#this is the reason a ton of our posts are tagged endo safe. i genuinely dont care if someone is an endo system or not

[fossys]

Hey guess who remembered why we stopped being active in plural communities in the first place <-people are dicks

[sophieinwonderland]

I'm pro-endo, but I do think that the term "sysmed" is transphobic. I know that anti-endos who force a medicalized view of plurality are harmful, but they will never compare to the harm that transmeds did, and will never even come close to the harm caused by medicalizing transness. "Sysmeds" aren't the result of a vaguely homophobic ideology that strips away the bodily autonomy of gay trans people due to our supposed "fetish" for "real" gay people. Sysmeds aren't what forces people to jump through so many extra hoops for necessary medical care like transmeds are. Sysmeds aren't what gives me a strong fear of the irl gay and/or trans community. As bad as some anti-endo might be, please don't call them a sysmed.

Personally, I feel a lot of the differences you highlight are more due to the scale of the communities.

I've interacted with and seen so many pro-endo and mixed origin DID systems who are scared to interact with online DID communities. Even posting in DID tags here on Tumblr is something many pro-endos with DID are terrified too.

And the only reason this doesn't transfer to IRL plural communities as much... is because there really aren't IRL plural communities yet.

Systems are fakeclaimed so much that most systems don't feel safe coming out IRL, and organization is difficult. But I believe that's going to change which only increases their potential for harming the community. But even putting aside the potential future harm, I feel you're understating the harm already caused to the plural and DID communities.

But to discuss this, it's important to acknowledge that there is a larger divide here than just being pro and anti-endo.

The hatred for groups like The Plural Association isn't simply born of endophobia, but of a larger medicalist philosophy. For this reason, the word "sysmed" is more than just about the comparison. For a few common philosophies included in that framework:

Parts Language is treated as objective fact, and systems who don't use parts language are shamed for it. For the few system medicalists who believe endogenic plurality might exist, this is used as a dividing line. "Endogenic systems are people but CDD systems are part, so therefore we're different." The problem with this is that it erases the many systems who identify as people. Remember: CDD systems identified as different people FIRST, and were later labeled as only parts by psychiatrists.

The biggest threat to CDD systems is people pretending to be systems. The myth that there are a ton of people faking out there faking DID, and therefore making it harder to be diagnosed, is everywhere in these spaces.

The Shame Criterion. Some questionable studies were conducted into diagnosed systems that were deemed to be "imitative DID." The claim is that one difference between "imitative DID" and "genuine" DID is that people with genuine DID are ashamed of their symptoms. These have been passed around in system medicalist spaces, and raised suspicion towards any systems who are too proud or overt. (This is harmful to any attempt at plural rights because it immediately casts doubt on any systems who aren't ashamed enough. It also ignores that people who are isolated without a community of people with similar experiences will be more ashamed than those who have people with similar experiences.)

Dismissing Mixed Origin systems as endogenic. This, while tied to the endogenic question, isn't about it directly. Individuals that believe in endogenic plurality and think it should be kept separate are sure to keep mixed origin systems on the "endogenic" side. They would prefer people with spiritual beliefs about their systemhood, even if diagnosed with DID, to not be allowed into DID spaces. This is a direct threat to the ability of these systems to seek medical care for their disorders.

For all of these reasons and more, the term "sysmed" is about a larger philosophical divide between them and the inclusive plural community than just whether endogenic systems exist or not.

More than just harassment and bullying online, if doctors are aware of and listening to medicalist rhetoric, this could further harm CDD systems who seek diagnosis, reinforcing the myth that there's a DID fad and systems seeking help are jumping on a trend.

The McLean Hospital video that fakeclaimed diagnosed DID systems on TikTok for not being ashamed enough of their systems was PROMOTED here on Tumblr and reblogged by system medicalists, as well as posted to sysmed hubs like r/systemscringe.

This was a video that was deemed so harmful by the institution that posted it that they took it down the next day, but that hasn't stopped others from using it and spreading it as an example of a wave of DID fakers.

This directly resulted in DID TikTokers facing harassment.

And it could make doctors even more hesitant to diagnose people with DID because of the perceived influx of fakers.

It's impossible to measure the impact of system medicalists spreading the video, or the impact of their other rhetoric, but the fact is that their beliefs and the content they spread further stigmatizes all systems who don't conform perfectly to what's perceived as the medical model, and supports ideas that make it more difficult for many systems who would benefit from medical treatment to get it.