#syscourse to an extent

[granulesofsand]

Are we all aware that science doesn’t fall from trees? Science is humans striving towards understanding, typically with agreed upon rules of publish and ethics. People have to do science. We have to come up with the questions and find safe ways to answer the questions as best we can. Science is everchanging, because science is a work in progress. Not having scientific backing is not the same as science not backing a subject. It just means we haven’t asked those questions yet (or haven’t answered them safely or gone through the publishing stage yet). Ask the questions, or find someone to ask them for you. Science ✨

[oopsallsyscourse]

I want a banner that just says "I stand with SAS" cause honestly seeing how many anti endos are flipping their lid because of SAS is wild. Like that is a blog concerned with CDDs, misinformation, and people not being asshats. If you can't agree with that blog, there's no hope for you in syscourse.

[tanix-dragon]

Is That a New Guy or Am I Losing My Mind; or, A Beginner's Guide to Finding Headmates

Written by Roger de Camden of the Draconic Wizard Workshop

Hello, everybody! This is an essay for both plurals who might struggle finding, identifying, or confirming headmates, as well as people who are questioning whether or not they’re plural. Certain pieces of advice may apply better to questioners than established systems, and vice versa, but rest assured, it is intended for both!

This essay will be broken into several sections for various “phases” of discovery and working things out, but a disclaimer before we get to that: this is heavily based on our own experiences. This is not a one-size-fits-all kind of guide. I’m going to try to make it such, but, well, I can’t make any promises, because there are infinite ways of being a system out there, and everyone’s a little different. This is just what I’ve found works for us, and, to a large extent, many of our system friends! That being said, if you try to start syscourse or invalidate other systems for any reason in response to this essay, I’m going to block you and that’s that.

Also, sorry if I go between spellings for words. I’m English, but the body is American and that means that I don’t know how to spell certain words anymore.

So! Onwards, towards discovery!

Step One: Getting an Inkling

The first step to figuring out whether or not you’ve got a headmate (new or otherwise undiscovered; I’ll mostly be calling them “new” as in “new to you”) is having an inkling that one might exist. This is mostly a passive process, and you’re probably familiar with it if you’re reading this guide. Maybe you felt something scuttle through headspace (if you have one) or through the back of your mind. Maybe you felt a presence looming behind you, mentally, that bolted when you “looked.” Maybe you had a very strong emotional reaction to something that makes no sense for you to react to, but would make sense for a character you’ve been really attached to in a show. Or maybe you slipped into an unfamiliar accent, had a loss of memories and woke up with nail polish on in a colour you hate, or just felt an opinion about something that doesn’t match your usual one. Sometimes, you may even “hear” comments about things going on in your mind.

There are a lot of little things that can tip you off. Most of them are going to be things that are misaligned with your own perception of yourself, your opinions, and your behavior. This is usually a sign that someone is co-conscious or co-fronting with you without you being aware of it. Some headmates are very sneaky this way, and some may not realise that they exist at all while doing this! Don’t hold being hard to notice or get a hold of against your headmates—many of them don’t realise that they exist, don’t know how to not be this way, or are doing it for what they perceive to be a good reason (this last one is especially common in disordered systems). Maybe they’re scared, or just not ready to be confronted yet. Don’t worry—remember, you have your whole lives to figure out everyone who’s in there, and the time will pass anyways! Take it easy.

One specific thing that tends to tip us off to a new fictive is that we realise that… no one is aware of running a character that we’re playing in a tabletop roleplaying game. Maybe someone started off running them, but they sure seem to be doing their own thing now! That character may be hard to “turn off” or “put on the shelf” when you stop playing them—and they may continue to make comments and have opinions about things in your life. This is a dead giveaway! Sometimes when we think about a character, we feel a “movement” or interest somewhere in our mind that doesn’t match anyone else’s pattern of thinking or interests, which also can be a giveaway that they’re scuttling around somewhere. Also beneficial, for us, is our synesthesia—every headmate has a colour associated with them, and when we get a thought pattern that seems to match someone but the colour is off, it can make us realise that maybe there’s someone else in here. For example, if someone were to be really interested in jellyfish, we might think that it’s Caspian, but if the colour comes back as red and not blue, then we know for certain that it’s not him.

This first inkling of a new headmate may be obvious or it may be subtle. You may question yourself repeatedly, but remember: if you feel like you are “accidentally faking,” that’s not how faking works. Faking must be done intentionally and on purpose. You could be wrong, yes, but being wrong isn’t inherently bad. It’s just that you were mistaken about something. Nothing wrong with that! We’re all mistaken about all kinds of things every day! Be kind to yourself while trying to figure things out.

Step Two: Are You There, Headmate? It’s Me, Your Other Headmate

Steps two and three are interchangeable in order, but I thought I’d put this one first because it tends to be the one that’s hardest and most distressing, rather than step three, which is about identifying who the hell your headmate is. We’ll get to that, never fear!

So, let’s say you think there might be someone in there. How can you tell for sure? How can you open communication? How can you get them integrated okay?

The bad news is that this depends heavily on the system. The good news is that there’s no need to panic, rush, or be afraid, because once again, you’ll figure it out eventually, and it will be okay!

My first suggestion is to take note of everything that’s made you think there might be someone else in there. Write it down, if that helps! Write down everything that seems to get the entity’s attention, if anything. Write down anything that might help you identify who it might be! In some instances, you might have a character that seems a little independent but you can’t tell whether they’re really a headmate or not. In my experience, this is often how many non-disordered systems (but it’s not exclusive to them!) realise that they’re plural. Knowing who it is will make this step easier, but it isn’t necessary! After all, if you know who it is, you can also write down things that might bait them into responding. Interests and friends of theirs are good examples.

Your goal in this step is to try to draw them out into doing things, speaking, or acting in ways that will give away that they are for certain there. For systems with heavy amnesia or dissociative barriers, this might be significantly harder, but my best suggestion there is to jump straight to trying to communicate, however you can—and this isn’t a bad approach for other systems, either. You can try internal communication, although you might get no response, or an abnormal one, if the headmate is new. For example, with us, new headmates usually respond to direct queries with anxiety—which, while not good for communication and not ideal for the headmate in question, does help us key in on the fact that they definitely exist. You can also try external communication, if internal communication isn’t working or is difficult for you. Write a note in a journal or a sticky note, or even in a notes app or a private Discord server. Sometimes, headmates can find replying over text to be easier. If you’re a high-dissociation and high-amnesia system who is trying to figure out if it’s someone old or new who is fronting and doing things while you’re unaware, leaving sticky notes places asking people to write down who’s fronting when they see it (if they even know who they are) might be helpful. Keep experimenting, and do what works best for you!

