#debunking antis

[fungus-id]

Haha this is really stupid. Zi wanna deconstruct this because it's hilarious

"Unlike gender, race presents as categorized (often physical) traits that are socially constructed and understood."

Okay, so race is a social construct. You're admitting that. How is that different from gender? Gender is also a social construct, and is categorized based on "girly" vs "boyish" things (I.E. pink, unicorns, makeup vs blue, mud, and cars).

"You can't inherit your gender [...] — but you do inherit the social construct of race."

The social construct that says what gender is is inherited. You pick it up from your family members and guardians. But also the entire world around you, as inheritance is not just familial. This is why gender appears differently in different cultures, with different ideas of what a girl or boy is, more genders, less distinction between genders, etc. It is inherited. Race is no different.

"There is also much more to one's racial identity than physical appearance — it's about culture, community, connection, and even trauma."

How is gender not the same? Culture isn't something exclusive to an ethnic people group (see: subcultures). Community is for everyone, including people of varying genders. Connection will be found with people of similar genders. Trauma – have you ever tried being transgender? That's traumatic. All that zi'm hearing is that race = gender and that this paragraph is full of shit

Screenshot via:

Also this was probably useless to write but zi had fun :] zi'll probably add reblogs with more dissections of this article

[ghost-jester-sys]

"The future is plural" movement from endos is CONCERNING

regardless of the fact they do not believe you require trauma to be a system (medically impossible) this proves they want to groom kids into identifying as endo and spread their medical misinformation further.

as well as causing real systems to believe they dont have it bad enough to be "traumagenic" (the only "genic you can be. this language is bullshit im just using these terms to explain their shit), preventing them from getting real help. they are WIDELY anti-recovery.

their misinformation has ALREADY endangered real systems medically as they have made professionals skeptical of a medically proven disorder, a disorder that is already very stigmatised.

outside of just endogenic misinformation, this statement leads to the idea that they want to traumatise kids to make more systems.

ENDOS ARE FUCKING DANGEROUS

[skywalkr-nberrie]

Hayden saying the Ob*dala affair theory is outlandish 🤣 Mr. Star Wars, Anakin Skywalker himself calling out the delulus in the fandom is tea ☕️ ✨

Now that makes both him and Ewan McGregor as well to put the Ob*dalas on blast.

[sysmedsaresexist]

Changing mindsets, from a Real Anti Endo™️

The Release of the (Pro/Endo) Golden Goose

I hope everyone from all sides will give this important, heartfelt post a read.

It's likely something you'll want to be aware of if you have a vested interest in syscourse and the validity of endogenic systems. Please give this a chance.

It's been almost three years since I started my blogs. Wow. I've been on tumblr a hell of a lot longer, but I really wasn't involved in the system community. I started out firm and loud. I probably inadvertently fakeclaimed (I went into this with the rule that I would NOT directly tell anyone they were faking, it was a boundary that I knew would ruin me socially if I crossed it, but I'm sure I probably did without meaning to), I name called and made fun of people and things. I was disrespectful to people. I invaded tags to get my message out there, though I was quick to stop once I realized I was making the tags unusable for the community I claimed to want to protect.

I learned very quickly what was appropriate and what wasn't, what I could get away with and what I couldn't. It started to become a numbers game, influenced by the risk of the post.

I made a lot of friends and a lot of enemies, and I amassed a following of over 2k. More people have come and gone from my little community than I ever thought possible. People made fanart of me, and I cherish those so deeply. I have over 300 asks because I struggle to delete the ones thanking me.

And the more I was thanked, the nicer I got, the more thanks, the nicer I got, rinse and repeat until I had trouble NOT empathizing with pro/endos. The more I was willing to listen, the more legitimate sources I came across that disproved my original ideas about consciousness. The people sharing the sources were more respectful than I thought they'd be. Things were starting to look a bit cloudy.

I talked to my colleagues about how they, as therapists, would handle some of these endos in their practice, and while their belief in the concept varied, kindness and attempts to understand was the consistent answer. When had I lost that kindness and understanding that had driven me to that field to begin with?

Colleagues, yes. For those who don't know, I have a degree in social services and counselling (plus three other degrees). It's why the current situation with the antis turning on me is so funny. I still can't get into the mindset of some of these new anti endos, I just can't imagine justifying that level of cruelty. I had lines that I wouldn't cross, and I didn't think people could be worse than me.

... That might have been a trauma thing, looking back on it.

So I got desperate.

I spoke to the actual doctors who wrote some of these papers all of us are quoting. Everyone was arguing the meaning of the words, so I went directly to the source.

Dr Colin Ross, who wrote about endogenous multiplicity in the 80s. I told him everything-- about plurals, non-traumagenic systems, syscourse, what was being debated, how I and others interpreted his words, and what I wanted to learn.

Was plurality only trauma based?

And back and forth and back and forth we went, with me asking over and over again in different ways, NEEDING to hear that it was.

But I never got that answer. He meant what he meant. He said what he said and he meant it.

That plurality was not only found in the aftermath of trauma.

And I said nothing to anyone because I couldn't reconcile it.

Don't try to read between the lines, I assure you, there isn't some hidden meaning to be found there. I can't share all of the messages because some contained personal information, but my final response will tell you all you need to know.

(It did NOT, in fact, make sense, and it took me three years to "rethink my paper" that endogenic plurality wasn't possible, I did not win that conversation, it was a dying stance that was not supported)

I've been accused of paying too much attention to my follower count, but I can't really help it. It's really scary when you make a post and see a sizeable drop. It means a lot of different things. My posts have less reach and support. I've upset people. I've done something wrong. My community is leaving me.

I'm in a weird spot, where I'm blocked by so much of the pro/endo community that I have nothing to join, and the anti endo community, who I still wholeheartedly support, continues to leave me for -checks smudged writing on hand- being too nice??

Misinformation about DID is a massive problem, and it's why I still consider myself anti endo and support that community. I relate to them in such a way that I'll always gravitate to and empathize with them.

Or at least, that's what I thought.

At this point, though, how can I not be pro/endo when Colin fucking Ross says it's possible?

I've already written about how I'm really struggling with these labels, and I love the people that have stuck around while I struggle to figure this out.

I hurt when I see the people that once supported me leave.

My (online) world is shrinking. Literally.

That's scary.

When you've watched so many turn away, you start to wonder, with every post, where is the line where the rest are going to leave? Is it this post?

I just want to be me, us, we want to laugh at the stupid crap people say, system or not, I want to talk about my disorder, I want to combat misinformation, I want to have productive, fun conversations about ideas and concepts with people who disagree and have different interpretations. I want to play devil's advocate and get people thinking. I want to be able to comment positivity and kindness on any post I see, I want to feel comfortable talking to more people about their ideas. I sympathize with anti endos, I relate to CDD systems, I still firmly believe that CDDs and plurality are different, unrelated concepts.

