AWM’s Bookmarks

“Plurality can only exist because of trauma.”

Research on dissociative disorders shows that conditions like DID are strongly associated with trauma. However, that does not automatically prove that every experience of plurality must have the same origin. The absence of evidence for non-traumatic plurality is not the same as evidence of impossibility. It’s more accurate to say that trauma is well-established for DID, while the broader phenomenon of self-described plurality has not been extensively studied.

“Endogenic systems are pretending to have DID.”

This depends on the individual. If someone claims to have DID without meeting diagnostic criteria, that’s different from someone who explicitly says they are plural but do not claim to have DID or another disorder. Those are separate claims and shouldn’t be conflated.

“Endogenic systems spread misinformation.”

Misinformation should be corrected regardless of who spreads it. But simply identifying as endogenic is not itself misinformation. It becomes misinformation only if someone makes false factual claims about psychology or diagnostic criteria. Diagnostic criteria for the DSM-5 and ICD-11 make no points about whether or not trauma is needed, it just says there is a high link. And the Theory of Structural Dissociation quite literally has “theory” in the name. The DSM says: 'The disorder may first manifest at almost any age from early childhood to late life.' The DSM does say its a risk factor: 'early life trauma (e.g., neglect and physical, sexual, and emotional abuse, usually before ages 5–6 years) represents a risk factor for dissociative identity disorder.'

“If it’s not trauma, it’s roleplay.”

This presents a false dichotomy. Human identity and subjective experience are complex. There are many phenomena (such as immersive identity experiences, religious experiences, or other internal experiences) that aren’t simply reducible to “disorder” or “pretending.

Also you aren’t plural. You’re multiple. The term you’re searching for is multiplicity. “Plural” was coined by endogenics. I barely see any endogenics use terms like “alters.” Also why do you feel the need to dictate what others experience? Why do you think you can confidently tell what’s going on in someone else’s mind?

I find it quite ironic that you use Hannibal Lecter as your main theme as well. I understand he is your source, but I feel like we missed the point of the show.

Medical professionals will hate us with or without endogenics. I hope you understand that. We don’t know enough how our brains fully work to be making these claims.

I feel it’s also important to clarify I am professionally diagnosed with DID and are traumagenic. Psychologists I have seen have acknowledged non-traumagenic plurality. My friends psychiatrist has acknowledged them as well.

‘Research shows that dissociative disorders like DID are strongly associated with trauma.’

Yes. The reason there isn’t a simple “CDDs must be caused by trauma’ is because it would be impossible to test without traumatizing children. And even if they did that, not every person with extensive childhood trauma develops a CDD.

—

Endogenics do not always claim to have DID, and I never said they do. However to form alters, your ego states must be so severely dissociated that they don’t fuse. Dissociation is a trauma response.

—

Yes, misinformation should always be corrected, no matter what side it comes from. When have I ever claimed that antis never spread misinformation? You are putting a lot of words into my mouth that I’ve never said.

—

The human mind is complex. Of course. However, refusing to fuse ego states is not possible without dissociation between the states. Once again, dissociation is caused by trauma.

—

Religious experiences are not plural. Take Tulpas, for example. Tulpas, according to the people who practice the *actual* practice of tulpamancy, are not permanent. They are guides that are present in meditation, not “alters.”

—

I do not call myself plural. I do not call myself anything other than a system or a person with DID.

—

As for me using Hannibal Lecter as a theme: How many times do I have to repeat that introjects are not their source? You are trying to make me fit into the neat little box of my source character. I am a person. I am not a character. Stop dehumanizing me. This is not about the show, this is simply me talking about my opinions. If you don’t like it, respectfully, fuck off.

—

And I do not care about your diagnostic status. Having a certain diagnosis doesn’t mean all your claims are suddenly correct or incorrect.

—

Also:

"The DSM says the disorder may manifest at almost any age" This is a misreading. The DSM describes onset of symptoms, not formation of alters. Alters form in childhood as a response to overwhelming trauma. Symptoms may not become noticeable until later, but the dissociative structure is established early.

"The Theory of Structural Dissociation has 'theory' in the name" This is a misunderstanding of scientific terminology. "Theory" in science doesn't mean "guess," it means a well-supported explanatory framework. Gravity is a theory. Germ theory is a theory. The word doesn't make the evidence any less real.

"Psychologists have acknowledged non-traumagenic plurality" Acknowledging that someone claims something doesn't mean validating it as clinically real. It's possible they were being polite, or avoiding a confrontation, or simply acknowledging that the person experiences something without endorsing the explanation.

