#syscussion

[syscoursing]

I just honestly think “sysmed” is a better term than “anti-endo” because they’re not just against endogenic systems.

They’re against traumagenic non-disordered systems.

They’re against traumagenic systems who are disordered by something other than a CDD.

They’re against traumagenic CDD systems who support endogenic systems.

They’re against traumagenic plurality if the trauma happened as an older child, teen or adult.

Some are even against traumagenic CDD systems if that CDD isn’t DID or OSDD (and sometimes OSDD doesn’t even count to them).

They’re not just anti-endogenic. They genuinely believe that everyone who doesn’t 100% agree with them are faking or enabling faking.

It’s more accurate to say they’re system medicalists (“sysmeds”) because they aim to pathologize (medicalize) plurality as a whole and leave out everyone who doesn’t have a dissociative disorder (and even some who do). Yes they are anti-endo but they're also anti-DID if it fits their narrative.

-- Hyena (he/him)

[the-orange-solace]

When I was a child, I watched an episode of Criminal Minds where a man had a split personality. A woman who killed other women who threatened the man she formed to protect. I remember her sitting in the dark on a couch, a cigarette in hand beside a lamp, as she spoke to an Agent about why she had to kill them, that it was to protect him. It was her entire purpose for existing.

As a child, I used to pace empty halls in the middle of the night and lay in bed, repeating in my mind that I would be the only being in my body. I will not break into multiple people. I will be in control. I have to be because, at the time, I believed I could break into those monstrous plurals you see on TV. The ones that killed their family after years of neglect, abuse, and wrongdoing. The ones you should be afraid of ever becoming, no matter who you are or your situation.

So I became terrified.

And yet, nearly every night, I'd look up at the sky or the ceiling and beg for something to change—to not be alone. I was stuck pretending I was a different character, a type of escapism that sometimes got out of hand, lost in an identity that wasn't my own. Looking up and imagining being taken away, every character I adored was by my side, caring for me in return. I had to keep going, be them, and exist in a world with them.

I'd made up stories, different realities, and places in my mind to escape to, as well as explanations for things my underdeveloped brain couldn't comprehend in the place I found myself within. I clung to concepts, characters, and situations that reflected my own, and soon, I no longer felt alone—not with all the escapism I conjured up, not with the different identities to help me face what was happening.

But I was in control. I was one being. No matter what. I had to be a single being because that was good. I had to be good.

I would never hurt anyone, and being many meant being bad. I couldn't be bad.

When I was a teenager, I started researching and getting involved in minority and disabled spaces. I loved being informed, the stories, the many perspectives, and the complexity of humanity. So it was no surprise when I shared a plural headcanon with a friend, and they felt safe coming out to me. They were many. They took my hand and guided me through a community I was fascinated with and wanted to aid and represent like so many others.

I spent years learning, staying silent as others spoke, just listening to everything I could. But then, one day, like so many others, I spoke through a different facet, a different identity I had created as a child. The many faces of me represented things I could not be, I could not hold, nor could I handle. I was struggling; some of me wanted to lash out. So she did. She lashed out.

As always, I was faced with kindness, listening ears, and aid that then pushed me more to the surface from drowning. But I never left; just another part of me was lost, right? Of course. People are complex. I deal with my emotions in a complex way. Of course.

My plurally disabled friend watched as I became more comfortable speaking through the identities I had, whether they were facets of myself or characters that helped me. Soon enough, the continuous "role-play" and "emotional processing" developed into normal conversation, a comfort, a relief.

They kindly approached me and asked if I was a system, too. They had never met anyone who spoke to themselves like I do, definitely not any singlets. None of our other friends did, in person or not, not even people in our families. It was just us.

The fear from my childhood arose. I couldn't be multiple; I couldn't be more than one. It was bad. But hadn't I learned about Plurality? All its ups and downs? Its complexities and nuances? I accepted it wholeheartedly; I learned and evolved from the demonized perception I was given as a child. So, why was it still bad?

Because I must be lying; I must be a fake, a poser. It was the only reason, wasn't it? I had seen so many conversations and arguments about fakes, those who wished to be special. Had I somehow become the harm they spoke of? How could I do this to a community I swore to listen to and fight for?

I obsessed over it, forcing the panic, dissociation, habit, and ease of speaking in multiple identities and beings of myself away. I buried it as deep as I could for the betterment of everyone else. The community didn't deserve such harm, and I wouldn't bring it to their doorstep if I claimed it to be something I'm not.

The loathing became so present it formed into tics that caused aches and disruptions in my life. Multiple stressors--along with an identity crisis--will do that to someone. So my shoulder and neck muscles ached from shrugging, flexing, and all the repetitive movements I couldn't stop without crying from the suppression. So I didn't. I let it disrupt and hurt.

Then, one day, someone, some random, unknown system to me out in the world, spoke about how it didn't matter what was real or not; it didn't hurt anyone. Plurality and the belief of it didn't hurt anyone. It hurt no one to discover themselves, to test the waters, to simply pry into yourself and learn. There was no shame in figuring yourself, or yourselves, out. There was no right or wrong, nothing to be ashamed of or fearful of. Just another part of living.