My priority will always and forever be the CDD community first and foremost.

However, I am a hypocrite. I have gone straight to the horse's mouth and failed. I've seen so much research that I finally get it. I'm grappling with holding on to this conversation with Dr Ross, wondering what harm I could have prevented if I'd gone public with these emails earlier.

Since when has being open to change been a bad thing?

Since when has showing respect to lived experiences been a bad thing?

What am I? What label describes this?

How do I go forward from here?

What are you going to do with this information?

I promise you, hate isn't the way forward.

[sergle]

i've litchrally been going crazymode listening to Maintenence Phase, which is my current favorite podcast, and i highly highly recommend it if you like informative podcasts about debunking misinfo around the wellness/health/diet sphere. it's also just really fucking funny, Michael Hobbs and Aubrey Gordon are great hosts and i love their chemistry together. i'd say "if you're a fat person, you gotta listen to this shit" but honestly i don't even need to be that specific, i just think it's good listening in general. like actually, i think skinny people with or without fat friends would greatly benefit from hearing some of these episodes.

[olenvasynyt]

Little reminder because some people are forgetting: Az and/or the twins training Elain how to spy is not canon. That is fanon based on a single sentence Nesta said that is easily debunked from the fact that 1. Az says himself that he had been avoiding Elain and 2. they don't have a single canon interaction after the Solstice.

But we do know that he has been training someone in private on dagger handling. Who, you ask? Gwyn.

[misasimagines]

this isn't well written or anything I'm just. I'm Desperate to get Ren out of my head he's been living here rent free and I NEED to switch into Taiga mode to write that request so. Please enjoy structureless Ren rambles. He doesn't come off as character with Much Nuance (like some others, Rui!! Jin, Subaru, Haku, etc) but like. When he's been sitting in your head for the past 14 business days....things unravel.

I'm not like citing sources here. This is pure vibes. Please don't crucify me if I got smth wrong 🙏

So he has a Thing about the ocean. He watches horrors movies related to it, he seems especially grossed out by it, but he doesn't seem like he's never had experience with it. Which is why I just can't not think he came from a small, coastal town (like from Aquamarine lmao). The kind that has a Barrage of tourists in the summer and over holidays and he Hated it because now he can't just go anywhere without risking being in the background of someone's vacation pictures. And I also can't help but feel like he probably had a parent/parents who parentified him, probably not maliciously, but they still did it. Like two immature parents or one immature parent and one completely absent one, so when it came to actually being responsible about things, he had no choice but to step in. Which is why he's so annoyed by and against hard work- he's done enough of it and he doesn't want to keep getting involved when he now doesn't feel the responsibility to. He probably feels a lot of resentment towards them for what he had to take on. Whether he feels bad about that resentment or not, I can't say.

He doesn't like messes or the animals in Jabberwock. He doesn't want to have to care for anything besides himself. Haru might remind him of his family which is why he's so hostile towards him. Because like Notably, Ren isn't BAD at hard work. He does go to classes, does missions, has a job at the diner, and still has to help around Jabberwock no matter how much he tries to avoid it. He's even dedicated to his mobile games, which seems silly, but those require a lot of routine daily to keep up and it seems like he has a few he keeps up with! And if we consider the Jabberwock chapter, even though he was against Calamari and resented taking care of it, he still did and he still felt guilty when he didn't do a good job at it, so much so that he ran off to the beach to try to revive the poor thing. Not the actions of someone who truly is selfish and doesn't care. Him carrying Haru to safety too- yes, leaving him to die would have been really. Kind of reprehensible but he carried the guy and rejected any kind of thanks and appreciation for it. He could have used that as guilt-leverage to try to get out of things later but...did he? Not as far as I know.

Like he does all of that no matter how much he complains. Also, who ELSE has a campus job? I'll wait. 🥱. Sho doesn't count, the food truck is a passion project. Even BROKE ASS Kaito doesn't have a campus job. Why is Ren working? Does he NEED the money or does he feel some kind of compulsion to make it for some reason? Because he's responsible? Because he sends it back home? Because he wants to have money for post Darkwick life? Who knows!!!!! He got that job like INSTANTLY bro enrolled and got that work study like the first damn week.

And this is way less in the realm of Theory Crafting and conspiracy and more just a pure hc but I just feel like maybe his hostility towards other people, the MC included, is because he might be dealing with the aftermath of a damaged or lost relationship. Not exclusively romantic but like possibly? Like if he grew up in a small town, he probably knew the people around him from childhood to adulthood. And it's not unlikely that he had a childhood friend that stuck through all the years with him. And it's not unlikely that, if they were friends that long, that people would start making jokes and suggestions about them ending up together long term. And! It's not unlikely that! He felt some kind of pressure to at least pretend to reciprocate feelings towards them. So maybe a close friendship became a relationship and maybe he did have feelings for them and maybe he didn't or just wasn't ready for them. Either way, now he's in Darkwick and given how unhappy he is, it doesn't seem like it was his first choice to be there. Is he running away? Does he not have a home to go back to (either self imposed or true exile)? I just. I have questions.

Please someone ramble with me I'm going crazy here. I'm like God I'd kill this guy [thinking about making out with him sloppy style]. Hate him truly he's so annoying I'd argue with him every day. What if this were us

[feyres-divorce-lawyer]

🎨: jessamybooks

i got tagged in this, presumably because the person wanted me to debunk it so here we go. (warning long post mostly because of the pictures, putting a break so as to not clog up y’all’s dashes)

the ic’s help for nesta was giving her an ultimatum of going to the house of wind or deportation to the human lands.

mind you, the former is also an isolation with a man she has verbally and physically made clear she wants away from her

“it’s not up for negotiation” again, the ruling power is forcing a war refugee to “choose” between being stuck in a house that would be gruesome to escape from, primarily with a man she wants to be away from and secondarily with another man who’s just as culpable in her imprisonment, and deportation to lands where they know she will be ostracized, subjected to prejudice, friendless, and practically housebound.

furthermore, amren lied about the rules of the night court when nesta rightfully brought up the fact that they were legally not allowed to do this. for all stans like to claim this was just like judge-appointed rehab, within that same modern context, lying about the law to force someone into “rehab” (mind you, through an intervention that had not a single medical professional involved), IS A CRIME

in contrast, nesta’s help for the women in the library was… pinning up a sign-up sheet.

yes, she intentionally practiced in the library, even after clotho asked her not to because it was distracting the priestesses who watched her

however, that was part of her plan to bring cassian down so the priestess could safely see how he trained her given their past terrible experiences with men.

also, there are seven whole chapters between when she puts the sheet up and when gwyn signs up. seven.

and then an additional five chapters when roslin, ananke, and deirdre show up in chapter 29.

ilana and lorelei join in chapter 38.

