOA, they have to admit that Ross isn’t a credible source for endogenic plurality… or anything else. That man is an abuser who manipulated vulnerable trauma victims into believing they went through things that they didn’t.

Mod Dude is only siding with Ross because of Dude’s own personal bias that favors Ross. Dude can’t be trusted anymore than Ross can.

You do realize that sysmedsaresexist doesn't agree with you that RAMCOA is antisemitic and has sources to back up their claim?

Okay? Thats quite plainly obviously and frankly we could not care less. But thank you anon - Soot

[syscourse-mythbuster]

This right here is why pro-shippers say anti-shippers are hypocrites.

Aspen is saying they think it’s okay to make fun of a group of people who create a certain type of fiction, while supporting and platforming an actual, real life, self identified R•PIST, who confessed to R•PING someone in actual real life.

Aspen doesn’t actually hate pro-shippers because if she thought pro-shippers actually were groomers/abusers, and caused actual real life harm, she wouldn’t be fucking harboring MTS in her midst. Instead, it’s just like what SysCoursers do: it’s all about the excuse to bully, harass, and abuse those who are an acceptable target (which is why they were drawn to SysCourse to begin with, no doubt). Anti-endo SysCoursers (specifically SysCoursers, not all anti-endos) bully, harass and abuse pro-endos in the name of “fighting ableism” while pro-endo SysCoursers (specifically SysCoursers, not all pro-endos) bully, harass and abuse anti-endos in the name of “fighting bigotry”. Both claim they “want to fight misinformation” but neither side actually gives a fuck about actual scientific research because it’s actually about the excuse to be a vile and wretched human being, causing harm to a group that “deserves it”.

Aspen can sit here and claim they’re in alignment with anti-shippers, and all they stand for, but their actions speak louder than words, and their actions say she’s a hypocrite.

At this point, Aspen is just the anti-endo like Sophieinwonderland. Those who platform them are only there for the excuse to harass, bully and abuse.

EDIT: Aspen pulling a bait and switch and announcing she’s now pro-endo is just further proof of what we’ve stated. There’s no way they ever actually gave a fuck about SysCourse. All that pain, all that abuse, all that trauma and it was nothing more than a cheap thrill to her.

Announcing she’s pro-endo is nothing more than a manipulation tactic. Aspen knows people are looking at her critically/sidewise with her support of MTS, and she’s moving on to a different type of Discourse/community/environment. She knows the performative liberal that pro-endow are will eat her announcement of being pro-endo now right up, and the community will consider her Morally Good And Correct, and not being digging into what she’s doing the way anti-endos are. It also means that the pro-endo community will dismiss anything negative the anti-endo community says about her because pro-endos will assume anti-endos are blindly hating her (Sophieinwonderland uses this same tactic).

Now, any time anyone tries to (rightfully, justly and correctly) criticize Aspen, all they have to do is say, “well they’re anti-endo, and you Know How They Are”. (Like Sophie, it’s not actually going to matter if the person speaking out actually is pro-, anti- or endo neutral. What’s important is that her audience believes the narrative Aspen tells them).

Aspen is also openly targeting the pro-shipper community to "make fun of them, but not wish harm upon them".

I have zero sympathy for pro-shippers, I do not care what you do or say to them, but this is just the same attitude Aspen always had, she's just found a new group to target.

And yet, she is still friends with milkteasystem/tommy_and_co.

It feels a bit like projection.

[syscourse-mythbuster]

“You are claiming something that almost everyone deems impossible.”

WRONG!!

Here’s a study about tulpamancy and non-traumagenic plurality:

This study shows that tulpamancy and non-traumagenic plurality actually improves mental health, not worsens it. So there’s no reason to be worried about them, though it is kind of you to do so.

I am sometimes just genuinely concerned for Endos/non-disordered systems.

If you have convinced yourself you are something to the point it’s actually happening to you, without having experienced the very reason for it to start happening… shouldn’t you be concerned…?

You are claiming something that almost everyone deems impossible. Instead of proudly screaming that “you are different!!!” shouldn’t you be slightly worried and start thinking about other possibilities? Shouldn’t you seek help for that, instead of proclaiming you are experiencing a disorder without the “disorder” part?

Endos enable each other too, that’s the scariest part. One says that “xyz is possible” without sources, and others -usually children- will believe it and convince themselves it’s true. They always seem to want to one-up each other with everything, leading to them creating new information that harms the endo community itself, then the general CDD community as well.

I hate the concept of endos, but I worry for them.

[syscourse-mythbuster]

What we mean with "we are bot our source": We are not literally the person you read about

What we DONT mean with "we are not our source": That we dont act like our source, that we dont have source memorys, that we dont look like our source, that we dont feel like our source, that we are nirhing like our source

We are like our source and thats fine.

[syscourse-mythbuster]

I think being neglected as a child essentially teaches two things : Not being worthy of love and that other people aren’t reliable to depend on and you really only have yourself.

It teaches a kind of independence that can be an advantage in life whilst leaving you unable to do the most basic things like depending on friends or truly trusting others.

If depending on others to much re opens that wound, where you start to feel like you can’t be truly loved or cared for, you will avoid it like the plague.

And often when it comes to it, you will be strong enough to do it by yourself, reinforcing the belief connection just isn’t worth it. People aren’t worth the hassle.

It invokes a need for autonomy and independence, feeling trapped easily by other people’s demands.

Neglect also means being used to a certain level of freedom and getting to make your own choice without a parent being there to force their view onto you. Why compromise if you can have it the way you want, with no one else to meddle?

Formative years were spend juggling decisions for yourself, you had to learn how to view the world thru ur own lense. Formative years were spend deciding a lot in your life for yourself. Peoples expectations that come with their need to connect, can feel like prison now.

It’s like being pulled into independence and liking that toughness and strength yet carrying this vulnerability and wish for care and protection inside all the same, and feeling bad for it.

[syscourse-mythbuster]

These things are traumatizing to an adult too, actually.

The thing is children rely on their parents to help them cope with trauma. When the parents are the source of the trauma, or fail to help a child during trauma, this child fails to learn to cope with trauma. And they turn into adults who also fail to cope with trauma.

Trauma becomes trauma due to a lack of support after the event. Two people can go through the same event- if one receives proper support, it won’t beg trauma. And if the other doesn’t receive prosper support, the event becomes traumatic.

It’s also important to note that trauma is essentially stress. It’s either a massive amount of stress in a singular event (an accident/near death experience, death/sudden loss, natural disaster, etc) or it’s chronic long term stress (abuse, financial instability, bullying, neglect, etc). Chronic stress, such as the stressful demands of work, school, family, etc, can also result in trauma, but the effect takes longer.

And finally: read “The Body Keeps The Score” by Bessel van der Kolk !!

Casual reminder that the following things are considered traumatic to small children

- neglect (physical and/or emotional)

- living in an emotionally unstable environment (for example, having parents that fight often)

- any kind of physical, emotional, or sexual abuse (not just from parents)

- consistent bullying

- etc

Remember that what is traumatic to a child is not the same as what is traumatic to you now. So think again before saying your trauma ‘isn’t bad enough’