So I did. I poked and prodded. I gave my parts names, spoke to them in the middle of the night, asked questions, got to know them, and learned we couldn't talk through words at first but could emotions and sensations. I realized I couldn't find where my Plurality started or where it ended, that we—oh god, we—the idea was so surreal but...comforting—were so combined, living without specific individuality outside of me that there was no separation in sight. Not that I could figure out. For so long, I believed everything was just me. Only me.

But now it was someone else, too. These things that made no sense, these things that felt out of place or special, unique, and ever-changing could be someone else.

Someone else.

The more I reflected, learned, applied, and prodded, the more things made sense. Until one day, I looked at my friends, held my breath, and spoke. Stated that it like it was a sin for me of all people to say.

I was plural.

No one blinked an eye. No one questioned it outside of boundaries and clarification. It wasn't surprising that their childhood friend was many. How surprising could it be when they used so many different names for different parts of themselves to express hard things?

It was astonishing.

And here we are, years and years later, grown and still learning, living, fighting, but more in touch with ourselves than ever before with so many more sys friends and aquatints. More experiences, a better understanding.

It's not shameful to learn, apply, and reflect. You take nothing from anyone but your time and open-minded exploration of the world and yourself(ves). There is no evil in being human, living life, phase or not. There is nothing wrong with you, any of you, for existing or living. You just are. I embrace you, I embrace us, and I embrace everything that comes with a life of many.

So, if you're struggling, just know you're not alone outside the body. We know, and so do many others. It's going to be okay; you'll find yourself in time. Don't rush it. There will always be time.

[greens-spilled-tea]

My non-plural and non-CDD partner has recently started doing an interesting bit of introspective work on themselves which involves what they call "Department Reporting". They've started conceptualizing bits of themselves as belonging to specific departments: Cognition (related to thinking and logic), Somatics (related to the body), Emotions (related to feelings), Memory Recall (related to short and long-term memory), and Abstraction/Creativity/Synthesis (related to creative output and abstract thought). They will do a nightly check-in with each of these aspects of themselves, seeing if any of these particular departments are in any need of help or support and making plans on how to address any needs each department has for the next day.

And this has been absolutely amazing for them. They've struggled with various forms of dissociation for a while now which has made addressing their needs difficult. Talking to me more has helped them realize that though they do experience themselves as a unified whole singular identity, it may be helpful to break down specific aspects of themselves into categorized parts in order to gain a better understanding of themselves. And the results have been fantastic. They're so much more grounded, they're better able to communicate what they want and need from me, and they're able to just generally take better care of themselves.

I was genuinely worried that having them separate out these aspects of themselves into specific groups may be harmful for them. After all, I have DID and I know exactly how maladaptive separating these parts of myself out too much can hurt me. And so I started asking them questions. Are they feeling disconnected or dissociated from the other parts of themselves? Do they sense any amount of "becoming plural" throughout all this?

And... the answer has been, no, not at all. In fact, they feel even more integrated than before as they can now feel connected to more of themselves compared to before. Their memory has improved, their energy levels have improved, their emotional regulation has gotten so much better. And I think it's just absolutely wonderful and fascinating that conceptualizing themselves as having parts/departments has actually ended up with them feeling even more like a unified whole than before.

It's definitely really interesting comparing our experiences, and seeing how my final fusion journey both mirrors and also differs from how my singlet partner experiences their self and identity. I think, in the end, having DID and/or being plural is ultimately not so different from what being a singlet is like, and maybe it'll be beneficial to sometimes find those similarities to help us understand and relate to each other more.

[catherine-clover]

An EEG Plurality Study Might Actually Be Kinda Easy To Do

Hey everyone, so I just looked it up and EEG is actually relatively cheap. If you attend a university, there might be a lab with it ready to go that you don't even know about.

So all you'd need is a few volunteers and you could maybe fairly easily do a proof-of-concept, first-of-its-kind(?) study of non-disordered plurality.

Currently waiting for a response from my university's neuroscience department. If you have access to the necessary equipment and potential participants, please contact me. Even being able to combine the results from two volunteer groups would be huge.

[prose-among-the-trees]

Begging screaming crying shitting pissing pleading for the internet to understand that DID is not an “alter disorder,” it’s a complex dissociative disorder.

My parts are a result of the trauma I went through and the dissociative behaviors I got in the habit of subconsciously to cope with trauma and abuse.

I am parts of one whole. Unless you and I have some sort of understanding or are quite close, you will not see me inform you about a switch or another part being out and about. This is for my safety.

I still have a CDD if I cannot participate in build a headmate (good god) posts, fictive appreciation posts, source calls (which I find particularly insidious anyways), and system anonymous ask games.

I am in therapy to cope with the trauma and the dissociation. I am not in active communication with every one of my parts, and the communication I am in with a few is not nearly as extensive as the community describes alter relationships as. I don’t know how to be “buddy buddy” with every piece of myself.