also note, nesta was going to give up and take down the sheet after her demonstration with cassian because it was her last resort. she still hadn’t physically bothered any of the priestesses, or initiated any unwanted contact.

additionally, clotho, herself, was happy when gwyn signed up.

so let’s review

the ic: forced nesta out of her safe space and demolished it, gave her a hosbon’s choice of training or deportation, and lied to her about their laws to bypass the illegality of their ultimatum

nesta: pinned up a sign-up sheet (which is by definition is voluntary), never physically bothered any of the priestesses or pestered them into signing up, and found a way to assuage any fears about a man training them without directly putting them in his way.

there is also a difference in time. the ic gave nesta no time to make her “decision.” she was forced into beginning her training the same day she got the ultimatum. in contrast, the time between when nesta put up the sheet, and when all the known valkyries from the library left the library to train is 21 chapters.

overall, i genuinely don’t think that anyone making this argument actually believes it, because it’s such a gross intentional misunderstanding of how the neo-valkyries came together, and stripping gwyn, roslin, deirdre, ananke, ilana, and lorelei of their personal choice to leave the library.

anyways, byeee

[ouatsnark]

i'm just gonna leave a link cause i can't recap the whole thing, you can break it down cause i can't submit urls here ( evilduckling / 142855439146 / how-can-you-say-youre-an-ugly-duckiling-and-ship? source=share

I love sources! Here's the link:

I actually started reading this going “Ok, this is fine. I get it. I didn’t start shipping CaptainSwan either until I saw the change beginning in Killian Jones. And they acknowledge Regina is a villain like Hook is.”

However, I ended up going “oh, there it is, there’s the delusion!” And things went downhill from there!

“Because EMMA is my favourite character and i ship her with who ever makes her happiest. Right now that means i am most definitely anti captain swan and pro swan queen.”

But there was never a moment when Regina made Emma happier. In fact, there is not one scene of them being happy together because they are together (friendship wise- this doesn't even exist). Henry, Snow, David and Killian have all made Emma happy. There's more evidence of Emma being happy in her friendship with Elsa than Regina.

Regina was busy treating Emma like complete garbage all of Season 4 and even into Season 5. Which if you want to fanon up a happy SQ friendship … be my guest… but don’t pretend like this isn’t a bias showing through. Because it’s just canonically incorrect.

Killian Jones makes her the happiest.

“Why wouldnt i ship my favourite character with the woman knew Emma’s biggest regret was leaving henry and worked to make sure that regret never happened? Why wouldn’t i ship my favourite character with the woman who gave her the life she always wanted?”

If we’re acknowledging that their friendship has taken a turn at this point (canonically we're told this, I disagree with how it was written but it is canon) and we’re not calling S1-2 abuse signs of true love… OK we can be friends.

I disagree that Regina is doing any of this for Emma but I can acknowledge that this person’s perspective on this scene is legitimate.

I personally believe it was all for Henry and Regina loved self-pity so she got to turn herself into a victim (just look how she makes everything about her, the S3 curse, losing Henry her pain was worse, her struggles are worse even though Emma was literally cursed with darkness, Emma's death visions were about her etc etc). Or maybe it just rubs me the wrong way because she can’t for one second recognize that she’s the reason Snow is separated from her daughter AGAIN and the show just completely destroyed Henry’s character by having him say everyone was better off cursed if it meant Regina wasn’t hurting.

Also, pretty sure everyone, including Killian, knows that giving up Henry is Emma’s biggest regret. This isn’t rocket science or something that’s special to Regina.

“Why wouldn’t i ship my favourite character with the woman who gave her her happy ending?”

Except she didn't actually succeed. Emma was miserable and about to marry a monkey.

“How dare i ship my favourite character with this person. I obviously hate emma swan so much. How dare i ship emma with someone who constantly saves her, believes in her and is literally in hell for her? “

That is canonically not true. Regina doesn’t believe in Emma. Unless it's convenient for her to say so because she wants something. They use the scene where Regina wants Emma to save Robin from the wraith as an example but they leave off the part where Regina accuses Emma of being the cause.

And I would argue Regina isn’t in hell for Emma. Regina disappeared on Emma to save a horse and have a family reunion. She was there because all the real heroes were there. But again, if that’s the way you want to look at it fine.

But let’s not pretend that Killian Jones hasn’t done even more for Emma and it was because he truly loves her. He was the only one to never lose faith in her. And. He wasn’t doing it for hero status or for anyone else but Emma and her family.

This is also kind of a straw man argument on the part of Swen because the real issue is…. why would you ship Emma with a woman that constantly belittles her, puts her down, refuses to follow her lead… etc etc NEVER MIND all of the reasons that Regina is the reason Emma’s family was torn apart… a reason that Regina doesn’t regret.

The above post is specific to how they follow Emma's lead but you can find so much more information in my Regina Vs Killian and how they treat Emma series.

“Instead i should ship her with a man who has tried to kill emma just as many times - the last time being like 4 episodes ago???”

No, you don’t have to. But while you claim “just four episodes ago” there is an issue here because there’s a big detail being left out: Killian was consumed by darkness. Regina never was.

This blog owner refuses to accept this detail but more on that below.

Also, correction: Regina has still tried to kill Emma and her family more times than any other character. Killian, when consumed by darkness, was a conduit for the dark ones so he's actually never tried to kill Emma and her family. That is not something he would ever want. He does too much to help Emma stay with her parents for this to even be a thing so it's obvious this is all the darkness' doing. Regina tried multiple times before Emma was born, as she was being born, before the first curse is broken in S1 (Emma's brakes, framing Snow, the apple, the tart) and after the curse (teaming up with Cora, the well, the kill switch).

"Regina wasn’t responsible for Neal leaving emma in prison - that was August and Neal.”

No one disputes this? No one blames Regina for this. Granted, Regina’s decision to cast the curse put all of these character’s in these situations but the choices they make are their own.

“Regina wasn’t responsible for the mess between Lily and Emma - that was Snow and Charming’”

This is a swing and a miss. This isn’t anyone’s fault but Lily and Emma’s. Emma has her own agency (as much as any character can have). She’s responsible for her choices and her actions. Not really sure why this is a big deal though. This is typical growing up behavior. I've never used this as a weapon against SwanQueen because it just doesn't hold water. IMHO. There's stronger arguments against the friendship than this... like why are we discussing this point right now?

Oh because they need to point fingers away from Regina and onto anyone else just like their queen does. Can't have Regina taking responsibility for her decisions!

"Regina wasn’t responsible for August leaving Emma in the foster home - that was August (and i know he was a child but still)"

I’d argue this one is a little more grey because neither child would be there if not for Regina’s curse or those that conspired to get August into the tree thus preventing Snow from going…. but August is just a child. This is not his fault either. So I don’t think it’s fair. I don’t think this specific thing is Regina’s fault… what is Regina’s fault is the Charming family being torn apart.