As a last resort for uncertain, new, or inexperienced systems, you can try something called “puppeting” on a suspected headmate, especially if you know who they are and just aren’t sure whether or not they’re here. A warning: this is rude and not advised under most circumstances, but sometimes it’s the only way to make absolutely sure that someone is in there with you, especially when you’re not used to it. Have an apology ready and mean it. Puppeting is when you try to force a headmate to do something, especially something unusual or out of character for them. For example, if I thought I might have my character Gorka as a headmate, but I wasn’t sure, I might try to call up a scenario involving Gorka and then try to imagine her doing something wildly out of character, that she would never, ever do. If I couldn’t get a response out of that, or if I had no idea who this new headmate might be, I might just try to make them physically do something—strongly imagining them doing a stupid dance or similar! No response doesn’t necessarily mean you do or do not have a headmate, but a strong response—usually of anger, offense, or “slapping” your “hands” away—indicates someone separate from yourself! Apologize immediately and then attempt to engage in communication once they’ve calmed down a little, or try to transition into it through an explanation. 

There are a lot of reasons that a headmate might not respond to puppeting, though. They might be non-confrontational, or hiding their presence from you intentionally for any number of reasons. (Maybe they’re nervous, not ready to exist yet, afraid of how you might respond, afraid of accepting that they’re in a system—it could be anything.) In cases like this, you might just get discomfort instead of a strong response, which is easy to confuse for being your own rather than theirs. Try to sort out whether you just feel strange doing it, or if it’s someone else’s discomfort bleeding through. I know it’s hard, but that’s a difficult thing to give advice for, I’m afraid! Other reasons may be that they just dip from the front when you try (removing themself from your sphere of influence completely), or if they’re a character you frequently play, they might be so used to being pulled around into doing things that it doesn’t bother them, or bothers them so little that you don’t notice.

Usually, if you’re at the point of trying puppeting, there’s enough signs that this person really is a headmate to dissuade you from trying it once you’re a little more used to it. It’s a temporary and unideal tool that should leave your toolbox as soon as you become confident enough to identify new headmates without getting grabby with them. Undoubtedly, trying to establish communication is a better approach, if you can get it to work.

Usually, once we’ve properly spotted a headmate and made it clear to them that we know they’re there, one of two things happens: either they come sit in the front for a few days or weeks to settle in, let us identify them, and get used to being a full active member of the system, or they realise that they exist and have a panic attack. This “new headmate panic” can last anywhere from a few minutes to multiple days, and may fluctuate in strength. Sometimes, a new headmate might seem fine early on, but have this panic after a few days, weeks, or even longer. Be gentle during this time, especially if you yourself have a strong reaction—be gentle with both, or all, of you! Realizing that you’re in a system can be very distressing, as can realizing you have a new headmate, so try to be gentle, let yourself feel what you’re going to feel, and work through it in the best way you have. Try not to direct any anger or negative feelings towards anyone else in your system during this time, and just let the storm pass before really trying to get to know each other.

Step Three: Who Is This Guy, Anyway?

Once again, you can do this step before or after step two, but I put it here because I decided to include some tips for getting to know your headmate, not just identifying them (if there is anything to identify). If your system is introject-heavy, or if you’re asking yourself if you’re just really interested in a character or if they’re a new headmate, this is an important step! Who is this? Are they an introject of some kind? Are they something or someone else? Is there anything to identify, per se, or is it just a situation of getting to know a whole new person? This is a very, very different step depending on your system, and is going to skew very much towards my own experiences. I’m sorry about that, but I will do my best!

If you’ve already established communication with this headmate, even if it’s shaky, you can try to get information from them that way. They might be willing to give you a name, a code name, a colour, an aesthetic, likes or dislikes, something you can use to familiarise yourself with them or identify them from a list of “suspects” if you have such a thing. (We always do, because we’re almost all fictives, and we know our own patterns at this point.) For us, new headmates almost never actually identify, and just sullenly sit while trying to figure themselves out and will only confirm who they are once we figure it out. It’s sort of like playing a mystery game, assembling clues based on a myriad of factors. If you have some suspicions, just like the previous step, you can try to bait out responses by doing things that might interest who you suspect this headmate might be.

Again, I suggest writing things down! Write down likes and dislikes, things that get their attention, interests, even things that make them anxious or afraid. Whether it’s a case of identification or just getting to know them, this is invaluable information for interacting with someone sharing a head with you, and it may even be helpful for them as they get their feet under them.

Another invaluable tool is talking to people outside of your system. They can help you identify when you’re acting unusually, when you might have someone unfamiliar riding co-conscious, and even who that person might be. You may be too tangled up in your own feelings, your dissociation, or the desperation to understand who is in your head with you. It’s easy to get lost in the weeds and lose sight of the big picture, but another friend, especially another system that knows you well, can be extremely helpful! One of our system friends has clocked many a headmate of ours before we were even certain they were there—just “hmm, you’ve been very much like X lately” and they were absolutely right. 

Regardless, taking notes on your new headmate, asking them about themselves, and sharing things about yourself are all important steps to getting to know them! They may be uncomfortable, they may distrust you, they may be afraid—or they could be friendly and excited to be here! It really depends on who it is and their comfort level. Don’t push—if they’re not comfortable talking yet, don’t make them! Let them adjust at their own pace and get to know them as they’re willing to let you. I know it can be distressing to have a totally unknown entity co-fronting with you, but sometimes it’s one of those things that you have to take a deep breath and carry on through until they’re willing to talk. I know you can do it! Talk through it with someone outside of your own head if it’s difficult to give yourself some fortitude if you need to. I know it helps me.

Step Four: Now What?

Let’s say that you’ve confirmed that you do have a headmate, and either have or are on the road to identifying them, if applicable. Now what?