I really wish the internet never got a hold on CDDs, which is hypocritical since it’s the only reason I’m diagnosed and in treatment, but hear me out.

Did has become an online game. Medical professionals are publishing papers on the rise of sociogenic illness. I’ve known multiple people in my online and real life who have seen my did and decided to fake it as some way to fit in and be Cool and Fun and Interesting. I have known people to actively use the idea of splitting introjects as a manipulation tactic to keep others in their lives. This is disgusting behavior that all stems from the social currency of being ill online.

I’m so sick of it. My disorder is not fun and games. It’s not a joke, it’s not a way to use people. It’s debilitating for me.

For all the people who might reblog this and talk about “oh well maybe it’s agony for you but I like it!!” Cool. Keep it to yourself please. I’m glad you’re doing well enough to be in that spot; this post is not for you.

If it’s not glaringly obvious I’m anti endo so if endos wanna come and give me their two cents I’m not going to care. Call me a hater I don’t give a fuck.

[mournfall-syscourse]

Persecutors are Smoke Alarms/Detectors

We've seen some talk about persecutors in systems, or similar stuff, lately, both on Tumblr and in some Discord spaces. Alters/parts/headmates/etc. that do harmful things within and/or external to the system/collective, typically for maladaptive and trauma-influenced reasons (though figuring out those reasons is easier said than done).

For simplicity, I'll be (typically) referring to these kinds of alters as 'persecutors', the behaviour as 'persecutorial', and so on, within this post. If that's not a label you like personally, consider inserting a more comfortable (but still fitting) label in place of the word, as you read. Though perhaps this post may shift your perspective on the label in general.

Persecutors as a topic is one that is rather close to our heart, as a system that is frankly quite heavily built on them. For the majority of our knowledge of being a system (including what we know from before our syscovery), we have had persecutor hosts (our current primary host is not, but a lot of our system in general still are). Realisation of this, early on in our syscovery, resulted in us having a bit of a soft spot for persecutors, both within our own system and within those of other systems we've known. We've always tried to treat persecutors with compassion, and as little judgment as possible. We've made mistakes along the way, especially with our own persecutors - we're not perfect - but we do our best. But the importance of persecutors to us is part of why we're making this post in the first place.

This is, of course, our own opinions and related to our own experiences on the topic. Maybe some of this will be helpful to you, reading this, maybe other parts won't be. Take what's useful, and leave the rest. Maybe some of this will challenge your views - it can be a good thing for those views to be challenged. Either they'll be changed, hopefully for the better, or you'll reinforce those views through that challenge. Either way, I hope that it helps you to read this. We are a CDD (specifically DID) system, so this will be from the perspective of that - I don't know how much of this will be relevant to systems that do not have trauma influencing any part of their systemhood, but maybe it'll still be insightful.

To avoid this being a massive wall of text in the tags or dashboard, the rest of the post will be below the cut:

The main things related to this topic that we want to address or talk about are:

Stigmatisation and demonisation of persecutors

Shame around persecutors specifically, but also how it relates to shame around any "imperfect" behaviour that comes about due to mental health issues, and the damage it can cause for actually recovering or improving

System responsibility with regards to persecutors and other alters who do harmful things, as well as responsibility with regards to mental health in general

Approaches to persecutors that we've tried (or heard about from other systems), and in general our own experiences (past and present) with persecutors in our own system.

Labelling in general, and how many alters or behaviours are mis-labelled as persecutors when that doesn't necessarily fit

Definitions of persecutor/persecutorial behaviour, and the ways that the system community has shaped that, and the good and bad parts of that - as well as how we typically define persecutors (and their behaviour) for ourselves

A lot of these things are rather intertwined, so rather than discuss them entirely one at a time, they'll generally be interspersed within the post, though some may be focused more than others at different parts. The post is long, so I'll include some kind of heading for different sections, to make it less of a giant wall of text.

Stigmatisation & Demonisation of Persecutors, and the Impact of Shame

I do want to kick things off with the stigmatisation and demonisation of persecutors. It's a really, really common thing to see in system communities of treating persecutors as "evil" or "irredeemable". That they're just abusive, or terrible. That they should be locked away or gotten rid of. This is a massive problem. It pisses us off, frankly. It's also just harmful to everyone in the vicinity that has a persecutor in their system. Yes, even you.

And I get it. I get why persecutors are treated this way, especially when people aren't informed of why persecutors tend to happen. Why they do the things they do. People see them as a problem, someone hurting them or their friends, maybe even using their own body or voice to do it, etc. depending on how things manifest. It's a knee-jerk reaction. The problem comes about when things never progress past that knee-jerk reaction, though. When people just label persecutors as bad and that's that. When it's all about shame and hurt. When the compassion is completely left to the wayside.

