#sanism cw

[glitchdollmemoria]

please can we stop describing bigots as delusional. please. im so fucking tired. someone being sucked into a hate group surrounded by others who believe minorities should be oppressed and encouraging them to believe in conspiracy theories that the rest of the group believes, is fundamentally different from someone having a mental illness that causes delusions.

delusions, by definition, cannot be explained by things like cultural background - such as having a belief constantly reinforced by intentional attempts to rationalize it for the sake of maintaining power over minorities. yes, someone can be both delusional and a bigot, and yes conspiracy theories can feed into delusions, but the two are not fucking synonymous.

i did not spend my teen years convinced that i was being stalked by demons just to hear so many of you people equate my disability with incel behavior and genocidal propaganda. stop reinforcing harmful connotations about mental health struggles.

[inrecoveryhehe]

Respect psychotic folk!!!

respect psychotic folk by not assuming they're automatically dangerous or hostile.

respect psychotic folk by not feeding into and/or confirming their delusions/hallucinations.

respect psychotic folk by not calling strangers "delusional" when they disagree with you.

respect psychotic folk by not pseudo-diagnosing criminals as psychotic with barely any evidence.

respect psychotic folk by not interacting with "schizoposting" posted by non-schizo specs.

respect psychotic folk by not showing them potentially paranoia-triggering memes.

respect psychotic folk by not interacting with memes that make fun of the psychotic experience.

respect psychotic folk by realizing that none of the things listed are too much to ask for, and that it takes no effort from your side to not be sanist.

[no-empathy-culture-is]

[id; a screenshot of a news article titled "how the ancient greeks kept ruthless narcissists from capturing their democracy - and what" (it ends from being too long). /end id]

i. w. huh

[creatureboything]

[Image ID: a flag with 7 curved vertical stripes colored: dark gray, light gray, gray, dark gray, gray, blue-gray, and dull red. they all curve away from the sides at varying degrees as they get closer to the center, which has a small dark purple solid circle in the center with a red crown symbol in it. End ID.]

Queenmobordaen: a bordaen label reclaiming “the queen”  BPD mother archetype. Bordaen (link) is a label describing ones relation to their bpd and their borderline identity.

“Queen” BPD mothers/parents are categorized as controlling and self-centered. The BPD mother archetypes are ableist/sanist by nature and this identity is for reclamation purposes specifically (I’ve tagged these as ableism cw and sanism cw for safety of the connotations).

“Queen” mothers/parents are also categorized as having NPD, but I do not have NPD so I am not comfortable making a -narcet label for this.

can be pronounced kween - moh - bor - day - en or kween - muh - bor - day - en

@epikulupu

[xxstrawberrybunxx]

LMAO "I don't care what trauma you went through, as soon as you say something that makes me mad I'm going to abuse you too so you can never speak of your abuse again, all in defense of proving narcs and people like me are not abusive!" yeah you're doing great

idk how to tell you this but im allowed to get pissed off when people like me are straight up refused proper treatment from medical professionals because of how stigmatized our disorder is. and saying im gonna punch "a vague approximation of people who are pissing me off" would be nowhere near the same as the "narc abuse" you seem ready to assume i've inflicted on people.

[neuroticboyfriend]

i know us schizos can be relatively lax about the word schizo... but for people who aren't on the schizophrenia spectrum, please remember... it is a slur, or at the very least, a derogatory term. maybe don't say it (unless we're okay with you calling us it), especially not to separate yourselves from us.

context: i just saw someone say "i'm not a fucking schizo" when talking about their misdiagnosis and resulting trauma. this could have been done without using a slur, especially given how much we also face misdiagnosis and medical/psychiatric trauma. we're in this together, not apart.

[disabledunitypunk]

I am once again thinking about the term "suicide survivors". How it's a term that rightfully belongs to those that lived through a suicide attempt, that literally survived suicide. How instead it means those that lived through someone else's death. How it neans "surviving" in only the archaic use 'survived by" used in obituaries. How suicide "survivors" lived through something that was never going to kill them, that was never even a threat to their life.

How we are only ever a footnote in the stories of others. We're a tragedy that happens to people, a cautionary tale if we die and inspiration porn if we live. How, forever long we do live, we were suicidal, past tense, because it makes people too uncomfortable too acknowledge that suicidality is chronic (whether pathological or environmental).