As I’ve said before: be gentle with yourselves! Especially for a new or inexperienced system, and especially for someone who is just realising that they’re a system, this can be overwhelming, distressing, or any other number of emotions. Remember that having or gaining headmates isn’t inherently a bad thing, and while this all might take some getting used to, it’s going to be okay. You’ll figure out an equilibrium eventually, and it is absolutely possible to live a long, happy life with your headmates. Remember that you’re all in this together, and you’re a team.

People may not want you to notice them, may not want to be in the system, or may avoid attention as best they can for a lot of reasons, and trying to make them feel at home, or at least more comfortable, is essential. It can be scary being in a system all of a sudden, especially if they’re an introject or otherwise had a life outside or before this one. Maybe they don’t like the body, or are afraid of another headmate, or are terrified of a negative response from you or someone else. Don’t force these people into situations they’re not ready for! If you’re looking for someone, trying to identify them, or trying to help them, and you’re just causing a lot of distress, back off for a while. Let them calm down and come to you in their own time. Sometimes, you have to do the system equivalent of leaving cookies out on a plate and turning your back to them so that your new headmate can take them without being watched. Take things at the pace that you’re all the most comfortable with, and as always, be kind.

I really do suggest talking to someone about this process, if you can. Journal if you’d like, especially if you can’t trust anyone with this, or don’t feel comfortable doing so yet. Getting your words out of your head helps you sort them out a lot, especially in the case of systems, where a lot of people’s thoughts can get jumbled together. Writing them all down, even if you don’t know whose they are, can be helpful. We find that talking to other system friends is of the most benefit, and our new members are far more likely to speak to them first rather than us, because there’s a degree of separation and that’s more comfortable for them. Whatever works for you, do it! The idea is to get comfortable with each other, and with being here together.

Find things that your new headmate likes doing. Goratrix has a whole panel about this aimed at fictives, but essentially, if your new headmate doesn’t have reason to front and isn’t interested in anything, you probably won’t see much of them, and they may end up miserable. Make sure you engage with them and their interests. Let them make friends if they’d like. Get them snacks. Again: whatever works! This is going to depend very heavily on your system, so follow your gut instinct on this one, I think.

Absolutely essential, though, is to not repress anybody. I know sometimes getting a new headmate can be scary, especially if they’re unfamiliar, frightening, seemingly monstrous, or a persecutor, but remember: they’re probably just as freaked out as you are, if not more so, and they need patience and understanding. Statistically, if they’re doing something troublesome, they’re trying to help and just don’t know how, or are misguided on what “help” looks like. Be kind, and try to find a solution that works for everyone.

Past that… just get to know each other. Figure out how to live together and how to make your combined life the best life it can be. For us, there’s so many of us that someone new can almost always find a fast friend in someone else, and sticks with them for a while until they’re more used to the system and more confident fronting and doing things without their buddy. Other systems may be able to mimic this approach, or may need to do something very different. Again, again, again, do what works best for you! If parts of this guide seem unhelpful or counterproductive, ignore them! This is based on our experience of plurality, not yours. Always do what’s best for you, what helps the most of you, and what causes the least distress while still letting you function as much as you need to.

Being plural is a very personal experience, in a lot of ways, which is pretty funny because sometimes that personal experience is spread across two or twenty or five hundred people. It’s also a very personalized experience, meaning we’re all quite different. Your “now what?” might look very different from ours, and that’s okay. We can only do our best, and that’s always good enough.

I hope this is helpful to someone! If you have any questions, please feel free to ask, and I may edit this guide in the future if it seems that I left something out or think of anything to add. =)

[haunted-house-sys]

Cutely blocking pro endos and other nontraumgens on SIGHT

We are anti endo and other non traumgens + those who support them...

We dont actively discuss syscourse on our blog, and will continue not to. Why?

BECAUSE IT'S PROTECTING OUR MENTAL HEALTH.

If y'all are coming at us to "uh ACTUALLY ☝️🤓" us we will block y'all on the topic of endos, tulpas, all that other bull.

We will look in from afar, and talk about it with our partner system, but that's the extent of it.

Listen...

We dont care if you are "built different" or "systems just happen without trauma"

Fucking BULLSHIT.

Who are YOU to tell that to those of us who had to face YEARS of utter HELL when we were only JUST KIDS?! "Uhm actually were a system too without the trauma" "we wanted this!"

NO TF YOU DONT. Being a system if FUCKING HELL. Get the fuck off our blog and get the fuck off our posts...

....

Hi.. this was Illya with a BPD episode stemmed from the utter searing hot anger that boiled through my veins after seeing an endo "um actually" me... fuck y'all...

[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.]

[sysmedsaresexist]

🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

This is Mod Quill, but this is on behalf of a mutual friend of mine and Mod Dude's. Someone we care about a lot, and someone I'm not even going to fucking name here, because I am so fucking done with my friend suffering. Besides. You're going to know who it is if you have a lick of syscourse knowledge. I just hope they know what this might bring. If you're reading this, hon -- maybe just... delete your blogs and get out of syscourse. Make something new for yourself. Trust me, I've done that plenty of times.

Anyways.

@sophieinwonderland

Let's have a chat. Okay? I mean this completely, 1000 percent genuinely. I want to talk to you. WE want to talk to you. And we want to understand what the hell is going on with you.

Context: A friend of ours is in the hospital. This friend is in the hospital... likely because of you. Well, somewhat -- I'm not here to convince you that you, personally, are at fault for someone else's actions. You did not personally give them whatever implement of choice they used to nearly off themselves. But you have got to see that what you're doing -- what you've done for a very, very long time, causes people a lot of harm. And you have acknowledged it. Repeatedly.

You know that you do. You know you're hurting people. And you've shown constantly on your blog that you're okay with that.

This isn't the first time someone has been hospitalized after you took grievance with their tumblr blog. This is the second time someone has notably been hospitalized after interactions with you, and far from the last time someone's harmed themselves over you. I should know -- I'm a user who tried so desperately not to self harm, but you are the person who brought me to that point, many moons ago in a fit of hell and despair.

Don't worry, I'm all good -- it was barely anything. But it still stings emotionally, to this day.

The user in question who's currently hospitalized is not, and has not been stable, for a very long time. They're someone I hold dear, but I think we can all admit that people with DID sometimes struggle greatly with making really dumb choices. They've made a lot. This isn't the first time they've been in the hospital.