I think this problem varies in different parts of the community. In our experience, it's been more common in communities that focus more on alters/headmates as individual, separate people - especially those where system responsibility between alters is not as strongly encouraged. Now, to be clear, I'm not saying that treating alters/headmates as individual separate people is a bad thing - our system started out exclusively with that viewpoint, and it's one we've remained comfortable with, while also adopting a parts-based viewpoint simultaneously (the two viewpoints don't actually conflict) - I'm just pointing out that the problem is more common within communities that have that focus. I've seen this problem occur in parts-focused communities, too, it's just less common, in our experience. I could probably make a whole other post about the thoughts we have on this on its own, but that's for another day.

So why is it harmful to just say that persecutors are evil or irredeemable and that's that? It puts up a wall. A roadblock. It shuts down any potential for recovery, as long as that wall remains. It disregards why persecutors happen, why they do what they do. It treats the symptom as the problem, instead of actually dealing with the problem that's causing it in the first place. It also disregards the possibility that the persecutor is actually helping the system. It shames the persecutor for existing, for being the way they are. It shames the system for having the persecutor. It's counter-productive.

Shame, as a whole, is a stopping force. It shuts things down. Pushes people into silence. Into hiding. Into stopping a behaviour. It's built on fear and rejection. There are situations where shame is a beneficial thing, though I think that's far rarer than the situations where it is actively harmful. How often has shame stopped you from speaking up about something? From seeking help? From talking about what's hurting you or how you're suffering? From feeling like it's okay to make mistakes, to be imperfect? How often has shame made you beat yourself for messing up, for hurting someone accidentally?

This can apply to not just systems, here, though it definitely does apply to them, too. Think about how many mental health conditions are stigmatised, demonised. Ones people feel like you can't talk about, that you have to keep hidden. That people will judge you for having it, for having any kind of symptoms be noticeable. Will make assumptions about you if they know. How crushingly alone that can make you feel. Even with just being a system, disordered or otherwise, this happens.

Shame often results in a persecutor being even less cooperative. Trying to be louder, or more destructive. It's like trying to bottle up a problem. It might work for a time, but eventually that bottle is going to build up too much pressure and explode, and you'll have an even bigger mess on your hands.

Approaching Persecutors with Compassion and Understanding, and Taking (System) Responsibility

Why are we shaming each other, and ourselves, when we're hurting? What if we treated each other and ourselves with compassion and understanding, instead? The painful, 'ugly' parts of ourselves, the things we don't want others to see. Alters/headmates/parts that are persecutors, or who have persecutorial tendencies and behaviours sometimes. Why not try to treat them kindly? To understand where they're coming from, why they're doing what they're doing.

Now, this isn't easy. And I'm also not saying to just let them walk all over you and hurt you with no repercussions or without protecting yourself. If a persecutor is hurting you, do what you can to protect yourself and the others in your system. You also need to take responsibility for their actions. They're in your system. Whether you view them as an entirely separate person, or a part of you, or somewhere in between, you have to take responsibility for their actions. Yes, it hurts. You might be a victim of their actions, too. And it's not even necessarily your fault that they're doing what they're doing. But it is your responsibility. This is one of the ways that I think parts-focused viewpoints for systems can help, with having system responsibility come more easily.

This goes for all trauma and mental health conditions, and related behaviours that can come about because of them. Something triggers a fight response from you and you lash out at someone? You have a responsibility to manage that situation. Make amends with the person you lashed out at. Try to repair. Try to work on ways to manage the trigger and your trauma responses. What happened to you is not your fault. Your responses that you can't control are not your fault. But they are your responsibility to manage, to find ways to bring under control. And if you choose to not take responsibility for those, then your responses will become your fault, as a collective, through that choice. You have control over whether or not you will work on things, and how you go about it.

Remember that the persecutor is like you, too. A person, or a part, or both, or however you view those within your system. It's actually one of the ways that I think that people-focused viewpoints for systems can help quite a bit: Seeing a persecutor as a person. Someone who is hurting. Lashing out. Or maybe seeing a problem and trying to solve it in the only way they know how. Someone who is scared, or angry, tired. Yes, it sucks that they're hurting you, or the people around you. So, how can you help them? How can you ease their pain? Help them cope better? Work with them to find a better solution to the problem they're seeing. Maybe even help them see that the problem they're seeing isn't actually there. Persecutors are so varied in how they can be, why they are. Each one might need a different approach. For trauma that originates in childhood, especially,

For us, we've had persecutors that have held individual problems, related to trauma they hold or that is strongly influencing them, that is causing them to lash out or react in certain ways, or to hurt us; others have been created in response to a wider problem in the system, that they're the brain's way of trying to manage the problem. Sometimes they're aware of this, and don't want to do what they're doing but don't know how to manage things otherwise, or they lose themselves to their emotions. Other times they've been unaware that they're doing anything wrong in the first place. It varies. It's also not always easy to figure out which is which, so trying different approaches and seeing what works, can be a good starting point.