How everyone wants to do suicide prevention but no one wants to acknowledge the people at the center of it. How it's never actually about our needs - or even about our safety, really. It doesn't matter what trauma or pain we must endure - they'll have us live if it kills us. Never mind social programs to give us housing, food, security, to make us want to live - it's our responsibility to find someone to tell us it's all in our heads and we need meds to fix us, because it's CRAZY to want to die. Make sure the hotlines can all call the cops if we don't comply.

Don't we know how selfish it is to want to not be in pain and be so desperate that we're willing to die for it? Don't we know how selfish it is to not have any access to the things we need to survive? Don't we know that suicidal depression is really our duty to get over, because obviously if we don't take meds that don't work or that make us sick, if we don't submit to medical gaslighting, if we don't "try" to recover, it's not like it's an illness or a disability! It's selfishness, a character flaw.

Don't we know that we're the selfish ones, when they make our struggling, our illness, our deaths, about us and not them?

It's sanism at its most basic. We're not reliable narrators of our own experiences. We're not the main characters of even our own stories. We're there to be a single pretty tear rolling down the cheek of our loved ones. We're tragedy-as-an-object, as an object lesson. "Make sure you pick yourself up by your bootstraps seek help so you don't become an inconvenience for us hurt your loved ones." Even STILL the focus is not on the harm done to yourself, except as a moral failure in that it harms the healthy people around you.

Quite frankly, I'm sick of it. I don't ever want someone to call themselves a "suicide survivor" again who means it not as "I've survived BEING suicidal" but as "I lived through someone else being in so much pain that they took their own life over it". Not when there still exist people that have survived attempts or are actively suicidal. This is our narrative, not one for you to center yourselves in.

I will not go so far as to say your grief is selfish. That would be cruel. But your grief IS about someone else. This is still THEIR story.

It is likewise the same pain, the same trauma, and the same ableism and sanism we face over it, for those of us who have actually survived it, more than it is that of those who have never stood on that edge. It is the same decentering of our own stories when we go through the exact same thing.

It is the same surviving another day of being suicidal, another attempt, and hearing people who have either never been suicidal or simply are not talking about their own survivorship of suicidality, have the audacity to call themselves survivors of something that they never survived. To take something that KILLED someone they love and claim to be survivors of it.

Cancer survivors had cancer. Automobile collision survivors were in collisions. Survivors of critical illnesses or disabling/severe injuries lived through those illnesses or injuries affecting THEIR lives. But suddenly when a deadly chronic illness kills someone, in this one case, the survivors are the ones who watched someone die of it?

Nah. This isn't a mass threat like a shooting or a pandemic, where your life was ever in danger. You're not the survivor. Your grief is valid, and there absolutely needs to be times and places where being a GRIEF survivor is centered, where your healing and well-being is focused on.

But let those of us who we so sick we nearly died for it, or DID die from it, be the center of THAT story.

Dead men tell no tales, so at least have the grace to let the echoes of our voices remain, unspoken over. And for gods' sakes, remember that there are people that DID make it through alive, that we're still talking, that our voices are most important in a conversation about OUR potentially deadly illnesses.

We're still here telling our own tales.

[sonicattos]

i want you guys to know it’s a hot topic to call abuse “narcissism”

if you’re wondering why this is disgusting: narcissism is a personality disorder. and vilifying such a thing is extremely harmful and stigmatizes people who struggle with such a thing, which is also extremely ableist and dangerous. call it what it is. it’s abuse. verbal and emotional abuse. manipulation. belittling.

you don’t even have to be a ‘narcissist’ to be this way. abusive people exist. sorry you need to dehumanize them by labeling them as with a mental disorder (which shouldn’t be dehumanizing to have) because you can’t deal with the fact that human beings can become awful people. but don’t wrap others into this.

i do not have narcissism myself, but as someone within cluster b i too am affected. i have abusive people in my life that yes, have selfish tendencies, but wouldn’t call “narcissistic” because thats not how that works. again. i call it what it is. it’s abuse. full stop. stop armchair diagnosing for sympathy points.

[xxlovelynovaxx]

Listening to Epic the Musical and went to join the discord server, only to find this:

I'd like to preface this by saying I am a member of a DID system that experienced intense childhood trauma. We identify as "mixed origin", meaning in our case we do not believe trauma was the ONLY cause of our system, but we do believe it likely played a part in the formation of our multiplicity. Now, onto talking about this screenshot.