Now, I believe I have made it very clear that I do not want pro/endos interacting on this blog. Respect our DNI, it’s there for a reason.

Whenever endos say "Read the DSM! It doesn't even mention trauma!" it always pisses me off because that's blatantly false. First of all, the introduction to the dissociative disorders section has a whole paragraph on the link between trauma and dissociative symptoms.

"Dissociative disorders are frequently found in the aftermath of a wide variety of psychologically traumatic experiences in children, adolescents, and adults. Throughout this chapter, 'traumatic experiences' refers to experiences that result in psychological sequelae, as opposed to the physical impact that can cause a traumatic brain injury. Therefore, in the 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 and posttraumatic stress disorder include dissociative symptoms, such as amnesia, flashbacks, numbing, and depersonalization/derealization."

Secondly, in the diagnostic criteria for DID, it states:

"B. Recurrent gaps in the recall of everyday events, important personal information, and/or traumatic events that are inconsistent with ordinary forgetting."

Lastly, in the Associated Features section, it even gives more specific examples of the trauma that could cause DID:

"Individuals with the disorder typically report multiple types of interpersonal maltreatment in childhood and adulthood. Other overwhelming early life events, such as multiple long, painful, early-life medical procedures, also may be reported."

And that's not even getting into the numerous examples in other diagnostic tools of questions pertaining to trauma or the fact that the DSM is a.) very America-centric and b.) limited due to not including diagnoses like C-PTSD and P-DID (unlike the ICD-11, which does).

Sigh.

All of them

From the misinformation that causes systems to deny their trauma and avoid medical help when they need it, to the forceful separation of identity and personality that many singlets start doing to "become an endogenic/willogenic system", to also then the harassment and the ableism

The whole community is harmful, the posts they make, the way they identify, what they say and how they act. The way they treat actual systems and singlets is horrifying and harmful, but they don't get that

They don't understand that harassment can be genuinely traumatizing, especially when you're targeting an already traumatized and disabled minor. They don't understand that telling people to die, telling people they're bad and wrong and horrible, can and will affect that person

And they certainly don't understand the fact that disorders do affect people, and making them deny having that disorder, or making them try to force themselves to have that disorder, will only hurt them in the end

I think it’s just a tad bit weird that endos and “ plural “ defenders like to say that Alters being a symptom of CDDs means that anyone can experience it without the disorder because it’s “ just a symptom and not the disorder in itself “

Because for one, there’s scientific evidence and research as to how alters develop, if there is no fractured states of the brain via extreme dissociation, you are not able to develop alters. yes, it’s a symptom. No, it’s not one that can magically appear out of nowhere. It’s not one you can will into existence. It’s not like things such as migraines where you can experience it without a direct cause/a mental health issue.

Two, it’s incredibly ableist to suggest that something these people struggle with is “ just a symptom that anyone can experience “ and then proceed to completely ignore and dismiss the trouble these people go through because you believe it’s not that serious and that it’s something everyone has on the fucking daily. It waters down a significant part of the disorder for your benefit of having fun and roleplaying in the worst way you can.

Dissociative Barriers and their existence in the argument of "Endogenic Plurality".

Sometimes I see Endos make arguments that because "people with CDDs have dissociative barriers, Endos must have barriers too," which they claim would then prove the existence of Endogenic systems. That assumption is based on a fallacy known as "circular reasoning". In short, "Circular Reasoning" means "A is true because of B" but B is also reliant on A or needs the belief in logic A to make sense or to happen at all.

To have anything even close to alters, a brain must develop dissociative barriers. The mere existence of dissociative barriers does not lend itself to "natural barriers" and there has yet to be any scientific evidence of such ever happening. What is documented is the incredible ability within dissociative disorders to hide the trauma that caused them.

Disclaimer: I am purposefully excluding other disorders on the dissociative spectrum here (such as DPDR, BPD and CPTSD) that would result in "parts" but not the autonomy or autobiographic memory that would come from the dissociative barriers discussed here.

What are dissociative barriers?

Dissociative barriers are the "lines" between separate alters. They develop by ages 6-9 due to trauma, neglect or abuse, because the brain wants to keep itself safe and realizes that it cannot be safe if these memories get integrated¹.

Dissociative barriers do not form out of "no" or "natural*²" reasons. They are present and necessary in any CDD System (however thin or thick; this also includes systems with minimal/low or no amnesia) because they are used for the initial compartmentalization. These are the only type of barriers that could result in "alters".