For things that are related to something the persecutor themself holds, trying to talk to them can help. Trying to understand them. If they're not willing to talk (to you or anyone else), then analysing their behaviours, looking for patterns. Getting a read of their emotions, where that might be coming from. Sharing a brain and body can help with some of that. Trying to figure out what the underlying issue is, and working out ways to manage it in a healthier way. You may not be able to solve it fully, especially not right away. You might need professional help, or simply time and effort. Take it step by step. Try to find ways for the alter to have an outlet that doesn't cause harm to others, or at least causes minimal harm. If it's a misconception caused by trauma, then helping them see how things really are, in reality, can also help.

For things that are more about a greater problem that the persecutor was formed to try and manage, then it's a similar approach. What is the problem they're acting on? Is it actually a problem, or is it something that trauma is making the system/persecutor believe is a problem? If it's actually a problem, what can you do to work on the problem? Are there alternatives to what the persecutor is doing to try and manage the problem, that could be done instead? Maybe degrees of solutions. Even analysing if the behaviour of the persecutor technically helps a bit with the problem - having it as a backup, just-in-case way of managing it, while you try other solutions. Sometimes the persecutor themself isn't actually helping the problem at all (even if they think they are), but serve instead to point out the problem in the first place, through their actions. If it's not actually a problem, then how can you work on teaching your brain that? Maybe you need to convince the persecutor themself, or maybe you need to help the system/brain as a whole learn that what you're doing that it's reacting to is actually okay.

We've had plenty of different types of persecutors, ourselves, though we tend to almost exclusively have internal-acting ones. It's been a long time since we had external-acting ones, those that would lash out at others.

Some of our current persecutors are capable of acting outwardly in a persecutorial manner, but we're aware of them and are trying to avoid potentially activating those tendencies. It's complicated - one of them is a part that would try and isolate us from everyone we know, if they felt it was needed, for our safety. The other is more inclined to prevent the rest of us from being able to talk to someone in our life that they deemed to be a threat to our well-being emotionally, restricting access, while discussing the problem (and not really being particularly kind about it) and working out if the people that they view as a threat are going to fix their behaviour.

As for our internal-acting persecutors, the host we had at the time of our syscovery, was quite internal-focused. She held a deep sense of self-hatred, in part so the rest of the system wouldn't have to. But it resulted in her being self-destructive. Hurting herself, making decisions that weren't safe. Self-harming behaviour, less obvious on the outside, that was indirectly hurting the rest of us. Self-sabotage, and the like. We helped her to find better outlets for her pain, and also to not keep it entirely to herself all the time, to share some of what she was holding with the rest of us, so that it wasn't so heavy on her shoulders.

Other internal-acting persecutors, like some that are currently still around, have taken rather aggressive methods to force us to deal with certain problems they've seen. Hurting us internally, quite drastically, to achieve that goal. Initially, they were incredibly secretive about it (and still are, at times), not really giving us an idea of why they were targeting certain parts, what they were trying to achieve outside of just hurting us. Over time, they came to realise that we wanted to work with them if we could, to try and find better solutions, so we now know why they do what they do, and have strategies for trying to mitigate the issue in a way that we can. They tell us who's in their crosshairs, with enough time to try and work on things before they feel like they have to act, and if we don't deal with things properly, then they'll still do what they do, as a back-up. Their method has helped, in a twisted way. It hurts, and it's not healthy, but it ultimately does the job, in a pinch.

Some of our persecutors, we still don't really get along with. They're hurting us, and aren't willing to talk about things to find any kind of resolution, and we also can't stop them from doing what they're doing, either. Maybe they will someday. Maybe we need help from our therapist. For now, it's something we need to manage the fallout from, it's all we can do, right now. Managing how we act in the emotional states that their behaviours leave us in. Oddly enough, some other persecutors are actually helpful in managing those, albeit in a maladaptive way.

And then, some persecutors do something we call "system-sanctioned" persecutor activity (not our idea to call it that, but it's what we use nowadays) - which is when they feel compelled by the system/brain to act in harmful ways, even if they don't agree with what they're doing. Sometimes this feels like them watching themself do something, their body moving on their own, internally. Other times, in the moment, their mindset shifts to suit what they're being made to do, only to return to clarity afterwards. Both scenarios typically result in the persecutor in question feeling an immense amount of guilt for it once they're in control of themself or have returned to their senses.

We could have done so much harm to our recovery, and the state of our persecutors, if we'd treated them the way we were told to treat them by people we once knew. People who, like some parts of the community now, treat persecutors horribly. Who push for the locking up, or "killing", of persecutors. We've seen those approaches go very badly. Sometimes they're necessary, we've done those before, to manage certain persecutors, but it's not a decision to be made lightly.

Locking up a persecutor is something that we think can be done in a good way. In the past, we've had a location in the headspace where we would confine certain persecutors to limit their influence. They'd be comfortable, and they'd still be able to front, to communicate, but their ability to cause harm would be far more limited. In some ways, it forced them to communicate more, as they knew they wouldn't get out if they didn't. We didn't do it to hurt them; it was simply a protective measure for the rest of us. Some of our persecutors went into it willingly, especially those who didn't like their persecutorial nature and wanted to improve, while others we did have to force into it, though we still did that carefully, and only when we felt it was absolutely necessary.