1. Pluralkit's creators are inclusive of nondisordered systems. It's one thing to say "no OCs" (which pluralkit is fine with, but some servers simply aren't for purposes of ACTUAL roleplay and that's fine), but to say "only OSDD/DID systems are allowed to use this" and imply that all other systems are "roleplaying" is just bog-standard anti-endo bigotry. Also, UDD and other lesser-known disordered systems are of course excluded.

A reminder that the creators of the Theory of Structural Dissociation, the DSM-V-TR, the ICD-11, and the APA all recognize the existence of nondisordered systems, and that they haven't met a high enough standard of proof to claim explicit causation via trauma of dissociative disorders. At this juncture, every actual scientist abides by the cardinal rule of statistics - correlation is not causation - and another important basic rule of logic - that "x causes y" does not prove "ONLY x causes y". Or in other words, neither the converse nor inverse of a true statement are automatically true. In mathematics, these logical fallacies are referred to "affirming the consequent" and "fallacy of the inverse".

2. Short of someone actively telling you "I am faking a mental illness", you CANNOT tell if they are. It's not possible even for psychiatric professionals to determine this, let alone random laypeople. Even screenshots "admitting" faking could be photoshopped, but more than that - that rule makes the server unsafe for every SINGLE system, even those with OSDD or DID. On what grounds do they claim a system is faking? Having the audacity to claim that our narrative of our own experiences is most reliable and that we are capable of determining our own origins? Having too many or too few alters? Enjoying aspects of even disordered systemhood? Achieving functional multiplicity?

Fakeclaiming when done to any kind of system, but ESPECIALLY disordered systems, will often severely worsen dissociation and internal communication and can even make amnesia more severe. Even most professionally diagnosed disordered traumagenic systems struggle a lot with doubt, in part due to the very nature of the disorder, which often is a response formed as coping skill for severe trauma which masks itself from both external and internal scrutiny for safety.

It is not worth risking this harm to "protect" systems this doesn't even help, much like it's not worth say, denying SSI to 90 percent of people who need it just to keep the extremely small fraction of a percentage of fraudsters (who are willing to try to live in conditions of extreme poverty without ever being able to marry or save money) from getting it.

(It also seems to stem in part from a pluralmisic society which obscures and erases the very experience of plurality, so that many of us don't discover the labels for our experiences until late enough in life that it shatters a long-held view of ourselves that we then have to contend with as a fundamental shift in our understanding of ourselves. A similar thing occurs with trans people in transphobic societies doubting our transness due to spending our whole lives thinking we were cis, but just in the wrong way, and that everyone is miserable trying to be their assigned gender at birth.)

3. "Alters under age 13 are not permitted to speak in this server as per Discord TOS." Discord's TOS is entirely dependent on legal age and therefore bodily age. Littles and middles are childlike entities in an adult brain and body, and it is therefore up to each system to determine what is safe for their own non-adult members to handle. While some littles and middles may be very like actual children and therefore their systems restrict their activity, some systems have littles and middles that are perfectly capable of using the adult brains' faculties to safely navigate normal interactions. Note that this isn't a restriction on nsfw interaction, which is strictly prohibited in the server iwrc, which while offensive when done "for littles' safety" is at least something reasonable to refuse consent to interact in that capacity with a little for your own personal comfort.

4. "Factive alters sourced from EPIC collaborators are required to speak through an anonymous proxy or base profile when interacting with the server". So, essentially, the comfort of singlets is more important than the health, functionality, and safety of systems. It can be destabilizing to have to mask or pretend to front as someone else.

It is also saying "it's not okay to be openly an entirely separate individual with your own life, consciousness, and experiences, simply because you were unintentionally created by someone's brain based on a different living individual". In this case, the people saying this also believe the only possible reason for this unintentional influence on an alter's existence is due to a severe mental disorder - that they likely believe is only caused by trauma. (They likely consequently believe alters can only be SPLIT through trauma!)

So what they are in effect saying is "if trauma caused a person to exist inside your brain whose formation was influenced by one of us and who therefore shares a name and maybe mannerisms with one of us, they are not allowed to be openly themselves around us". Imagine if an autistic person who often mirrored mannerisms shared a name with them!