“Regina cast a curse but it was Snow and Charming that put emma in the wardrobe - not Regina”

And here it is! The Regina Apologist in this Swen has arisen!

No, luv, it is still Regina’s fault. The Charmings had no choice because Regina didn’t give them a choice. Regina would’ve killed Emma and everyone would’ve been cursed for eternity.

“Remember this? It’s rumple being taunted by your precious Killian. See because of situations like these, where rumple was so powerless against other people - other men like Hook - that he takes  power wherever he can. Enter the dark one”

Sorry, luv, but no one forced Regina to cast the curse. She chose to do it. Her actions caused it. Therefore she is responsible for the curse.

"So let’s summarise - If killian hadnt made rumple feel so powerless, rumple wouldnt have become the dark one, wouldnt have lost his son,.."

We don’t know that for sure. And I disagree. Even if Killian hadn’t come along, Milah was destined to leave her coward of a husband who had shamed his family. Her unhappiness was there long before she met Killian. So I believe all of this still could’ve happened with or without Killian. I mean the reason Rumple took on the darkness was to save his son from the Ogre Wars. Last I checked, Killian didn’t cause those!

And even so Regina still chose to cast the curse. Therefore, she is responsible for her role that she played in it. Now is Rumple also culpable? Sure. He helped her, after all. But who’s out there saying that Rumple is a better choice for Emma? There’s probably like one person. So Rumple sharing in part of the blame is kind of irrelevant to the topic.

"Last person who tried to kill Emma’s family - Killian.  And before you say Gold isnt family - yes he is because quite literally in the next episode emma says “You’re henry’s grandfather. Like it or not that makes us family”

Correction: at the time this blog was written the last person to try and kill Emma’s family was the Dark Ones.

And this person is seriously trying to use a line from S2 to justify this when Gold has betrayed them multiple times since including the end of S5 and S6? Yes, Emma says this as justification for helping him during S2. After all, family means a lot to Emma and I think she was trying to help Gold turn a page.

But let’s not pretend that any of them had any real affection for Gold after his multiple betrayals. Emma was ready to take him down in S5 and S6 when he stood in the way of her true love. So. That argument is so disingenuous. It's a perfect example of reaching so far you make a fool out of yourself.

And technically Gold is the last person to have tried to kill Emma’s family by the end of the series. This blog was written prior to the ending of S5 so I’ll let this slide.

"And Hook being the dark one does count as the only thing that can control a dark one is excalibur/dagger and Hook was not being controlled by anyone. This was most definetely hook being an ass and nothing else."

And here comes the Regina Apologist again trying to deny the dark curse. It was not “Hook being an ass and nothing else” like please do not pretend like we didn’t see a complete change in him when the darkness took over! Because we did.

Also, Season 5 tells us repeatedly that those cursed with the darkness become someone else entirely. I've already covered this here:

And this one goes even further into how the darkness controlled even Emma for a hot second:

So the fact that they refuse to accept or acknowledge canon is why we can’t be friends. Because they use their fanon and complete disregard for canon as a weapon against us.

If they had just stuck to saying "yeah I ship Emma and Regina post S3 because Regina is on Team Hero now" and said nothing else... we wouldn't be here right now.

" - is the reason for emma’s darkness" (aka her saving Killian)

Not by any fault of his own. He begged her not to!

It was Regina Mills that begged Emma to risk becoming a full on dark one to save her handbag!

See, I don't know how you can ship SwanQueen when Regina is clearly willing to sacrifice Emma for her handbag and Emma is clearly fighting for her true love Killian Jones... and it's Killian Jones putting Emma first while Regina is still thinking of only herself.

"Pretty sure Regina’s been the one fighting for Emma’s light harder than anyone"

Incorrect! Evidence is in how they each treated Dark Swan and how they treated the Dagger.

It was Killian that faced the Wicked Witch to get to Emma. It was Killian that believed in her enough not to control her with the dagger. It was Killian that helped Emma light the flame. It was Killian that ultimately fought the darkness and restored Emma’s light.

"is awful to emma’s son?"

Killian: "Riveting tale, Snow likes oatmeal. Is my morning breakfast in there too? Henry I thought you were gonna use your author powers to get us to defeat Hades."

And there we have it. Ignoring S1-2 and picking ONE LINE out to try and say Killian was awful to Henry. Oh you would not win this argument with me, luv. You would lose and lose horribly.

Regina Mills abused Henry for the first ten years of his life and was not that great of a mother in later seasons either. That alone trumps one frustrated line from Killian Jones who was worried for everyone's safety when they'd all come there to help save him.

And even with the first ten years of abuse, we have these present day moments where Regina was just awful to Henry:

[tempesttz]

i feel like causing problems today: correcting actual endogenic misinformation on the anti endo blog about "correcting misinformation"

WARNING: VERY LONG POST ABOUT SYSCOURSE BELOW THE CUT! you have been warned. stay safe! :3c

[/image id: screenshot of tumblr blog @antimisinfo, the blog's profile picture, and the blog's header stating "correcting misinformation." end id.] (before we get into this, some of these images will be very bright! i will try to provide accurate image ids to every screenshot i post. stay safe!) okay so see this account right? op has no clue what they're talking about. addressing pronouns right now, i was going to refer to them by their preferred collective pronouns but i can't find them? i checked their carrd and their alters all had different pronouns and their about me just says this

[/image id: text stating, "horned haters is a subsystem filled with alters who hate endos / pro-endos. our whole system does but we are more passionate about it and plan to try make as many safe spaces for anti-endos as we possibly can!" end id.] so at least i know they prefer alters. cool [happy] so far okay whatever they REALLY hate endogenic systems thats cool thats whatever nothing new there but

[/image id: five images of different flags, likely did/osdd related, anti endo related, or something similar. text underneath flags states "system hot takes," "anti endo support group," "anti endo system terms," "agre and littles safespace," and "fictive stuff." end id.] jegus dude you weren't joking about being passionate about hating. this is like, grade a hater here. but i digress this probably isn't the post to be screwing around on i'll keep the screwing to a minimum i promise. that being said i don't promise to be nice, i do not owe anyone kindness, especially when they are not kind to me. i will try to be polite. so this is already splendid right but you would think with this many accounts dedicated to hating endogenic systems (they also own anti endo vents, i think?) they would at least know what they're talking about, right? right?????