But Dude made a promise to them when it seemed like things were going to hell this time around, something to try and encourage things to go the right way.

Your named was tossed out too. Because of course it was. Like it or not, Sophie, you are 100% the biggest syscourser on Tumblr. You post the most and have the most followers. You are syscourse. And Dude's promise was to take syscourse down.

... But I don't think anyone in this situation really understands what that means.

Sophie, you are a person. Not a blog. Not a stance. Not a slogan, or a preacher, or whatever conspiracy you're trying to lean into next to explain away the angry actions you've shown more and more lately, to somehow explain why it's okay to say the things you've been saying, even when it sometimes, just maybe, seems like... you just don't want to.

As people may know, a (from my perspective, horrifically written, incredibly inaccurate, and only harmful) callout post for Sophie was recently posted to syscourse. What people don't know is that I, Mod Quill, was approached to help write it. Mod Dude was involved in the callout post as well, though to what extent I don't know.

I flat out refused to work on it. And that's because I knew exactly what would happen. I knew my friend would be hurt, or maybe even hospitalized over this. I knew that syscourse -- that Sophie -- would drive someone over the edge again. I knew that the document -- filled with inaccuracies and vaguities and nothingburgers to the max -- would be easy for Sophie to pick apart, easy to dismantle, and it would all start with debunking so much of the very real pain and suffering my friend has gone through.

And yeah.

I was right. Go figure. Maybe I should've done more, my brain inevitably says, I need to help everyone, I should've fought harder to prevent this... Dumbass brain.

Sigh.

Dude edit/addition: I knew the doc was coming, and while I won't say that I was supportive of it going out (I made the owner sit on it for several weeks), I made no effort to stop it. Having made my own callouts on sophie (and Quill, you have, too), I understood the need, and the positives and negatives. I knew Sophie could handle it. I was approached to read and check it, as my posts had been used in it. I even offered to help add to it, though... I ended up being completely unable to. I still can't actually remember anything in the doc. I'm doubting if I actually read it because it seems I retained nothing from it. This likely stems from the fact that I have been in contact with Sophie for several weeks now, getting to know her. I'm so incredibly conflicted on this topic that I chose to stay out of it publicly from start to finish, without comment or publicity. For the first time since I started my blog, I'm not feuding with anyone, I'm having such amazing conversations with people, I feel like I'm making more of a difference than ever before. Certain people have left me alone as I stayed under the drama radar.

I'm so tired of being angry...

My thoughts on the doc and sophie are complicated. I'm sorry to anyone that was hurt through my uncertainty. Instead of helping with the doc, we talked about life, experiences, medicalization, and I was... so happy. I don't think that I really thought beyond... "I wish I had spoken to some of these people sooner."

It's important to note that I don't blame the doc or author for any of this.

Syscourse, as a whole, does not address any sort of recovery, or help, or even just acknowledgement of the issues we are facing, as human beings, as systems, as people on this earth. It is just slinging words at each other with varying degrees of value. And I'll be the first to admit that I have relished that battleground. I have loved the feeling that I might be able to throw the right words or the right punches and get someone to either change, or deactivate. I've also wrestled with those feelings, tried to explain them away, mirroring what I see on Sophie's blog constantly.

But as more and more time goes on and I grow up and I see the damage that's done to me and my friends, I have grown to absolutely despise this place. I try my best to spread what joy I can. I also know it's really not enough.

Sophie, I have sent you, if I had to hazard a guess, at least 10 anons this past year, all of them variations on themes. Either positivity, begging you to take a break, or explaining to you in excruciating detail how I know you are hurting people, and why that hurts so badly. And... each and every single one of those have been met with dismissal. With that godforsaken shrug emoji that convinced me for years that you just... did not care, at all, about other people.

And this isn't just you. I know I'm coming at you, but that's because you are the biggest source of Syscourse Grief(tm) for this particular friend. But lord knows people get enemies here, that's just par for the course. So, this goes for everyone.

Learn to fucking care about each other, for fucks sakes.

God, this really is a ramble. I thank everyone who's bearing with me.

For syscourse in general: Stop. Just... stop. For those who are considering it, just stop for a bit, and witness. Watch. See what happens. Because the ones who are obstinate -- primarily the overly aggressive anti-endos and pro-endos -- will fling their vitriol at each other. It will just get worse and worse, and you can witness syscourse eat itself alive.

For my friend in the hospital: I've already given you some advice, but genuinely, I really, really hope you take care of yourself. I pray that, when you get back, you maybe set syscourse aside. At most, discord is there, and that seems to at least be tamer. But you are young. You have so much future ahead, and coming from someone who is (unfortunately seen as) an older system, I can promise you that it gets beter.

For Dude: GO TAKE A FUCKING BREAK. You are recently retraumatized, recently through a severe surgery, and you are out here promising shit like "I'll burn syscourse to the ground for you"??? Play a fun game and pay attention to your fucking partners, take a fucking break and take care of yourself. Syscourse will wait for you. People will come and people will go, and it doesn't fucking matter. Your life is what matters and I'm so fucking scared watching you obsess over this one, small aspect of it. I'm so relieved you went to that fun pokemon blog. You aren't alone, you are so loved, and don't let this toxic ass place make you forget that.

And Sophie.

I'm going to give Dude a link to send to you. You don't have to take it if you don't want to. You don't even need to acknowledge this if you don't want to. But I'm swinging the door open and offering the olive branch. I know you don't use Discord much, but for gods sake, it's better than Tumblr DMs, and we both know how Tumblr is a mess.

I really hope you'll take me up on it.

And for everyone else.

Wait till you see what happens next.

Edit from Mod Quill: Well, what's next is evidently a need for clarification and yet another callout post. Hello, callout-post author. Thank you for your clarifications. Notably, I attempted to keep your URL out of this, for those who didn't know.

Anyways, for the fullest disclosure and context: I was approached by Mod Dude, who asked if I wanted to participate in "Sophie Drama, Anonymously." I agreed, though I'll admit I was hesitant due to my particular issues with that user. I was then added to a group chat involving an enormous callout post. Notably, it should be mentioned, callout posts are a major trigger of ours that we are still working on overcoming.