There are no other barriers that would lead to anything like a "non-disordered system with alters" because the brain wouldn't need to develop any barriers in non-traumatic settings other than for protective reasons⁴. Normal, natural human development actually develops the other way; instinctually always working to integrate experiences rather than compartmentalizing or "disconnecting parts of the brain" (which in DID is proven through neuroimaging; See sources ³ & ²). Our brains rather have things together than disconnected.

The brain just does not like to be more compartmentalized than necessary without needing that mechanism to survive, because it makes survival in nature harder, but survival in trauma easier.

"Natural multiplicity" (not to confuse with Functional Multiplicity) would actually hurt the person's chances of survival more than they would help, as it would interrupt not only memory formation but also our innate human instinct to "learn from past experiences" which, during development, used to increase survival due to pattern recognition.

Ergo, "natural multiplicity" is unlikely to exist because you need (dissociative) barriers to have anything akin to alters or "headmates" at all.

*In this post I define "barriers" as what is commonly referred to as amnesiac barriers or those that separate alters (the latter is meant for systems that experience low amnesia). These may be relative to the system and its functions. For us they are like amnesiac fields (what comes to mind is something similar to the Emancipation Grid/Fizzler in Portal 2). We think of them less like force fields or walls that get erected but rather lines that develop to protect¹.

*² "natural" in this context means situations that don't involve trauma - natural origins - without the involvement of alterations through outside sources.

Sources used are underneath the cut.

(A/N: I have been working on this for the past few days, so I'm pretty sure by now I am blind to it, haha... Should anything not be linked properly, has thinking mistakes or has unnecessary repetition, please tell me so I can correct myself.)

what do you think of schizo-spec "systems"? putting in quotes just in case. i have a longer post about this you can read if you'd like: https://www.tumblr.com/serendipity-sys/820291845839077376/note-i-dont-identify-as-endo-and-please-try?source=share

up until recently i've been ostensibly/vaguely pro-endo, but i'm questioning whether i should be; i've so far described my stpd-based separation of selves as a system, as that is the easiest way to compartmentalize it with the terminology available, though it's dawning on me that this may be incorrect. i don't know enough about dissociative disorders and traumagenic systems to say so.

and i know whatever you end up saying doesn't stand for the whole community (people with dissociative disorders are not a monolith), but i still think it's worth getting your opinion regardless.

my apologies if this comes off as rude in any way! thank you for your time! <3

- @serendipity-sys

Thank you for asking respectfully.

Personally, I don't consider the schizophrenia-spectrum self-disorders and dissociative systems to be the same phenomenon. In schizophrenia-spectrum self-disorders, researchers describe disturbances of a "minimal" or "core" self. The model assumes the existence of a fundamental sense of selfhood (ipseity) which becomes unstable or disrupted. Experiences such as identity confusion, altered self-world boundaries, diminished self-coherence, and weakened feelings of "mineness" are understood as disturbances affecting that underlying self. Dissociative disorders are generally conceptualized differently. Modern theories of DID/OSDD do not typically describe a single intact "core" self being disrupted. Rather, the personality itself is not integrated into a unified whole, resulting in dissociated parts or self-states. In that sense, the parts are not usually understood as existing alongside some separate "real" or "core" identity; they are collectively the personality in different states. Because of that, I think schizophrenia-spectrum self-disturbance and dissociative systems are describing fundamentally different structures of selfhood, even if both can involve dissociation, identity confusion, or feelings of internal division. Those experiences are absolutely real. However, they are not generally described in the literature as autonomous dissociative identities or alters.

This is where I think a lot of conversations become muddled. Childhood trauma is not the only thing that can lead to self-fragmentation, identity disturbance, dissociation, or a feeling of being "more than one." We see forms of self-fragmentation across multiple conditions, including schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, personality disorders, depersonalization, and others. But not all self-fragmentation is systemhood.

The fact that two experiences may share identity confusion or a sense of internal division does not necessarily mean they are the same underlying phenomenon. For that reason, I personally don't think "system" is the most accurate framework for schizophrenia-spectrum self-disorders. Not because the experiences aren't real, but because the literature generally describes them differently than dissociative identity states. The similarities seem largely surface-level, while the underlying structure appears distinct.