[/image id: text reading "so what are endos? endos or endogenics are people who claim to have did/osdd without trauma or claim to have alters/be a system without having did/osdd." end id.] source: endos / endogenics and why they aren't valid, may 8 2024 for the sake of convenience, i'm going to be referring to did/osdd as osddid from now on. okay so first of all, anyone who claims to be endogenic while having osddid is almost definitely also traumagenic and has reasons rooted in trauma, those two things aren't mutually exclusive. endogenic is a broad, personal label. an endogenic system with did could be one with a lot of created alters or headmates. or just two created alters, headmates, etc. who knows! it's a very personal label after all. that being said, to have osddid, you have to have some form of trauma in almost every case, because trauma is what causes the dissociation, amnesia and other symptoms of osddid. anyone who's arguing to the contrary is wrong. you cannot have osddid without trauma? "so tempy, endogenic systems aren't real! they don't have osddid!" wrong. you can be a system without having osddid. for just one example, sourced from the national library of medicine, pubmed central, "multiplicity can be placed along a continuum between identity disturbance and dissociative identity disorder (did), although most systems function relatively well in everyday life. Further research is needed to explore this phenomenon, especially in terms of the extent to which multiplicity can be regarded as a healthy way of coping." (2017) taking some bookmarks from your sixth grade english class (which i can only hope you have passed by now, if you are on this website,) we are going to use some inferences. if multiplicity isn't dissociative identity disorder, but it is a state of being multiple and a system, what do you have? a system without osddid. "but tempy, that doesn't mention osdd!" that's because osdd wasn't a medical term before the dsm-5. not to mention, it stresses that "...most systems function relatively well in everyday life..." and that "...multiplicity can be regarded as a healthy way of coping." osdd is a disorder and an osdd system's plurality is disordered. non-disordered plurality is a thing that exists, and almost all non-traumagenic plurals are non-disordered! so we're already off to a terrible start. op isn't creating a distinction between plurality and osddid, likely because they believe that osddid is the only way to be plural. this not only was disproved above by a literal scientific article on a .gov website, but also the icd-11.

[/image id: text stating "boundary with normality (threshold):" which then moves a line down to a bullet point stating "the presence of two or more distinct personality states does not always indicate the presence of a mental disorder. in certain circumstances (e.g., as experienced by 'mediums' or other culturally accepted spiritual practitioners) the presence of multiple personality states is not experienced as aversive and is not associated with impairment in functioning. a diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder should not be assigned in these cases." end id.] so someone can experience multiple personality states without it being part of a mental disorder. and it's not dissociative identity disorder, and it can't be otherwise specified dissociative disorder, so... i wonder what it could be? well, many things! all under the wonderful way-too-vague umbrella that is endogenic plurality. oh, you need more proof? how about we look to a book written by eric yarbrough, a psychiatrist who specializes in lgbtq issues:

[/image id: text reading "the phenomenon of plurality is unknown to most mental health clinicians. most professionals know this condition as dissociative identity disorder (american psychiatric association 2013), although plurality and dissociative identity disorder are not exactly the same. being plural, or having two or more people existing in one body or space, is just one part of the diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder. many people who are plural do not experience distress from the existence of others within themselves." end id.] what was that, psychiatrist eric yarbrough in your book transgender mental health which was published by the american psychiatric association?

[/image id: text reading "plurality is a more patient-centered approach to what has historically been referred to as dissociative identities. this is not the same as the dsm-5 diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder (american psychiatric association 2013). plurality makes up just one part of the larger diagnosis and does not necessarily cause distress. although many people who are plural have a history of trauma, there are just as many who do not. a plural system is a collection of all the alters present. with some people these alters might come and go, whereas with others they are static and waiting to be discovered." end id.] this is not the same as the dsm-5 diagnosis of dissociative identity disorder, huh? it's just one part of a larger diagnosis and doesn't necessarily cause distress, huh? still not convinced? rapid fire! zarah eve, sarah parry: "not all multiplicity is based in trauma" (2021) mick cooper: "neuropsychological research has demonstrated the inherently divisible nature of the brain and consciousness" (unsure, likely pre-2013) zarah eve, kim hayes, sarah perry: "multiplicity experiences are phenomenologically distinct from clinical dissociative experiences" (2023)

kymbra clayton: "there may be in the general population a large number of people with [multiplicity] who are high-functioning, relatively free of overt psychopathology, and no more in need of treatment than most of their peers. they may not have abuse histories and may have evolved a creative and adaptive multiplicity." (possibly 2005)

the entire endogenic and non-traumagenic resources google doc, created by a diagnosed traumagenic system can we at least establish there's been a recorded medical existence of healthy, non-disordered multiplicity in psychiatric fields and that this isn't something that someone just made up on tumblr one day? okay, cool, thanks. now i wonder if there's a word for that. oh wait. it's called non-disordered plurality and tends to be much more common in non-traumagenic systems. by now you've probably forgotten the actual reason this post exists, so back to antimisinfo!

[/image id: text reading "why is this bad? this is misinformation because as far as science knows did/osdd is a trauma based disorder (specifically caused by trauma in early childhood, which is speculated to be 1-9 / 1-12 years old) and your brain would not split/create alters without reason. you cannot have alters without having a disorder, this is common sense as it's not normal to have alters. to add onto this endos also take over our communities and teal our terms. (we'll make a post with further information on that in the future.)" end id.] okay so first off non-disordered systems exist, let's stop talking about osddid as if it's the only way plurals can exist. second off, you can be multiple without having a disorder, it's literally highlighted in the icd-11 that non-disordered multiplicity exists. see above for disproving that. this is not common sense, because as seen above people can experience multiplicity without it being disordered, therefore meaning it is "normal," though not realistically normal as all plurals are a minority. normal =/= bad/disordered. cool? cool now, onto "endos take over our communities and steal our terms." i have no clue what terms op is talking about (tried to find their elaboration on those terms but it seems they haven't posted it), nor have i ever gotten an actual comprehensive list of terms they think we're stealing, but here we go: the terms traumagenic and endogenic were created by an endogenic system

[/image id: text reads "an important part of the development of these terms involves our journey towards identifying as plural. we have used a lot of terms for ourselves over the last thirty years; since 2014, we have identified as endogenic, but have known we were plural since at least 1990. the road" text cuts off. end id.] the term plural can be traced back to 2003 and even in its oldest records recognize the existence of non-traumagenic plurality. it has always been an inclusive term

[/image id: header reads "heart's home." text next to it reads "join date: january 02, 2003." text underneath reads, "this is my site for people that have mpd did, {;} also i agree that not all is cause by trauma. {;} i was on the ring from ring world and did not know this was moved." end id.] introject is a psychiatry-focused word, meaning that it could be claimed to be osddid exclusive, however multiple communities have used them in tandem for years. it can be traced back to this glossary which was written before the dsm-5, or pre-2013.

[/image id: text reads "introject - introjection occurs when a person (singlet or plural) internalizes another person (real or fictional) into his or her mental space. in classical psychology, the introject is usually a parent, whose advice for good or ill becomes integrated into the person's moral system. more broadly, many people experience introjects as a kind of muse, inspiring them to creativity or self-improvement (a psychologist would call this an "internalized imago"). (psychiatric)". new line. new line text reads, ""introject" is seen as derogatory by some, because it is a psychiatric word and seems to imply that such people of necessity are unreal. They prefer terms like walk-in, soulbond, or fictive. having an introject does not necessarily mean you're multiple. it is an experience common to singlets and plurals. some multiple systems report adopting people from books, films, or real life, making them part of the group and allowing them to take the front if they desire." so, having introjects hasn't even always been seen as a fully plural experience! singlets used to be considered to be able to have introjects too! isn't that cool? not to mention, they also have a definition for fictive in there, recognized as a wider plural term! cool, cross that off the list... oh? what's this?