I clicked the document and saw it was a mess of grammar mistakes, poor formatting, and impossible for me to read without trembling. But given that I already have an intense distaste for the user who posted it, I wasn't about to tell them more personal details about myself, and I did not want to communicate with them any further due to my own fear of the instability of all those involved. I told them I disliked the callout post due to harassment that it would cause, that I feel Sophie is a person, and that they had better have contacted the user who was hurt -- who is once again revealed in the callout, unfortunately.

I tried to laugh it off and move on, and take care of my mental health. That's what I was lamenting above; the fact that I didn't say more. I felt bad that I didn't allow myself to damage my mental health further to craft a callout post -- something I have tried desperately to avoid since the one I made the mistake of writing years ago about the very user you wrote this callout post about -- and something I get roped into constantly.

I privately read the rest of the document after it had been posted in full, as I still have access to it and it is a publicly posted document. It was filled with things that I found to be either nothing important in particular (things that have already been discussed numerous times) or things that would just be inflammatory (i.e. the OAS sections). I talked with a friend on Discord about the document, to which we both agreed it was bad.

To the OP of the document: I didn't say any of this at the time because, as I said, I felt uneasy and could not be in that group chat. I explicitly said I would not be touching "it" (the group chat). I was taking care of my mental health.

I refused to work on it because, based on my past experiences and triggers, which I do not owe you and still alluded to anyways in my conversations with you, I knew it would end poorly. I tried my best to sway you in the moment, but I was not able to do so because of my own mental health.

So, yes, to clarify: My grievances with the document were not made known to the one who posted it, whom I never mentioned in the original post. I do not condemn the poster of the document. I was simply making my feelings about callout posts known. What is above is not a condemnation of the callout writer, nor a comment on them at all. I genuinely did not want the point of this post to be lost due to callout-post drama.

So let me reiterate the important part of all of this.

This post was about the state of syscourse and how people do not approach syscourse in a good way. It is constantly slinging hate at people, which is never justified.

Learn to fucking care about each other, for fucks sakes.

---

Mod dude, here...

I want to add something to this, but I don't know what. I mean, Quill said it all, quite well.

Hurt people... Hurt other people.

I've made the attempt, over the last year or so, to actually talk to some of the bigger names in syscourse, the ones usually active in the tags, endos and antis alike.

It reinforced that... we're all just fucking people, trying to get by.

Antis, have you even tried to empathize with the community you attack so quickly and cruelly? Imagine if people said those things to you or about CDD systems. Have you, personally, witnessed the things you claim are happening? Because I've been here a lot longer, and it seems you're making shit up. Consider that you should stop parroting everything you hear and stick to what you're actually seeing with your own eyes.

Endos, please don't forget that these are severely traumatized individuals that have probably never even been to therapy yet. If you're not yet, maybe you should get into therapy-- it doesn't automatically mean there's anything wrong, but everyone could use someone to talk to, and seeing what it's like could be really beneficial to understanding the other side and getting an unbiased view of your own behavior and beliefs.

These are real fucking people that are ending up in the hospital.

Quill, the rest of my mods, and I are real fucking people behind these screens.

Sophie is a real person. They just got a new dish washer that they saw on Circ's blog, I missed it, but she linked it to me, and now I'm looking at it. She's going to let me know how it works.

And you know what? This little countertop dishwasher feels a hell of a lot more real and important than anything in syscourse.

As Quill mentioned, I just went through a major surgery. I'm learning that...

I'll probably never be able to walk properly again. My life is forever changed, and I'm really struggling.

My cat just... passed. Feel free to go like that post, it would mean a lot to me.

None of you know that. The people who leaked my main and smeared my wonderful name don't know that.

Sophie didn't know that the last time we fought each other.

My friend didn't know that when I promised him I would bring syscourse down.

Maybe bringing it down isn't the answer.

Maybe just reminding you all that we're all people behind the screen is enough.

Fucking TALK to each other.

Make an attempt to learn and understand.

Talk about things that actually matter.

Grow the FUCK up.

Reblog to share a hug, because that's more worthwhile.

And most importantly.

Please keep our friend in mind while they're in the hospital.

Syscourse community, endos and antis, this is one of our own. A person you've likely interacted with before, that you've seen around.

We exist in this small bubble, all together. Whether we like it or not.

[sophieinwonderland]

I heard an anti-endo recently did a poll that showed that many anti-andos wouldn't change their stance even in the event that proof came out showing unequivocally that endogenic systems existed.

This just goes to what I've been saying all along. Their bigotry has never actually been about not believing.

If every single major psychiatric organization released statements tomorrow affirming that endogenic systems existed, the vast majority of anti-endos would not change their minds. They would still hate us for what we are.

The post said that syscourse would never end. And it's right to an extent. We will never be able to convince all of the hateful bigots out there that we are people deserving of respect.

They only hide behind their lies about what they claim the science says because it gives them an excuse to be awful human beings.

What the bigots don't realize is that we don't need them. We just need to outnumber them.

There are a lot of ways to do this. If we could change the mind of a hateful bigot, that would be nice. But we can also just spread awareness before someone becomes a bigot. We can reach out to different communities or just be ourselves in those communities. And we can spread techniquea for creating new systems. And what will they do?

They'll come at us probably. They will come at our communities and try to destroy them. Just like they did with the Yaelokre Discord.

But how many allies do you think they won by destroying the whole community for just being neutral? If they want to be hateful, let them. When they harass people, make an example of them. When they lie about the science again and again, cite sources to prove them wrong and humiliate them in front of the world.

I don't care about changing their minds anymore though. 🤷‍♀️

I don't think they are that important. I don't think the plural community needs to convince them to change their minds when we could just talk over them.