5. Re: the last point. They claim that people using pluralkit are people, but notably, they only recognize them as individuals. They do not recognize the personhood of non-parts based systems. "When speaking with someONE who uses pluralkit, remember you are speaking with A real PERSON". Now, they could be referring to the individual alter fronting at the time (and just not acknowledging cofronting out of ignorance or forgetfulness). Except for the damning line:

6. "Please note that Pluralkit is a bot used by INDIVIDUALS with DID/OSDD to facilitate communication". Now, I wanted to touch on, once again, that pluralkit's creators are open to and even intend for the bot to be used by nondisordered systems and even roleplayers. Once again, I have no issue with servers not allowing its use for roleplay purposes, since that doesn't dehumanize any actual systems nor refuse to recognize the personhood of individuals within any systems. But also... they literally are refusing to recognize the existence of actual DID and OSDD systems who identify as multiple people, not individuals!

While it is possible that the creators of Epic the Musical were simply trying to create a safe space for systems and are simply ignorant to the harm that sysmedicalism and creating a culture where fakeclaiming is allowed and even encouraged DOES, I find it more likely that a moderator, creator, or system that is close to one of the above is a sysmedicalist.

Below the cut for brevity of this post is a primer on system discourse (syscourse) and sysmedicalism for those that may not be immersed in the plural community.

Tl;dr of the part above the cut: This server is unsafe for even DID/OSDD systems, discriminates against and violates the autonomy of littles and factives (misunderstanding what littles and factives actually ARE in the process), and does not recognize the actual personhood of alters and headmates and multiplicity of disordered systems. This is just ableism, and extremely disappointing as a DID system that is a fan of the musical.

For those that don't know, sysmedicalists are plurality's version of transmedicalists. They believe that the only way to be many people or parts in one body (which is what plurality is) is to have a severe mental disorder that causes extreme distress and dysfunction, as a result of severe long-term childhood trauma, usually between the arbitrarily named ages of 9 and 12. Like transmedicalists, they believe that multiplicity is inherently a mental illness, and that you can't be plural if you don't experience extreme distress around it.

To be a [identity]medicalist is to pathologize and medicalize an experience that is not inherently either to the point of claiming all nonpathological and nonmedical forms of the experience don't exist, and usually also involves defining an identity primarily by the severe distress it CAN cause in some individuals, staging an arbitrary standard of suffering as a prerequisite that if not met is grounds for fakeclaiming anyone who derives any happiness or positivity of any kind from said identity.

They claim that a term coined and primarily used by trans systems is transphobic, because "transness isn't a mental disorder and systemhood is!" They fail to recognize that like transmedicalists truly believing transness is only a mental disorder incorrectly, they are also clinging to a claim that only the disordered form of a wider experience of being "many in one" is valid or real, and that everyone else are just "fakers" "stealing resources from real trans people/systems".

See iirc @livseses wonderful post for further similarities on transmed and sysmed arguments, which I will link later if I can find.

On the other hand, even psychiatric professionals, in an industry known for disregarding the experiences of neurodivergent and mentally ill people in favor of the narratives that neurotypicals with degrees in the subjects of our lives make up based on their external experiences of us, agree that nondisordered systems can exist. Most now also believe that trauma is not a prerequisite for plurality.

The DSM acknowledges cultural experiences such as mediumship (not all of which are from closed practices), and the ICD goes further to state that the same experience of "two or more distinct personality states" they describe as one of the requirements for DID does not "indicate the presence of a mental disorder". They also use cultural multiplicity as one example, clearly stating that the same experience of multiplicity present in DID can be present in the absence of a disorder.

These disorders are also very purposely not categorized in the "trauma disorder" section of diagnostic manuals, but rather in a section for "dissociative disorders". Even personality disorders, which are well-recognized as being mostly traumagenic in origin, are also not categorized as trauma disorders, for the same reasons of both lacking a high enough standard of proof that trauma is the only possible cause, as well as for the simple reason that dissociative and personality disorders are much more highly self-similar than they are to trauma disorders. Anyone claiming that "DID/OSDD are trauma disorders" and that to claim to the contrary is misinformation is themselves spreading anti-scientific misinformation.

It is also worth noting that by all modern definitions of disorderedness, a mental disorder requires either distress or dysfunction (and in some cases, both). Therefore, a DID or OSDD system that achieved functional multiplicity would not longer be considered functionally disordered.