[/image id: text reads "system - a group of persons in one body. also, the operating system by which a group governs itself. multiples have many different names for this: group, collective, clan, household (or house), family, etc. (may have originated with a few multiples writing for the amateur press; we first read it in an early mpd book.)" end id.] so non-disordered plurals have used the term system since ever too... not to mention, hey, look at this term!

[/image id: text reads "empowerment is for all multiples. It is not only for natural (non-trauma) multiples; you can be empowered and be a multiple who was born as one person and split due to child abuse. In fact, if that's your situation, empowerment is a wonderful thing for you, and is something your therapist (if any) ought to be encouraging." end id.] wow... non-trauma multiples. look at that. is that enough terms? if you want me to look up more, feel free to suggest anything the endogenic community is "stealing" that haven't been used synonymously and consistently in both traumagenic and endogenic spaces since before traumagenic and endogenic were terms. okay back to misinformation.

[/image id: text is a link that reads "there is also a carrd that explains why endos are bad and debunks a few myths if anyone is interested in it! if not continue reading." end id.] i didn't need to click on this to know it was the why endos are bad carrd. this is the most touted anti endo carrd in existence. i'm so sick of seeing it i'm not even addressing it today. it's wrong and blames endogenic systems for systemic issues like "making actual systems be less believed." not a verbatim quote, but you can go read it for yourself and then scroll up and read everything i just said again.

i've never actually seen another anti-endo carrd. which is saying something, because there's a lot of endogenic carrds, some better than others. carrds in general aren't reputable in most situations, unless they cite other sources, which the why endos are bad carrd doesn't. it cites a google doc about cultural appropriation and the theory of structural dissociation, which is about osddid, not non traumagenic plurality. it also implies that anyone identifying as endogenic has been lied to, is traumagenic and in denial, is a singlet who's experiencing a factitious disorder or other disorder misleading them, or are a singlet faking because they think it's "fun." no comment, i'll talk about it in length another day.

[/image id: text reads, "why can't you have did/osdd or alters without trauma? as far as science knows did/osdd is a trauma disorder and in order to have alters in the first place you require dissociation, which is also a trauma (or stress) response. here are tons of medically reviewed sources that say this:" image ends. end id.] once again, not osdddid. also, "as far as science knows..." see above. science knows about non-disordered plurality. op goes on to list a bunch of articles about dissociative identity disorder, that talk about dissociative identity disorder. they are wonderful articles about dissociative identity disorder and prove that individuals with dissociative identity disorder (and by extension otherwise specified dissociative disorder) experience that disorder due to trauma. that being said... non-disordered multiplicity is a thing, and endogenic systems still don't have osddid. seeing a pattern?

[/image id: text reads, "what about religious beliefs / tulpamancy? first people are not required to believe or participate in your religious beliefs (and religious beliefs are not exempt from criticism) and second tulpamancy is a closed buddhist practice that has nothing to do with being a system and should not be compared to being a system nor should it be included / involved in system communities. Note that the dsm-v also says that in order to have did; "the disturbance is not a normal part of a broadly accepted cultural or religious practice." <- this does not mean it's possible to have alters due to a religious thing, if anything it says they cannot be counted as alters / as a system." end id.] okay so i corrected this in the image id, but op actually wrote "tuplamancy" twice. lol first off, tulpamancy isn't a closed buddhist practice. a tulpa is a theosophical term that was originally inspired by the tibetan buddhist nirmāṇakāya, translated as in tibetan as sprul-pa. "the western understanding of tulpas was developed by twentieth-century european mystical explorers, who interpreted the idea independently of buddhahood," according to wikipedia, sourced from tracking the tulpa (2015). a google search could tell you this. did you research any of the communities you are attempting to debunk past listening to what people who agree with you say? if you've decided in the past three months that google is your friend, i would google "echo chamber." second off, people absolutely are not required to believe or participate in your religious beliefs, and religious beliefs are subject to criticism. however, they should also be respected. this post, along with most other things you have had to say, have not respected spiritual plurals. not to mention, not all non-traumagenic plurals are spiritual. not to mention, not all tulpamancers are spiritual, in fact, most aren't. "modern practitioners, who call themselves "tulpamancers", use the term to refer to a type of willed imaginary friend which practitioners consider to be sentient and relatively independent. modern practitioners predominantly consider tulpas to be a psychological rather than a paranormal concept. the idea became an important belief in theosophy." see: wikipedia again. i mean, if you want me to go find scientific articles about this i can but wikipedia has plenty. go check the sources on wikipedia. this should have been the first thing you did if you wanted to "combat misinformation," by doing actual research before posting. op then starts talking about did. see: not all plurals are disordered. op also takes the time to shit on spiritual multiplicity again, which i will rightly ignore, refer to two paragraphs ago. it's midnight and i would like to finish writing by 1am.

[/image id: text reads, "to add on, no you cannot pray to be a system or transition into being a system. if you were to pray and one day magically become a system you are either in denial or you've convinced yourself you're something you're not. believing you can be a system without trauma or that you can become a system by praying is like believing you can get autism from vaccines or drinking too much dairy milk, that's just not how it works." end id.] this is a half-truth! you cannot pray to become a system unless you count spiritual possession (and frankly that responsibility lies on the individual in question), and you cannot pray to have osddid as that's a dissociative disorder that stems from childhood. you technically can transition to being plural (created systems are a thing, intentional and unintentional creation of headmates has been recorded dutifully since at least the early 1900s (see: tracking the tulpa, 2015). for the sake of it, here's a sciencedirect article about authors who experience different forms of hearing their characters in their head, who's recounts all sound very similar to non-disordered plurality. "believing you can be a system without trauma or that you can become a system by praying is like believing you can get autism from vaccines or drinking too much dairy milk, that's just not how it works." maybe if all plurality is disordered. it isn't. see above when i showed multiple examples of non-disordered multiplicity. believing that all plurality is disordered is like insisting that god created everything on earth after being presented with the theory of evolution. the analogy goes both ways.