[afuckingsystemsthoughts]

if the future is plural it means society as a whole, not just lawmakers and people of power, including teachers and social workers, failed our current and future generations of children, but it means us civilian bystanders have failed our current and future generations too. just imagining an entire generation of kids who are already growing up being hated on by previous generations, called "ipad kids", being harassed over gen alpha slang, and being born neurodivergent at a high rate, who are probably already traumatized to some extent because of all that, just the thought that the majority of them are being severely abused to the point their brain never develops into one cohesive personality and these kids are gonna mentally suffer severely as a result later in life, makes me feel sad for this generation and future generations. imagining these kids growing up to find out they have DID or osdd, learning about how stigmatized these disorders and the people with it are, the stereotypes, the misinformation, and unfortunately the syscourse. if the future is plural, kids are gonna be mentally exhausted from not just what i listed, but also from having to meet new alters every week and log information about every alter, try to know when a switch is gonna happen and log switches, have amnesia for large amounts of their life, feel like strangers to themselves, forget what they did five minutes ago, struggle with wondering if the world is real or not, feel like they're faking DID or osdd and trauma, and be fakeclaimed. if the future is plural we have a whole generation of kids who are gonna feel shame and guilt and be fakeclaimed for their alters especially fictives and factives. who are gonna feel like they're just for peoples fascination and entertainment because of their plurality, which is a disorder caused by trauma. kids who are gonna feel less human because of all this. kids who are gonna have cptsd and other effects of trauma because DID and osdd are posttraumatic. a whole future of unhappy kids and more suicides than we have right now.

if the future is plural, we have all failed as a society.

[rayssyscourse]

question/disscussion

hey everyone! this is something I've been thinking about for a while, so if anybody has input that would be awesome so I can eliminate the confusion I have.

this is about the word "system". for a long time I was under the impression that "system" is exclusively a traumagenic or OSDDID term, and thus that non-traumagenics shouldn't use it. I figure(d) that there's a lot of other terms out there, the most common of which being "plural", that were more general terms for non traumagenic systems as well as traumagenic ones.

but it occurred to me recently that I don't really have any basis for that. I must have heard it from somewhere, but unlike the rest of my syscourse opinions I don't have a solid source/evidence to point to.

so what I'm asking is, does this actually make any sense?? or did I just kinda randomly make it up one day lmao?? if anybody has sources or evidence that would be great as well.

and if it turns out I'm wrong about this and "system" isn't a traumagenic only term, does anyone have propositions on how we can more effectively distinguish traumagenic and non traumagenic systems' terms?

I have other posts about this but if you're not familiar with this blog, my main criticism is not the existence of endos but the fact that their community is so intertwined with ours, which has negative effects on us (and them, at least to some extent, I think). so if system isn't the right word, I'd be interested if we as communities could better distinguish exactly what terms mean what, and who they apply to.

that's not to say I want to, like, separate everyone with specific label boxes, but I think it's important for us to have distinguishing terms for those of us whom it's important to, in the interest of having better defined communities and spaces for both traumagenic and non-traumagenic plurals.

I am fully willing to be proven wrong or debated with on this, because like I said I'm not sure if I'm actually right here, so please feel free to correct me if I got anything wrong!

have a lovely day, everyone <3

[granulesofsand]

Selective mutism vs no talk program anon again. I should probably also add that the way verbal issues are presented are different for that alter and most others as they would not necessarily be too overwhelmed to talk but rather parsing the right words together is difficult and the body feels lightheaded. I know skills can vary throughout the system but I sometimes hear about high support level autistic systems saying individual alters can’t be nonverbal and we consider ourselves low support

Part 1: What you asked

🗝️🏷️ RAMCOA, programming, torture mentions

I don’t love how we’re talking about alter identities through the lens of the whole system, but I can help with the programming aspect of this.

This may be programming. If it is, it would likely be scramble or no-talk, depending on the perception of the alters effected. If you already know you have a history of programming, I would lean more towards that possibility.

Scramble progs mix up information both ways. While active, those effected might have difficulty comprehending speech from others or producing it themselves. It can change the way visual or tactile information is perceived as well. Scramble progs are sometimes tied to no-talk, but they don’t have to be.

Other no-talk progs target language, movement, or thought. This can look like inability to put sentences together, lack of understanding of known languages, clenched jaws, biting your tongue (usually not off), brainfog, sudden flooding of emotions or memories, lots of things.

Both are installed by torture, but the alters effected need not hold the programs and the programmed alters need not remember events. The more alters involved, the more complex the structure of the system.

Selective Mutism is associated with anxiety, but I don’t think it’s required for diagnosis. Alters are rarely diagnosed individually because it would be on the record of the whole system. If this alter ever speaks aloud, Selective Mutism might be accurate. I would not say that the system has Selective Mutism just because some speak aloud and some do not.

I have Opinions about alter-specific labels, so the rest is about that.

Part 2: the Opinions

🗝️🏷️ syscourse, alter labels

These use our system as an example because we exist this way and have these experiences as anecdotal evidence. It might be relevant to you, but here’s a TL;DR— alters should be able to identify with labels if they fit that description.

With our experience as a Deaf system, I have no qualms with an alter being Deaf. This is because Deafness is a subjective experience reliant on community and ability. An alter who is deaf/hard of hearing/similarly effected would be Deaf if they know and use a signed language and participate in the Deaf community.

Some systems are not as clear-cut with alters. Some systems share memories between members. Some systems consider themselves collectively one person. All of these are good reasons to refuse an opt-in label like Deaf, but ultimately no one else decides whether or not you are Deaf enough.

Alters are capable of producing varying presentations within a body. This is a well-researched phenomenon, and if it were not there are still many systems who live this reality. Some effects only appear the same, others functionally are.

We have asthma. The younger alters have not had treatment for asthma, so the body has severe asthma when they are fronting. Their brain maps do not include information about medications and their effects, only what they front for. They would also have mild asthma if they took the medication for a while.

Alters in our system qualify for personality disorders, for different heart conditions or digestive issues. All of these tie back to trauma, but every alter has a different set of life experiences to inform their health.

Similarly, support needs are going to vary by alter. One body may not be treated as having this variety, but that is because of an assumption of singular self. It makes sense that some alters have different symptoms, and what they ID as should be up to them.

Refusing an alter’s right to choose who they are is only proof that others do not see us as whole. If you are an alter who feels this way, you may adjust your labels accordingly.

It is not acceptable to treat every system like this without intimate knowledge of who they are and how they function, and even then it would be preferable to talk it out rather than make their decisions for them.

If an alter is nonverbal in the same way a singlet is nonverbal, they should be able to choose that label accordingly. It may well be that this protector is nonverbal rather than SM, or it may be programming. They should have the space to determine which seems to fit best and how to proceed.