Traumagenic is the term used to describe systems formed due to trauma. There is zero proof whatsoever that the trauma that forms a system is required to occur in childhood, and in fact seemingly previously healthy war veterans have been acknowledged in medical literature as displaying symptoms of complex dissociative disorders. While there is not a high enough burden of proof to discount the possibility that every single case was just a covert system's presentation made overt by the recurrence of trauma or development of PTSD, there is likewise not proof that trauma that occurs later in life (particularly for neurodivergent individuals with developmental disorders, as the parts of our brain involved in multiplicity often develop in different orders or at different rates.

Endogenic is the term used to describe systems formed for reasons other than trauma (and by most members of the community, for mixed origin systems that were not FULLY formed from trauma. The coiner maintains that full lack of trauma is required for "correct" use of the label; see my previous posts about the harm of prescriptivism and the ludicrousness of defining a term for an identity you don't claim and a community you are not in).

Endogenic does not necessarily mean nondisordered, as anything from trauma occurring after initial system formation to simply the brain's "wires" getting crossed, so to speak, may be able to cause a dissociative disorder even in the absence of the usual stimuli of trauma. Basically, if your brain has a "push in case of emergency" button, there's always a possibility however many failsafes are built to prevent this happening that it will accidentally be set off in the absence of an emergency. Likewise, traumagenic does not inherently mean disordered, as in the case of previously disordered systems who achieved functional multiplicity, or again, weirdness in an extremely complex organ we barely understand causing the brain to push the emergency button but only part of the stuff that is supposed to be caused by the button happening.

Plurality is simply a form of neurodivergence. People can be multiple consciousnesses or "people" (the defining of which falls more under the purview of philosophy than psychiatry) in one body without there needing to be a reason. Assuming singlecy (being a singlet, a nonsystem) is the default is as based in pluralmisia as assuming being straight is the default is based in homophobia.

It's also worth noting that the majority of psychiatry and psychology, as soft sciences, are based entirely in self-reporting. While yes, dissociative disorders can obscure knowledge of trauma until a system is ready to process said trauma, in the absence of any other notable amnesia or other disordered symptoms, it's actually more likely just from a logical standpoint alone that a person is simply right about saying "there are multiple people in this body" than they are unaware of trauma, let alone just "roleplaying" or "faking". There are simply too many endogenic systems for that to be the case.

Why would total amnesia around exactly the chronological bounds of the trauma, despite a system not having any periods of time missing from their memory, be the ONLY symptom experienced? In a society where even if you HAVE a disorder treatment is often inaccesibly expensive and the majority of people regard anyone who identifies as multiple as "insane" at best and "dangerous and needing to be locked up" at worst, what is to be gained from identifying as plural if that's not truly who you feel you are? It's the same tired arguments of nonbinary and nondysphoric/nontransitioning trans people in general just "pretending to be trans for fun". No one does that!

Also, traumatized people are not helpless crazy people that need "help" being paternalistically told what our "actual" experiences are because we're too ill to ever be right about our own lives and ESPECIALLY our subjective internal thoughts, emotions, and ways of experiencing the world and our selves. That's just extremely basic foundational sanism.

Some will claim it's not "for fun" but as a result of delusions or other mental illness that endogenic systems "claim to exist". They claim that delusional and mentally ill people need to be forced into treatment "for our own good", even if the alleged delusions are neither causing distress for us, dysfunction in our lives, or influencing us to act in ways which cause any material or quantifiable harm to others. And no, being offended by the existence of a subgroup of people within a marginalized group is not harm. That's just bog-standard bigotry.

This is also just basic sanism. It's the idea that if someone holds uncommon beliefs or is in any way abnormal, that those beliefs and abnormalities need to be suppressed and stamped out for "our" own good and for the good of society. It's the same (fascist) rhetoric that causes everything from autism [Coolsville sucks] spe/aks seeking a eugenicist "cure" for autism to white supremacy. Note: neither autistic people nor nonwhite people nor any other marginalized group are inherently "abnormal". They are simply minorities LABELED as such by those in power.

I know someone might try to take that line out of context to claim that I AGREE that marginalized peoples are abnormal, coolsville-sucks-style, hence my clarification and inclusion of that in brackets to make any bad faith actors have to at least black it out if they want to screenshot that out of context. That way, anyone bothering to actually fact-check will see immediately that they are twisting my words and acting in bad faith. I've been around the syscourse block long enough to know people WILL do this.