I think it's completely reasonable to describe experiences of self-disturbance, self-fragmentation, identity confusion, or internal division. I just don't think that every experience of a fragmented self should automatically be categorized as a system. If every form of identity disturbance, self-fragmentation, compartmentalization, or internal conflict were considered systemhood, then we'd have to start calling large portions of BPD, schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, depersonalization disorders, and other conditions 'systems' as well—which isn't how those conditions are understood in clinical settings.

taglist: @anti-willo-utsuro , @anti-willo-valerie , @anti-willo-siffrin , @anti-willo-purpleguy , @anti-willo-sonicexe , @anti-willo-2017x , @anti-willo-c00lkidd , @anti-willo-joker-junior , @anti-willo-miku , @dissociacho , @the--classifieds, @antiwilloheartcj , @anti-willo-darkiplier , @anti-willo-ticci-toby , @anti-endo-spencer , @anti-willo-stu-macher , @thesicksys , @anti-willo-mark-grayson , @the-rogues-gallery-sys , @anti-willo-kinger , @antiendoventing , @cidadepequenasystem , @sansland , @aka-collective , @anti-willo-stark

I've seen so many pro-endos claim that IFS therapy, or the multiple selves theory, or the authors of the theory of structural dissociation's writings on what an integrated personality looks like, are proof of endogenic systems.

But the fact of the matter is that those resources aren't describing "plurality" or "systemhood" at all. They're describing how a normal, healthy human personality functions, which is applicable to every single person on the planet except people with DID or OSDD-1.

The human personality is made up of multiple parts that become active in different situations. They are responsible for different functions, such as exploration, attachment, defense, self-care, etc, and the subfunctions within those functions.

This what gives the human personality the flexibility that allows it to respond to different situations, and explains why people can have different "versions" of themselves in different situations (such as at work rather than with friends). These parts are all integrated together, meaning they can function fluidly and cohesively, and they create the basis for a consistent identity to form on top of. This is the kind of thing those resources are discussing.

However, that is explicitly not what happens when a person has alters. That is the opposite of being a system.

Systems occur when these parts of self become chronically dissociated from each other due to the abnormal compartmentalization of traumatic memory. This division of self is the same base neuropsychological process that is responsible for the development of PTSD and C-PTSD, just at a much more complex level.

The highly complex dissociative compartmentalization that occurs before the personality has reached the previously described state of integration, is what allows for divisions of self that are autonomous and have elaborated identity states.

If you were to argue that the aforementioned resources are proof of endogenic systemhood, that would mean that every single person on the planet would be a system. At which point, the word would lose all meaning. Even in that case, it would remain true that the only way to experience parts of self that are significant and distinct from the normal human experience, would be through DID and OSDD-1.

This was back when CDDs blew up in popularity online and when endogenics started becoming an increasingly popular identity label. I was quite literally told by a psychiatrist that he would not look into it because of that. This was less than 7 years ago, when our therapist at the time already started our treatment for the CDD I was getting the diagnosis for.

We were denied a proper diagnosis simply because it was at a time when CDDs were "trendy" and "non-traumagens" jumped at the opportunity to involve themselves. (this has nothing to do with whether they actually ended up having a CDD or not, the fact they used "ntg labels" was still harmful).

We discovered our system before the tiktokification of CDDs, and we waited with seeking treatment at first because we were afraid we wouldn’t be taken seriously because of it. But our quality of life and functionality became so bad that eventually we sought help anyway. Our psychologist at the time refused to even evaluate us, always brushed it off every time we tried to mention it, and apparently it turned out to be because of the popularity the disorders had gained and the people claiming to be NTG.

We told him that we do have trauma, he had already confirmed we dissociate, but he refused to look further into it because of the NTG “systems” and the sheer amount of people claiming to be one, as well as the popularity of the disorders at the time.

They think that the term and concept can be separated from CDDs because they wholeheartedly believe that alter is just "someone else in your head". I don't think I have to explain how that's extremely watered down and ableist.

In refusing to understand how CDDs work, how they form, and how alters come to be in the first place they water down alters to just a "buddy in your head", rather than a severe response to severe trauma.

Their community time and time again, refuses to listen to those with CDDs around them that call them out of their ableist logics and behaviors. They refuse to see how the very core of their beliefs are born from pure ableism. And in doing so, they are a community that isn't safe for any trauma survivors, let alone anyone with a CDD.