Labels are Tools, and Our Definition of 'Persecutor'

As far as the label of 'persecutor' itself goes, we view it as a constructive label, one to be used with compassion and care, a tool and a utility, instead of one of shame or to put an alter in a box. We don't do it to label someone in the system as a "problem".

Now, labels in general are a tool. They're something to be used if it helps you. People use labels all the time, for identity, for instance. It's a way to find community, people who are similar to you, who can relate to you. So, looking at the label of 'persecutor', does it help you to use it? What do you associate with it? If you associate being a persecutor with being a problem, something to be ashamed of, or any number of things that make you feel awful for being one, then the label isn't helping you. You could find a different label, if you want to, or you could change your perceptions and associations of the label. You don't have to use a label at all if you don't think it'll help.

For us, we view being a persecutor as an alter that acts on trauma in a maladaptive way, uses maladaptive coping mechanisms, that cause harm to the system or the people around it. Some may do it intentionally, others may not. Sometimes it's consistent behaviour, other times it's only occasional. Typically, the behaviour is destructive, but it may not be entirely so. Persecutors, through this behaviour, can often serve as detectors for problems, highlighting issues that the system needs to work on. Sometimes that's a specific issue that the persecutor holds within their part that needs to be dealt with, that can't just be kept behind a barrier untouched. Sometimes that's a wider issue that the persecutor was formed to try and deal with, to manage, or to shine a light on, so that the system can do something about it. Persecutors are smoke or carbon monoxide detectors. They detect 'smoke' or 'harmful gas' in the system - i.e. problems that need dealing with, often ones that have slipped under the radar or would be difficult to notice otherwise until it's too late - and when they do, they do so in a rather loud, disruptive, perhaps painful (to one's ears, to continue the analogy) way, often resulting in quite a headache. Sometimes they have false alarms or don't work quite right (like when a detector's batteries die, or when you burnt toast by accident - the house isn't on fire but the detector still goes off sometimes and you wish it wouldn't), maybe they've been calibrated incorrectly, but they're trying their best. There's frankly more nuance that could be included in this, that I don't fully know how to put into words, but that's the gist, and I kinda like the analogy/metaphor I came up with.

Sometimes people attribute being a persecutor incorrectly, as well. Whether or not an alter actually fits the label, really depends on the system and the alter, how you view the label, the situation you're in, etc.

For instance, a system that is overly non-confrontational (likely due to trauma, and may typically fawn) might view any alter that sets firm boundaries as being persecutorial, especially if that viewpoint is reinforced by people external to the system getting upset or angry, or even punishing the system, in response to this boundary-setting. However, this alter is more likely to be a protector, under normal circumstances. Perhaps 'persecutor' fits, temporarily, as the system isn't in a safe place to exhibit certain protective behaviours yet. Where something that would be healthy normally is actually harmful in the moment, due to the situation the system is in. If the system has left that unsafe environment, they may still mistakenly attribute setting boundaries as being persecutorial, when it's now healthy and safe to be able to do that, it's not maladaptive. At this point, the fawn response that kept the system safe might be more accurate to be considered as being persecutorial. A now-maladaptive coping mechanism that, while helpful in the past, is preventing the system from moving forward, or is maybe getting the system hurt again, either by people who take advantage of it, or by people who don't even realise they're hurting the system because the fawn response meant that things weren't communicated.

In the above scenario, if the alter that sets boundaries forms (or surfaces) after the system has gotten out of the unsafe environment, they still might be mislabelled as a persecutor. Trauma can make it difficult to feel like we're allowed to self-advocate, to stand up for ourselves. For many, setting boundaries can feel like we're being mean or hurtful to people around us, so often we avoid doing so, and this can lead to labelling an alter that sets boundaries for the system as being a persecutor when they're actually just being a protector. They don't even have to be a protector, they could just be an alter setting their own boundaries for themself, not struggling with the feelings around that. (As such, persecutor isn't the only label that can be misattributed or given incorrectly.)

System roles are things that can change, too. Not every persecutor is going to stay a persecutor forever. Alters can become persecutors when they weren't initially. These roles, these labels, come and go, and there's nothing wrong with that. Alters can and often do have multiple roles at the same time, too. Many of ours do - we have caretakers who are also persecutors, protectors who are also trauma holders, and so on. It varies a lot. Use the labels that are useful to you. Make up new ones if that works better for you.

Conclusion

This was a long post, longer than we really intended to write. I probably rambled quite a bit, but we have a lot of thoughts and feelings on this topic. It's important to us, and there's a lot to go over about it.

I hope it was helpful, enjoyable, or insightful to read. If it challenged your views and beliefs, remember that's not a bad thing, and it doesn't even mean you have to change your beliefs or views, either. It means that it got you thinking.

Please feel free to respond in the comments or in reblogs, or even in DMs or in our ask box, if that's more comfortable - I'd love to discuss this further with anyone who wants to. Share your own experiences, or ask questions. Debate with me if you like, too, if you disagree with something I've said - calmly and respectfully, please. Maybe you can challenge my views on something, as well.