There's further arguments to be made that "normality" is simply a descriptor for things that do not significantly deviate from arbitrary averages and that abnormality itself is therefore morally neutral, but I digress.

I do however, want to encourage people to look into the subject of "mad liberation" for more on questioning and challenging the assumptions that anyone with any mental disorders or trauma is incapable of being a reliable source on their own experiences and existence.

Anyway, plurality has existed for as long as humans have been recognizably human. Many past and present peoples acknowledge forms of it, both in open and closed cultures. Most reputable psychiatrists and psychologists acknowledge the existence of nondisordered and endogenic systems, and further studies are being done into this form of neurodivergence already. The few professionals that don't are typically those like the ones present in the video released by McLean Hospital which fakeclaimed actual professionally-diagnosed disordered systems (which also goes to show just how fakeclaiming only ever ends up harming the people it's claiming to be used to try to protect).

Finally, "plural" is a term coined specifically to be inclusive of all systems, regardless of origin or disordered status. Plural was never a term that belonged only to disordered traumagenic systems, and to claim so is to actively speak over the inclusive systems responsible for coining the term and spread misinformation.

Tl;dr Endogenic and nondisordered systems exist, are valid, and should be believed about the ways they experience their own consciousnesses and brain. This is backed even by doctors in the field of "dismiss people who have abnormal experience of consciousness and supplant their narratives with what neurotypicals THINK is going on based on how we experience the actions of neurodivergent people. Trauma is not the only way to form a system, and intensely distressing mental illness is not the only way to BE a system.

The Epic the Musical server is unsafe for any systems, which as a DID system, makes us feel sad and angry and hurt.

Anti-en/dos, just block us. Even if you can come up with a new argument instead of the same repetitive and inane misinterpretations of scientific literature (or those actively disproven by scientific literature, no less) and pseudoreligious baseless beliefs about plurality, all I would do is tear apart the foundation of the new "argument" for bigoted exclusionism. I've already weighed more evidence than you've ever read, and I won't be convinced that this time the group just trying to live their lives and be accepted as they are is ACTUALLY harmful evil invaders faking and stealing resources because trust you bro. We also know more about our own mixed origins than you as a stranger are capable of ever discerning.

We've been harmed enough by fakeclaiming as a multiply physically disabled and neurodivergent queer traumaendo DID system to ALWAYS side with the people against fakeclaiming anyway, we BELIEVE minorities and especially neurodivergent people about what's going on inside their heads, and quite frankly, we just don't like exclusionist bigots (like you) and don't want exclusionist bigots (like you) interacting with our posts.

[ur-fav-is-schizo]

Just an observation, but it's sooo sillyz to me those fakeclaimerz ppl use "cringe" as a measure of fakeness when that's literally how neurodivergency manifests itself like... A LOT a lot of the time. It's wild.

Too obsessive about an interest? CRINGE!! Don't have a typical interest? CRINGE!! Can't talk like a normal person? CRINGE!! Don't have self awareness? CRINGE!! Too full of yourself? CRINGE!! Too sincere and open? CRINGE!! All these things (and more) are CRINGE...!!

..but like. Aren't these all apt descriptions of different neurodivergencies? When you break it down, you realise that this measure of 'fakeness' is absolutely contradictory to what neurodivergency is, because neurodivergency is systematically CATEGORISED as cringe. The label of 'cringe' is for behaviour that doesn't fit in, right? But like that's the entire definition of neurodivergency?? You're trying to disprove someone's neurodivergency with a symptom of neurodivergency itself.

There's other things to be said about why fakeclaiming is wrong, but I feel like this is the emotional core of a lot of it. I browse sometimes to see what the sanists are up to, and the amount of reasoning that boils down to, "I know it when I see it"... And the thing they see in question is 'cringe' behaviour..... It speaks for itself.