It's incredibly disappointing that even when you argue with polite and nice endos and pro endos, who actually listen to what you have to say, they still aren't actually taking in the information you're giving them. They still aren't actually listening to the disordered person telling them how the community they're in is unsafe and ableist, because they see endos as "friendlier". Because they don't see the ableism, because they don't have our fucking disorder.

YES, exactly !!

That's my main issue with people who say they're "radically inclusive", including all kinds of people into your communities means that you're letting these kinds of people in! How is that okay at all!!

Their community is built on an ableist hate movement to de-medicalize CDDs, has a massive massive history of racism, cultural appropriation and/or orientalism, transphobia, and more!! (Like. Whatever you would call them constantly calling anyone they disagree with nazis. The watering down of a historical term and group that did horrible terrible genocide just because you hate a group of trauma survivors. )

People will care more about being inclusive then they do about the minority groups in their community. They will care more about catering to ableists and racists than the disabled and people of color that will only suffer because of their "radical acceptance".

I'm fucking tired of it!!!!!!

IT IS SCIENTIFICALLY CORRECT, to be a system without trauma. However, you CANNOT have OSDD or DID. Because the criteria specifically states that these Mental ilnesses need trauma to develop.

This does NOT mean that Systems without OSDD and DID are not valid. Theyre also systems, and the brain can do weird things sometimes.

Validity of Experience: Plurality is a subjective experience of identity, not a "fake" disorder. If multiple, distinct personas operate within one body, that experience is real to them, regardless of its origin.

Diverse Origins: While many systems are formed through trauma (traumagenic), others can form through natural, spiritual, or voluntary processes (endogenic), such as tulpamancy or spontaneous creation.

Beyond Diagnosis: Medical models focus on diagnosing distress (DID/OSDD), but "not disordered" does not mean "not real." Plurality can exist without the impairment.

there is no "scientifically correct" way to be a system without trauma because there are no verified scientific studies that even entertain the possibility that nondisordered plurality can exist. the only studies done on nondisordered plurality are sociological studies that merely observe the way the community works and documents their beliefs. that's what nondisordered plurality is; it's a belief, not any tangible thing that can be proven or disproven. it exists similar to a religion, where there's no way to prove the existence of a god but there's also no way to disprove it in turn. the entire concept exists outside of the scope of proper scientific analysis and therefore would never be described as "scientifically correct/incorrect" in any regard.

and see, I don't mind nondisordered plurality as a belief. I don't mind there being people who view themselves as plural due to some sort of spiritual belief or what have you. but when a community centered around a belief system tries to force their experiences and their belief to be not only comparable to a medical experience, but to even attempt to replace said medical experience with spirituality or personal belief? (see "natural multiplicity movement" which made an attempt to have CDDs removed from the DSM entirely.) that's where we have an issue. systemhood is a disordered experience. system terminology is medical terminology specifically used for those with CDDs. using this medical terminology while claiming your experiences are not medical in nature and are instead a result of a belief is extremely contradictory and, frankly, quite idiotic in concept. that is the issue I have with these communities, not their belief on its own.

You cannot be a "system without trauma" because the term "system" means "person with a CDD," not "person who believes they are multiple" or even "person with multiple parts" (because then disorders like BPD could be included in the definition too).

Bullshitting your own hypotheses where there are gaps in the literature is not sound scientific reasoning, it is breeding grounds for misinformation and disinformation. It is also incredibly concerning the extent to which non-traumagenic plurality communities insist on co-opting terms and co-opting spaces used by people with CDDs and their insistence on "expanding the definitions" of various concepts related to CDDs to include them, when there is no need to do so. Cultural practices and religious systems across the globe do not, and should not be associated with disordered behavior. Not only does this then make it much more likely for culturally insensitive clinicians to regard completely ordinary behavior as disordered, therefore making them more vulnerable to victimization by the medical system, but it's also harmful to people trying to find information on CDDs and instead finding religiously/spiritually-affiliated information with no scientific or medical basis, and engaging in behaviors that may worsen disordered behaviors.

Screenshotted to avoid getting the OP harassed , but I’m realizing that a lot younger folks truly have no idea why we’re saying Endo, Willo, Tulpas, etc are ableist.

So here’s a quick explainer for you.

In the capacity that systems are created, the Endogenic Umbrella cannot exist. The brain doesn’t just become a system. It’s a mental disorder caused by consistent abuse that makes the brain decide that being whole will only cause more stress. Once the brain learns this neat trick to avoid stress, it will do it over and over again for little stresses.