We have many alters who are nonverbal, but some of us were tortured into behaving otherwise. We were stuck between a rock and a hard place, and if we had not split someone who could do what was asked, we would have died.

We maintain relationships by alter rather than as a body, so many of our friends know our body as nonverbal because this is all they will ever see. Alters have the experience of being nonverbal all the time, they should be allowed to find peers who understand them.

I don’t see this as the same as race; you cannot change the body’s race, you cannot have the experience of another body’s race. An alter can have experiences with many other things. It is little more than the Deaf community gatekeeping from those who are HOH or use cochlear implants. Sometimes we do belong, and we are not wrong for existing.

[hiiragi7]

I have been doing some reading lately, and wanted to clarify some common questions and misconceptions people seem to have regarding the TOSD.

I'm also more than willing to answer additional questions or asks people have based off my understanding of the theory. I'm also open to being corrected on anything I got wrong.

My system doesn't have any ANPs, we all remember the trauma?

"ANP" (or "Apparently Normal Part") seems to have gotten its definition mixed up in syscourse somewhere along the way. An ANP is not always a part who does not remember the trauma, though they often are - ANPs are parts focused on daily life, vs. EPs who are focused on defense. ANPs can be hosts, caregivers, parts who manage work or socializing, or parts who do chores such as cleaning or cooking.

Instead of complete amnesia for the trauma, it is common for ANPs to instead feel seperated or distanced from the trauma or to not realize the full extent of it or how it affected them.

There is also such a thing as "Mixed parts" which a lot of people don't seem to know about - These are especially common in systems whose trauma blurred the line between "daily life" and trauma, or those whose "daily life" functions became tangled up in trauma (Such as child sexual abuse victims, whose sexuality functions were stimulated by abuse, turning a function regularly associated with normal daily life into one that is attached to trauma and survival functions).

The TOSD lists OSDD as secondary structural dissociation, but my system has multiple ANPs and EPs?

This is actually accounted for within the TOSD. The authors say that the diagnoses attached to each structural dissociation level are generalized examples and not set in stone, these categories are flexible. They also say that elaboration (The distinctiveness and complexity of each part from each other, including different memories, skills, senses of self, names, appearances, opinions, etc) and emancipation (The seperateness of each part from each other, including autonomy, barriers, amnesia, not seeing each other as sharing the same body, etc) can have a wide range of variation within levels. The levels refer to how seperated each function for navigating life (Such as caretaking, sexuality, eating, socialness, defense, and so on) are, and while this is associated with higher levels of both elaboration and emancipation at each increased level, this is not always the case. The authors describe cases of PTSD where only one ANP and one EP exist, but each have their own distinct identities, for example, as well as cases of DID with only two ANPs and two EPs.

Different functions being seperated from each other can take the form of caregivers, protectors, persecutors, hosts, and any number of different roles.

What about endogenic and non-disordered systems?

The theory is not about endogenic or non-disordered systems. It is about levels of trauma-based dissociation - If you don't experience trauma-based dissociation, it is outside the scope of the TOSD to describe your experiences. It is a theory about trauma-based dissociation, not about the origin of all systems and how they work. DID is only a part of the theory - The theory also covers PTSD, CPTSD, BPD, and other trauma-based stressor and dissociative disorders.

If an OSDD system with secondary structural dissociation developed a tulpa, would they suddenly be a DID system with tertiary structural dissociation?

I would argue this misunderstands the TOSD on several levels, and seeing the diagnosis examples attached to TOSD as much more rigid than they are. If you do not meet the diagnostic criteria for DID, then why would the diagnosis change?

I'd argue that the TOSD is not meant to cover endogenic headmates, at all, and bringing them up in a theory about trauma-based dissociation is not really all that helpful to understanding trauma or dissociation.

It is also very important to note that each level of structural dissociation is not rigid - You can change levels over time. The goal of treatment for disordered systems, even, is decreasing dissociation and increasing the ability to integrate new information and share memories and skills between each other more flexibly. If a system chooses to fuse members, some may even lose their "multiple ANPs, multiple EPs" status. ANPs and EPs under the TOSD are functions for navigating life that have become seperated, and increasing communication and cooperation between these parts is considered a goal of treatment for dissociative patients.

Our system doesn't have anyone who just exists to eat or use the bathroom, how can the TOSD still apply to us?

It's actually fairly common to have many generalized roles instead of several extremely specific ones. It depends on to what degree each function of living is seperated to. Some parts may have generalized roles, like everything to do with socializing and eating and work, while others may have very narrow and specific tasks, such as washing the dishes. How many generalized and narrow roles exist in a system will vary a lot, and the elaboration and emancipation (Described above) of each part will also vary heavily between systems and levels.

[oopsallsyscourse]

One nitpick I have is that some people get so focused on interpreting everything thru a plural lens that they forget that even the most singlet of singlets experience some degree of identity separation.

[mouserdiscourse]

its a little bit depressing and.. confusing to me how anti-psychiatry is basically laughed out of the room by syscoursers. there's very little respect for people who exist outside of the system, or for whom the system just Does Not Work.

i think a lot of people get scared when they see these things heavily criticized, or when they see people say that medication and therapy and other resources dont work for them. because if they dont work for everyone they might one day not work for *ME* and *I* need these things to function

like, the main counterpoint i see brought up against anti-psych sentiments is "but i need my meds", which is kind of a fundamental misunderstanding of what anti-psych means and it frustrating to see over and over again

i just. get confused. bc this is a site and community presumably filled with leftists who understand the fundamental evils of capitalism and that our establishments (and, to an extent. our sciences) are shaped by the mindset of western imperialism, but the second you point out psychiatry as an oppressive tool of social control everyone is like "so you want to come into my house and rip the adderall straight out of my hands? youre crazy"

[luxlitemidnight]

Intro Post

Quick Facts:

System Name: Lowlux System

Collective Name: Lycan, Lichen, or Fluffy

Collective Pronouns: they/them

Collective Identities: Alterhuman, A-spec, ADHD, Anxiety, Depression, suspected autism

Age: 21+

Origin: Created & Adaptive

Dni: none (we're more than happy to talk with people from all walks of life as long as you're not a prick to us)

Sideblogs:

@luxlitereblogs - reblog blog

@sanctumfilth - NSFW/kink blog (minors be warned)

@spain-exline-linden-runesworth - Sims blog

Important Links:

Pronouns.cc (system info and headmate list)

Coining Anymic (Alterhuman term)

More about us below the cut!