[/image id: text reads, "what about mixed origin systems? Mixed origin systems are not a thing. did/osdd forms purely from trauma, you can't form from a mix of trauma and not trauma, that's not how it works. if you identify as mixed origin you are likely in denial and really need to come to terms with the fact that you are either traumatized or you're not a system at all." ] okay so first of all people can be traumatized past the age of twelve. ooh burn i know crazy. not to mention, plurality in general is known to be experienced by neurodivergent individuals, who as a minority are more likely to experience some form of trauma. this isn't a controversial statement, right? i don't have to prove this, right? cool great thanks. oh hey i just found a really flat ginger ale this will now fuel the rest of this post. there's this crazy concept, some people can be traumatized without it causing them to be disordered. or, a person with osddid could have created headmates, therefore making some of their system of non-traumagenic origin. personally, i was a system before i was traumatized. this caused my plurality to have some very trauma-based aspects, trauma holders and trauma-focused roles. that being said, my plurality (mostly lol) isn't disordered and my first recorded headmate was a created/spontaneous headmate at the age of ~nine.~ isn't that cool? anyways i've been medically recognized as plural so you can't fakeclaim me [silly] i dont have osddid. don't fit the diagnostic criteria. but i've been experiencing headmates since 9 and have recognized my plurality since 12. i'm 18. most of my headmates can be sourced to when i was 13-15, as that's when i experienced the most trauma (i'm better now stay safe though yall). that's decidedly after the gracious "1-12" estimate you gave, op. not to mention, we created headmates intentionally at the age of 12. so what's up with that op? what am i? okay i'm done being anectodal, i just took the opportunity to parry a personal opinion with a personal anecdote just to further drive the nail in that people like this exist and are living breathing sentient individuals with lives outside the screen and many of us have been plural since ever. i sourced non-traumagenic multiplicity to before the dsm-5 just in this post alone, not to mention tulpamancy (many tulpamancers don't consider themselves plural/multiple or part of the community).

[/image id: text reads, "what about other kinds of origins? Other origins like "willowgenic" and all that bullshit? Yeah no, same thing as endos, not possible. look above for all the proof you need, did/osdd is only caused by trauma. traumagenic is the only valid origin." end id.] i dunno if i told you this but did/osdd isn't the only form of plurality because not all plurality is disordered. also, spelling every origin you don't agree with incorrectly in a post that's supposed to be informational doesn't lend to your credibility. it's spelled willogenic. you're welcome. also, the word "traumagenic" was created by an endogenic system (see above, during "endos are stealing our terms," first link). you're appropriating our terms, buddy. [silly]

[/image id: text reads, "but I gave myself did! / but I created my own alters! no you didn't. that isn't possible, you cannot turn yourself into a did/osdd system and creating alters is a coping mechanism, not something you do for fun, sources on this;" text ends. end id.] half truth! you can't give yourself osddid because it's a dissociative disorder that forms due to childhood trauma. you can, however, create alters/headmates. see above when i talked about tulpamancy. op goes on to link more resources about dissociative identity disorder that don't mention other forms of plurality. not all plurals are disordered, let's move on.

[/image id: text reads, "isn't being a system like the same as being trans or being lgbtq? no, many endos compared the two but they are completely different. Being lgbtq is an identity, it's something you are born as. being a system is a debilitating disorder caused by severe trauma, it is counted as a disability which is;" text ends. end id.] first off i gotta say it again, not all plurality is disordered. op goes on to explain why did is a disability, which is true. that's just true. but again. not all plurality is disordered. second off, half truth! being a system is not the same as being lgbtq! that being said, a lot of systems are part of the lgbtq community, both due to its known effects on gender and sexuality and because a lot of them are neurodivergent. speaking on the internet plural community here, anyways. a lot of anti endos are referred to as "sysmeds" as a reference to "transmeds," people who believe that all people who are transgender must have a disorder in the form of gender dysphoria. sysmeds are people who believe that all people who are systems must have a disorder in the form of osddid.... same thing different font debunked not all systems are disordered. anyways.

[/image id: text reads, "but the dsm-v says that trauma isn't required! no, the dsm-v actually says csa isn't required, there are other forms of trauma that don't involve csa or child abuse. To act as if it saying that the trauma isn't always ca or child abuse means that it doesn't require trauma at all is extremely invalidating to those who are traumatized in ways that don't involve child abuse or csa." end id.] both of you are wrong jesus christ. okay so first of all the dsm-v heavily implies that trauma is basically required in order to have osddid.

[/image id: text reading "dissociative identity disorder is associated with overwhelming experiences, traumatic events, and/or abuse occurring in childhood. the full disorder may manifest at al-" text cuts off. end id.]

[/image id: text reads, "the dissociative disorders are frequently found in the aftermath of trauma, and many of the symptoms, including embarrassment and confusion about the symptoms or a desire to hide them, are influenced by the proximity to trauma. in dsm-5, the dissociative disorders are placed next to, but are not part of, the trauma- and stressor-related disorders, reflecting the close relationship between these diagnostic classes. both acute stress disorder" text cuts off. end id.] second of all the part of the dsm-5 that goes over dissociative identity disorder doesn't mention sexual violence once. the best i can assume this claim came from is an old belief that most dissociative identity disorder trauma if not all is inherently sexual.

[/image id: text reads, "promoted by charismatic individuals such as cornelia wilbur -- that multiplicity was almost always caused by severe, repeated child abuse, usually sexual, and was an extreme form of dissociation." end id.] so... where did you get this info, op? you didn't give us a source, after all. and again.... not all plurality is disordered. so this is a pointless argument to make. shit, i'm out of ginger ale. and it's 1am. it's okay i'm basically done right? uh, right?

[/image id: text reads, "but this source claims endos exist / did doesn't require trauma! most of those sources are extremely old and / or made by endos (or pro endos) themselves. (we'll make a more in-depth post on this topic some other time, but for now this is all we have to say on it)" end id.] first off i dated every source i cited, most are post-2013 and the newest is from last september (sep 2023). the oldest is ~2003. you're welcome. second, if you denounce every source given matter how reputable because it's "written by pro endos," you'll only end up listening to people in your own community. hey, remember when i asked you to google "echo chamber?" also, i'm waiting for that post, op. also also, for the sake of it, not all plurality is disordered, so why are we mentioning did again? oh yeah, because you don't believe in non-disordered plurality. is that because all the sources proving their existence are pro endo? hey, fun challenge, if you're over the age of 21 and find yourself wishing to, take a shot every time i reiterate not all plurality is disordered. [joking]

[/image id: text reads, "but we don't know everything about the human brain! you're right, we don't. the brain is mysterious, but we do know enough to know that it doesn't do these kinds of things for no reason. we know the brain reacts to trauma and we know what the difference between a normal brain and a disordered brain is. just because we don't know everything doesn't give people an excuse to jump to conclusions and spread misinformation. it is better to stick to what science currently knows which is the theory of structural dissociation, which is the current theory about how did/osdd forms, and so far no one has been able to disprove it. and before someone says it, no it is not only a theory, it is a scientific theory which is;" end id.] hey i have this fun concept for you not all plurality is disordered. also, just to throw it out there, otto van der hart, the guy who created the theory of structural dissociation referencing the haunted self and doing so along with ellert neijenhuis, suzette boon and kathy steele, had his license revoked years ago for abusing his plural patients. not to mention they promote only referring to the "client" and not the "parts," and only referring to alters as "parts of the client." i recommend reading this article on power to the plurals, and if you feel like some extra reading, you can also check out this old article about how psych professionals used to be encouraged to bait or purposefully leave information out or use different names for integration to attempt to coerce their plural patients into final fusion. in conclusion, not all plurality is disordered, source your shit, and if you're going to talk about only dissociative disorders at least get your claims right. thank you. stop spreading misinformation.

dave got a blinkie for his post so now i want one

[/image id: green and yellow blinkie gif with the words "written by jade harley!" in pixelpoiiz font. end id.]