[glitchdollmemoria]

on one hand, want to get angry, tell non schizospecs/psychotics to take their turn defending, protecting, speaking up for us. should not need to put self in danger, risk of harassment, of attempts to trigger psychosis. should not be my fucking job. if people want to be mental health advocates, should do the fucking work. money in mouth. words from mouth. defend us. befriend us, if we want. shut down fuckers who harass and threaten and belittle. shut them down. make them unwelcome in communities. be open in support for us, show you believe we are people worthy of care. show it. show it to me right now. show it in the future. do the work. support us. protect us. care about us LOUDLY. we need you to be LOUD, be LOUD.

on other hand, i dont trust. dont trust you to not speak over us instead of for. to actually see us as people. high horse, savior complex, infantilization, clout, fake and shallow. speak, your words fall, but falling short. still internalize, "so weird, creepy, stupid, dangerous, insane". assume you think lesser of me, us.

beg, demand, challenge, prove me wrong. prove im in your worldview. prove i matter in your head. prove i can be safe. prove WE can be safe, my community, fellow schizospecs/psychotics. prove it. will continue being loud for self and siblings either way, but fucking help me. boost my voice and our voices and take our saying - include take saying from us who can say, about siblings who cannot say for selves, catatonic and completely lacking language ability and all else - and internalize it and speak up without speaking over. cannot do this by ourselves. need to be heard, need to be protected, need help. help us.

(non schizospecs/psychotics, reblog fully ok, encouraged. aimed at you. aimed at you.)

[inrecoveryhehe]

I'd like to thank you for being kind in your pro-recovery posts. So many others read like the op thinks people who acknowledge they self harm at all are toxic fakers romanticizing depression, so this is a breath of fresh air.

i'm so glad you feel that way about me :] i totally agree, the stigmatization and fakeclaiming against mentally ill people is exhausting. people who are so keen on the idea of "if you were depressed you would hide it!!!" are rarely ever actually mentally ill people AND are re enforcing the idea that those who are shouldn't get help.

[no-empathy-culture-is]

Tw: discrimination ment(?), sui bait ment(?)

Low empathy culture is "empaths" calling you evil and abusive while also saying they're the Ultimate Good and you're the Ultimate Bad and that you should die.

low empathy culture is

[creatureboything]

[Image ID: a flag with 7 curved vertical stripes colored: light red, red-violet, dark red-violet, gray, blue-gray, teal-gray, and gray. they all curve away from the sides at varying degrees as they get closer to the center, which has a small gray solid circle in the center with a white witch hat symbol in it. End ID.]

Witchmobordaen: a bordaen label reclaiming “the witch” BPD mother archetype. Bordaen (link) is a label describing ones relation to their bpd and their borderline identity.

“Witch” BPD mothers/parents are categorized as sadistic and hostile. The BPD mother archetypes are ableist/sanist by nature and this identity is for reclamation purposes specifically (I’ve tagged these as ableism cw and sanism cw for safety of the connotations).

can be pronounced witch - moh - bor - day - en or witch - muh - bor - day - en

@epikulupu

[debunkingfdc]

So anyways I want to talk more about r/fakedisordercringe fakeclaiming diagnosed people

So usually, they used to just casually ignore the fact that some of the people they were fakeclaiming were diagnosed, but now they've gone more mask off with their ableism

Instead of passively ignoring, they've started actively fakeclaiming diagnosed people, and saying that their diagnosis was fake/faked.

Some of their arguments include shit like "They just diagnosis shopped for doctors", "They aren't diagnosed, they're just saying they were", and "Diagnosed people can fake their symptoms", which can be easily debunked if you just realize that 99% of people seeking a diagnosis aren't doing so in bad faith, and that even if they were, the doctor would just... not diagnose them.

And this is extra shitty to neurodivergent people, because if even diagnosed people can be fakeclaimed while openly saying they're diagnosed, then there's no coherent definition of "faker" beyond a subjective "it looks fake!"

And at that point, it's literally just devolved to straight up ableism.

[neuroticboyfriend]

gentle reminder that gaslighting isn't always an abuser blatantly calling you crazy. they may lecture you about how you're misinterpreting something. they may say something very serious is no big deal. they may get passive aggressive and leave you feeling irrational. or they may get furious at you for being overdramatic without ever directly calling you that.

gaslighting is a form of manipulation, and manipulation is most effective when the victim doesn't even notice it's happening. "you're just insane" is a lot more obvious than "i don't remember that happening, are you sure it wasn't just a bad dream?" and whether it's over or covert, both are horrible. both are dangerous. both are abusive, and oftentimes neglectful.

be careful out there, and know you know yourself best. you are the expert on you - your mind, your body, your life. no one can change that. not even the people who wield so much power over us.