[nodusxtollens]

GENERAL INFO

osdd-1 sufferer ; i do not consider myself a "system" bodily 19 years old ; he/she bigenderflux butch lesbian on testosterone

ACCOUNT INFO / OPINIONS

the posts of this account will contain primarily syscourse/syscussion and discussing my experiences as someone who (likely) suffers from OSDD-1. there is no dni for this account; i am open to civil discussions with everyone.

i believe that DID and OSDD-1 are both traumagenic disorders, meaning that they can only exist through repeated and intense trauma. i do not think that endogenic/willogenic/non-traumagenic systems can exist and find them insulting, but for the sake of retaining civility on this account, i am not going to be hostile or disrespectful. i want to retain open discussion.

i believe that the majority of people who claim that they have DID and/or OSDD-1 are misinformed; i do not believe that the majority of people are intentionally malicious, though some certainly are. i think it is easy to confuse other forms of dissociation and disconnect from the self for DID/OSDD-1 symptoms, but they are vastly different.

i do not encourage separation between alters as it makes dissociative barriers and DID/OSDD-1 symptoms worse. for the sake of transparency, i am aware of having two different alters, but alters are not separate people. my primary goal is final fusion, but i do believe that there are those who benefit from functional multiplicity. final fusion is not the only form of recovery.

i hope that this account can foster insight and interesting discussions.

[granulesofsand]

Commitment for Safety (or Lack of)

🗝️🏷️ non-explicit discussion of self-harm and suicidality in a recovery context

I’m reading the ISST-D DID treatment guidelines trying to gauge whether we’re stable enough for trauma work using their definitions of stable. It’s no secret that our system doesn’t quite get system accountability, but there’s another basic goal we don’t seem to meet; commitment for safety from self-harm and suicidal behaviors.

There are two explanations that go along with that. We consider a commitment a set of non-negotiables, both liability and devotion. Protection, to put them together.

We don’t have the same definition of self-harm as many clinicians seem to. What we consider good, safe and appropriate contradicts some of what others do, and that’s okay because we’re different people and our actions don’t affect one another. We can explain what certain behaviors do for us and why we prefer to keep them. It becomes a problem when we disagree amongst ourselves because our actions do affect each other, then we communicate about it until we reach an agreement. There is no need for protection, we are already safe.

Suicidal behavior is similar but not the same. It has liability, but not devotion. Right now, we are trying living. We have commitments that keep us living, some that we made mostly for that purpose. But we’re not committed to staying alive. If living gets bad enough or dying gets good enough that suicide is the better option, we are allowed to choose it. We have the right to give up, move on, die. We keep our options open, the opposite of commitment.

Harm reduction instead of abstinence. Both of those are in a place I’m happy with, so I think we are stable with just those. The spirit of the contract and all that. I’m open to opinions, however you make sense of the guidelines or your own experience and conclusions.

[syscoursing]

I think this is where some anti-endos are getting the idea that "spirituality needs to stay out of CDD spaces."

I'm sure they're conflating "e.g." and "i.e."

e.g. - an abbreviation for the Latin "exempli gratia," meaning "for example."

i.e. - an abbreviation for the Latin "id est," meaning "that is."

The difference is that i.e. defines the prior statement, whereas e.g. can give multiple and open-ended examples. The language used here in the ICD-11 shows that "as experienced by 'mediums' or other culturally accepted spiritual practitioners" is merely a single example of non-dissociative personality states.

That said, the two are not mutually exclusive. A DID system may still be a medium, have purposeful headmates as part of their practice, use other forms of plurality such as Daemonism, or have spiritual or religion-based headmates for any other reason and still have DID if they otherwise fit the criteria. The Boundary with Normality doesn't mean a DID system can't experience spiritual plurality, just that it can't be the only presentation. And even then, they still recognize the non-disordered patient as plural, or having "two or more distinct personality states."

Remember your Latin, kids.

-- Hyena (he/him)

[teru-byte-dev]

Introducing @teru-byte, the sockpuppet detector (among other things)

Something I've always hated about online forums is trolls repeatedly making new accounts to continue their mayhem with impunity.

They're everywhere. It does not matter if you're on Tumblr or Discord or Reddit or a dedicated forum, they will keep coming back well after they ought to be shooed off.

There are many different kinds of trolls. Some are just nuisances. Some spam. Some try to get a reaction. Some are much more crafty about trying to get a reaction. Some will do and say and send and post deplorable things.

Some enjoy their reputation as troublemakers. Some take refuge in anonymity. It is the latter type that @teru-byte was made to address.

Over some 3am brainstorming sessions and showers, my brain combined some disparate facts I knew to form an amazing discovery in language analysis. Sadly I cannot share the discovery publicly because it is what gives power to @teru-byte.

@teru-byte is a bot I have worked for a long time to bring to life, and it's finally ready. Given sufficient data, it can accurately determine the author of given writing. No, it does not use “AI.”

I waited until I was very confident in its ability before going public, because a single misfire could be ruinous. It still errs on the side of caution, by design. The false negative rate of approximately 50% is worth the near complete erasure of false positives.