[/image id: blinkie with a dark blue, almost black background featuring multiple stars, one of which twinkles. contains text reading "written by kankri." in the pixeloid sans font. end id.]

[starlight-bread-blog]

Kataang on Balance and Rage

There's a common protest to Zutara especially that typically goes like this:

"If Zuko and Katara ever got together they would spiral into endless fights, since both are hot-headed. Because of these traits, they need someone who is calm. Like Aang and Mai. They balance them out".

I already adressed how Zuko and Katara seem to balace themselves out just fine, and that Katara isn't actually that hot-headed. There's a lot to be said about Maiko, and I will in another time. But for now, I'd like to focus on Kataang. This argument doesn't quite work for me because Aang is repeatedly proven to be unable to effect Katara's rage.

THE WATERBENDING MASTER

When Katara challenged Pakku to a duel, Aang tied to put up the fire. Telling Pakku she didn't mean that, and telling her she doesn't have to do this for him. Due to his peace seeking nature, he wants to pprevent the duel and is communicating this to Katara.

(1th) Aang: I'm sure she didn't mean that.

(2th) Aang: You don't have to do this for me, I can find another teacher.

Did it work? Well,

THE CHASE

The entire Gaang is sleep deprived. Katara and Toph get into a heated argument about unpacking camp. Aang tried to stop the argument, and once again it didn't work.

THE SOUTHERN RAIDERS

This is an extremely controversial episode. I'm not gonna get into who's right and who's wrong. I'm just here to make an observation.

Katara decided to seek justice/revenge on the man who killed her mother. Aang, being a pacifit, encourages her to forgive him. He tells her a story about the monks, that revenge wouldn't help her. As you know, Katara still goes on the quest.

Later when she spares Yon Rha, she highlights to Aang that she did not, and will not, forgive him.

IN CONCLUSION: Aang tries to calm Katara down, but that doesn't seem to work. To suggest that Katara should be with Aang because he can balance her out would be a mischaracterization of their dynamic. He can't do that.

[peantisdeliriouts]

Anyway they won’t allow comments OR reblogs (my guess is so they can stay in their echo chamber and so they don’t have to own up to spreading misinformation) so I’m going to debunk this misinformation here on my own post.

Sharks are, in fact, NOT on the verge of extinction, that is clear by a simple Google search. Certain sharks species are ENDANGERED or VULNERABLE which has nothing to do with JAWS and everything to do with the fishing industry. Of course because they are endangered and vulnerable they RISK extinction in the future but they are not 'on the verge' of it.

List of endangered and vulnerable shark species

Sharks, rays, and similar species are killed NOT because of an American movie but because of overfishing of sharks. In certain cultures, shark fin soup is said to be medicinal and provide a wide range of health benefits. Despite no evidence of such being true, certain cultures still fish for sharks for their fins alone. This is deadly because of the way sharks breathe. They need to be in motion in order to breathe and without their fins they slowly suffocate to death.

Source of why sharks are currently endangered

Last, lets finally bring up JAWS and why this argument doesn't prove the point of "fiction can affect reality" in the way they think it does. JAWS causing people to be more afraid of sharks did NOT cause shark-finners and shark overfishing to occur or get worse. The "JAWS effect" doesn't actually exist in any meaningful way beyond people from the USA being more afraid of sharks. JAWS did not have that much of an impact in other parts of the world where shark fishing is common. Of course the movie JAWS DID inevitably lead to people killing sharks, but not nearly to the scale most assume. Shark-fishing tournaments were set up and fishermen at the time would catch as many sharks as they could. This did lead to a big decline of sharks in the US east coast due to the overfishing. Keep in mind that this, however, does not account for the millions of sharks killed for their fins every year.

Did JAWS have an impact on the way people (especially in English-speaking countries) saw sharks? Yes it did, the uneducated masses at the time had no idea how sharks actually functioned. Did JAWS cause a decline in shark populations in the US? Yes it did, fishing contests put in place greatly affected the sharks in the East coast of the US. Did this have a greater impact on shark populations as a whole and their decline? Nope! The biggest reasons sharks are endangered as they are now is because of overfishing, shark finning, and bycatch (catching a fish and then discarding it because it isn't the fish you desired/can sell).

Link 1 about the "JAWS Effect" myth

Link 2 about the "JAWS Effect" myth

[sysmedsaresexist]

Reminder :) the ISSTD says that DID is not rare

[myobsessionsspace]

You can’t reason with crazy

I don’t go here, never gone here. But anyone who knows anything about real person shipping has heard of larrys. People who ship ex One Direction members Louis Tomlinson and Harry Styles.

One Direction went on permanent hiatus in 2016 and towards the end of their active period the two who once had a close friendship drifted apart, Louis mentioning that shipping played in the awkwardness that developed between them.

Even after publicly shutting larrys down

Larrys still exist… They. Still. Exist.

After Louis publicly shut down rumours & conspiracies several times online, in print, on tv interviews etc.

After ARGUING with Louis on twitter, Louis having a child and several girlfriends, Harry having several girlfriends and them openly

Meanwhile Louis & Harry:

Say something, don’t say something. Spend time together publicly or don’t speak to each other for years. Have a family, public relationships, live in different continents.

Louis & Harry live their lives with how they want with who they want not who Larrys want

Ignore or acknowledge them.

Larrys still exist.

[lloydgaymerdyke]

i actually don’t mind blogs w llorumi dni and shit like that like i actually prefer not to interact with you truly🤗 let’s all be friends mentality pmo like no i can enjoy my shit and you can enjoy yours and we can never ever cross paths how fun!

and i don’t want to convince ppl to ship it? like if they see my posts and like them and then like the ship that’s so cool i love bringing ppl to the dark side! but also i don’t feel the need to defend myself or my ship to anyone. seriously ive been in fandom and loved hated ships for so many years its tiring as hell trying 😪

[newts-gay]

so let me get this straight, aemond is a psycho for lifting up a rock against another child (definitely not desperate to defend himself after this whole 4v1 jumping) but luke is an absolute sweetheart after taking out another child’s eye seeming completely unfazed by said action, never to be remorseful after and feeling quite smug about it actually