------------------

Hello! Welcome to our blog. We talk about plurality, personal life, alterhumanity, media we like, and whatever else suits our fancy.

If you want to talk to us or ask a question, please go ahead! We only bite on Thursdays (or if you ask nicely) 😁

We follow the golden rule. Treat us with respect, and we'll respect you. Treat us with disrespect, and we'll take that as an invitation to disrespect you back.

We are always open to good faith discussion and questions no matter your beliefs. We are against echo chambers and personally dislike DNIs, however we will do our best to respect yours if you have one.

If something about us bothers you and it's non-negotiable, you don't need to engage with us.

We engage in syscourse to some extent, and consider ourselves pro-endo.

We are against censorship, though believe that there should be specific spaces for things so that people don't have to see what they don't want to.

We think that all sides of an argument should be considered before creating a stance, and that it is okay to not have a stance on something if you can't dedicate the time to learning.

We use tulpamancy terminology. We don't fully support the use of the term, but we believe using an alternate term only further separates the community.

We're kinky and very sex positive. We will talk about sex in here, but it will be tagged #suggestive or #nsft. Consent is always necessary. Explicit stuff will go onto our NSFT blog.

We try to trigger tag anything potentially triggering with "cw [trigger]". If you would like us to trigger tag something for you, please ask. We will not change what we post, however.

We have memory problems. Sorry if we forget something, it is not out of malice.

Tag List:

#[headmate]'s post - a post by, about, or mentioning that specific headmate.

#[headmate] lore - primarily for introjects, but a post talking about the backstory and/or personal stuff of a specific headmate.

#suggestive - mentions sex, but is not explicit.

#nsft - mentions sex, and is explicit about it.

Userbox Hoard:

[cyrusclouds]

⋆˚࿔ SYSTEM INTRODUCTION 𝜗𝜚˚⋆

hello! we figured we'd make a separate introduction for our system, since our pinned intro us just a bunch of collective facts about us. i hope you guys don't mind!! <3

GENERAL FACTS

☆ we are a ramcoa traumagenic did system!! we collectively use any pronouns and go by the name cyrus, though it's preferred by alters when not referring to us as a collective for their pronouns and name to be asked. ☆ we are very introject/fictive heavy, and most of the alters that do choose to front are introjected! nonetheless, you may see brainmades around from time to time! ☆ outside of did, we also have suspected asd (which we will be getting screened for) and bpd!! :))

FREQUENT FRONTERS

kris ibarra - intro? : yes! - they/them/theirs - 16 y/o kite - intro? : not yet! - he/it/his - 28 y/o henry miller - intro? : yes! - he/him/his - 90+ y/o nina hopkins - intro? : not yet! - she/it/theirs (+neos & xenos) - 16 y/o

OTHER

☆ we do not participate in syscourse. please do not bring it to our page, we do not appreciate it. we do not care your opinion, with that being said. anybody is f2i. :DD ☆ we are bodily 14 years old! we would appreciate it if adult systems tread lightly around us and interact with care, same goes for anybody 16-18, though to a lesser extent.

[sysmedsaresexist]

Wanted to ask: which endos you are specifically against? I understand being against ‘endogenic DID systems’ because, well, trauma is necessary to a DID diagnosis, but being against all endos is… not good to say the least. Non-disordered and non-traumagenic plurality is central in a lot of indigenous religions and practices. IFS are created often in therapy for people with mood disorders, anxiety, depression, etc. So, which are you against? And which do you think most anti-endos are against? I haven’t seen anyone anti-endo people talk about this, so I was curious.

I'm going to spin this around on you

Anon, why do you think those experiences are comparable to DID? Why is DID lumped under that same umbrella?

IFS isn't about "creating" parts (I'm horrified by your explanation of IFS), it's recognizing and caring for parts of yourself that exist within everyone. You can't focus too much on your "work self", you need to care for your "social self", as well, for example. The social self has needs, just as the work self does. It believes that all people are multi faceted and each part needs to be given equal care. This is just... True? I fully support IFS.

As a treatment option, unmodified IFS can be dangerous/unhealthy for people with DID/OSDD. Why do you think that is?

Could it be... Because they're not the same?

The DSM states that cultural and religious practices that are excluded or exempt from a DID diagnosis are short term, nonrecurring, and occur within a culturally accepted ritual. For example, non-pathological possession during drum and dance rituals.

Well, gee, that doesn't sound like endogenic plurality, does it? Those experiences are excluded not because they're endogenic, but because it's not "plurality", as being discussed in syscourse-- as seen in DID.

There are actual physical changes that occur in the brain during childhood that allow us to dissociate to the extent that we do, and thus create alters.

Why is it being forced under the same umbrella, despite our PHYSICAL differences?

I feel like endos only want DID to be in the same category to lend credence to their experiences, and it's fucking bullshit. Downplaying DID and forcing it under the same umbrella while ignoring these facts isn't their ticket to validity.

Edit to add: someone just added some tags with a really important point that I think is often overlooked.

The DSM knows damn well what it's excluding in cultural and spiritual practices. Clinicians have spent decades trying to separate those practices from mental illness. There is an unending list of research into this topic. I've listed DOZENS of these articles in previous posts.

Endogenic systems hiding behind this exclusion is flat out disrespectful to those cultures and all the work that went into separating the two.

The exclusion is in reference to the MANY cultures, indigenous and otherwise, that participate in rituals and practices that all follow similar lines of experience.

Short term

Nonrecurring

Occurring in specific, accepted contexts

Nondebilitating and welcomed (mostly and in a loose definition-- ie, the people participating know that possession is a possibility and they accept that)

People participating were raised in those cultures, providing mechanisms developed in childhood that assist in the experiences.

It is not for endogenic systems to pick up and put on like a shield to defend their experiences. It doesn't "include" or "prove" endogenic plurality. Those rituals and practices are not your talking point.

Honestly, it shouldn't have any bearing on endogenic systems. Why can't endogenic plurality just exist as something separate from DID and cultural practices?