Some might say this is “feeding the trolls.” If I believed it was, I would not be doing this. I counter that if a troll is hiding behind an array of alternate accounts, it is because they are terrified of reputation. Even a troll who does not immediately reveal themself in order to further their chaos will readily do so when they are found out, if they enjoy the spotlight. If they do not enjoy the spotlight, the prospect of reputation is horrifying.

In addition, knowing it's the same user can aid in learning other patterns, even more so on the administrator side of things. Extra punishment or deterrents are available when a user is provably evading bans or blocks.

I am debuting this project on Sysblr because I hardly know of a more ideal environment. There are dozens (not hundreds or a handful) of active users here who consistently keep coming back to write hundreds or thousands of words weekly, with easily accessible and very expansive account histories. And indeed, some trolls to catch.

Presently, @teru-byte has 1 publicly accessible command: revealing some statistics about a specified user, as proof of work in lieu of being able to publicly discuss the algorithm running the sockpuppet detection, for it is very easy to circumvent given knowledge of how it works.

I suspect these blogs will rarely be visibly active by next week. @teru-byte is designed more to strike like a bolt of lightning upon unsuspecting lowlifes.

The name is half pun and half a reference to the Death Note character Mikami Teru, who traded half his lifespan for the Shinigami Eyes which allow the user to see the true name of anyone they look at.

[greens-spilled-tea]

Guys I wanna talk about system responsibility more. What does it mean? How far should you go with "system responsibility"? Is system responsibility enabling the negative actions and behaviors of the other members of your system? Why should one headmate or alter be responsible for the actions of another (especially if you ascribe more to the mentality of headmates or alters being individual people who should have their own independence and freedom to do things outside of being part of a system)? Building off of that, how much independence and individualism should headmates and alters have from each other? There's so much and more I wanna talk about on this subject but I'm just gonna toss those questions out into the wind and see who bites.

[system-voices]

Hi, it's me, Kevin, back at it again with another random take.

I've seen, and heard, plenty of stories- typically from anti-endo's because of course -about endo's being assholes to them. Before they even became anti-endo. About Endo's manipulating people, hell we know someone personally that had an actual endo system try and gaslight them into thinking their trauma never happened.

I do believe these stories. I do, because the unfortunate thing about community is that toxic people will also exist within them. Community is a double edged sword with finding people that understand you extremely well, and also people that will treat you like shit. And to act like the pro-endo community is exempt from that would be foolish. But despite that, we've met and interacted with plenty of good pro-endo systems. Systems that were kind and understanding and let us ask questions.

You know who I have yet to meet? A nice anti-endo, and I will acknowledge that is because I'm a bastard and I've intentionally hit the hornets nest. But I haven't even seen them be nice to each other? They constantly hate and are suspicious of each other and it's mind boggling. I'm not going to act like I'm in any anti-endo spaces so I can't really know, but I think community is only as good as the public interactions you see in it.

It seems like being anti-endo is also being anti-community. When all the pro-endo people have blocked you and left you alone, it's not enough. It seems like you all just don't want systems to be seen or heard, more than anything.

[catherine-clover]

Another experiment.

An anti-endo's help would be greatly appreciated for this, so if you're an anti-endo who doesn't principally view endos' existence as a threat to your validity as a System, please keep reading!

It's often said that disordered and non-disordered Systems/collectives/multiples/omadas/whatever-word-I-have-to-use-to-avoid-extra-baggage-and-include-as-many-as-possible are just so unfathomably different that it's not even useful to be interacting in the same spaces. I would like to test this hypothesis.

I want to create a Discord server of ~20+ users with just one rule (other than the usual rules to keep things civil): no discussion of origins! There are all kinds of things to talk about on a daily basis and this website's obsession with initial circumstances is quite odd.

After about a month, we'll have everyone guess each other's labels and see if there really is that much of a difference. We (Clover) of course would not be able to participate directly, only moderate. At the beginning there will be some stuff to work out regarding the many mostly-but-not-completely overlapping categories but everything should be running smoothly within a few days.

If you're an anti-endo reading this, your help in reaching that side of the ash line would be greatly appreciated, and also this is probably a chance to prove your opinion correct. Please DM me.

Like this post if you would be interested in participating!

EDIT: THE SERVER IS NOW FULL HOLY MOLY THIS GOT A LOT BIGGER THAN WE EXPECTED

[oopsallsyscourse]

Here's a question, any other system use IFS in therapy? If so, how is your experience with it? Do you define system parts different than your IFS parts?

[aspenfrosten-doc]

aspenfrostEN document

i was planning on waiting until i had a bit more but i’m impatient. the doc is still a work in progress and probably will be until aspen either leaves the internet or starts being a better person.

the document

(in my experience it’ll be easiest to read on a phone)

i will still be accepting statements and submissions.

[snezhnayan-nights]

Is it really impossible to have a system with only introjects? I heard this from someone and have asked others but I haven't drawn a conclusion.