Endogenics as a general group claims that they have formed alters without the initial big trauma and therefore are not disordered. As Alters are a symptom not a cause for the disorder itself, calling yourself an “Endogenic System” is the equivalent of putting pepper in your nose and saying you’re allergic to pollen because you sneezed.

It would be perfectly fine if Endogenics and their Umbrella of Willos and Tulpas stayed in their own corner as a separate more spiritual thing. Maybe with a focus on making imaginary friends as a thought exercise. But instead, Endogenics are coming into system spaces and claiming to be the same as the very real mental disorder. If you are not a system, why are you trying to join system spaces?

And before folks come and tell that Endos aren’t doing that, I am an admin on a CDD Discord. Even with our stance publicly stating we are Anti-Endos, plenty of Endos come into the Discord anyway.

You can’t be like “We’re the pepper sniffing community! Completely removed from the seasonal allergy community, we promise” but then march into spaces where it says “Only people with seasonal allergies allowed”

This is not about young folks who don’t think they have trauma because they don’t remember it. This is not about folks who are genuinely young children who do not know any better. This is about the adults who are making 2+2=6 and then getting upset when folks are telling them it actually equals 4.

You’re not evil if you’re a child and you want alters. I can assure you, Endogenics do make having a system LOOK fun even though the reality is, it’s headaches, dissociation, and feeling like you lost days of your life.

You ARE sick. (In the most literal sense.) No healthy person wishes to be ill and I hope that one day you get the help you deserve to understand your own behavior.

Fun Fact:

Traumagenic is a real medical term that is typically used in therapeutic environments to describe beliefs or states that are impacted by the cognitive and emotional impact of trauma. ( It's also used to refer to the traumagenic neurodevelopmental model of psychosis. )

1 ) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8833025/ ( Mentions of SA & CSA ) 2 ) https://www.mosac.net/TraumagenicStatesModel.aspx ( Discussion of SA & CSA )

Not only that, but there are papers out there that refer to CDDs as "Trauma-Related Dissociative Disorders" or caused by trauma, for all the weirdos out there who keep saying they can have a CDD without any form of trauma.

1 ) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9162402/ ( Mentions of abuse, neglect, sexual violence, suicide, substance use. ) 2 ) https://www.isst-d.org/publications-resources/public-resources/fact-sheet-iv-what-are-the-dissociative-disorders/ ( Mentions of alcohol & drug use, torture, cults, coercive control ) 3 ) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12406319/ ( Mentions of CSA and childhood abuse. ) 4 ) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4959824/ ( Mentions of CSA, childhood abuse, neglect, suicide. ) 5 ) https://pasadenatraumatherapy.com/dissociation/ ( Mentions of sexual abuse, physical abuse, incest, emotional abuse, neglect, torture, trafficking, CSA, drugs, alcohol, self-harm, and suicidality. )

Extremely, EXTREMELY sorry if I missed any triggers.

anon i love you for this /p

As an autistic system I do notice that the way endos/ntgs view/treat plurality/systems is very similar to how (mostly allistic but sometimes autistic folks too) view and treat autism.

"It's not a disability it's a superpower! You're not disabled your differently abled! Everyone's a little bit on the spectrum! Oh yeah I'm sooo autistic" autism has been made something cute and quirky. Men are wanting "autistic" girlfriends but I'm sure if a real autistic woman was anywhere near them they'd revert back to bully they were in middleschool. Traits like stimming and special interests are romanticised, while the more "ugly" parts are all ignored and forgotten. White autistics with Lower supports needs are centred and most often leave their POC and higher supports needs siblings behind and/or speak over them.

DID too has suffered from being sensationalised and glamorized, the alters/multiplicity aspect has been romanticised and taken by outsiders while the "ugly" parts have been left out and forgotten. "Plurality isn't a disorder it's just some vague phenomena anyone can experience! If you wish you were a system, now you can be!" It's just a quirky identity stripped of it's "baggage". Plural communities constantly decentre CDD systems, their most vulnerable group, we are not listened to because our disorder isn't pretty, because we don't want our experiences and language appropriated , because we don't abide by their idealised version of Plurality and blindly agree with their community.

The "tiktokification" of autism does not represent me, the "tiktokification" of systems doesn't either. I'm not against sharing the good parts of your disorder/disability but you must remember it IS a disorder/disability. There is also nothing wrong with relating to traits of a disorder without having it. But,once again, do not speak over us!!

(Sorry if what's written I all over the place, the post was started by one alter and its been a few day I've decided to finish it and post it. I hope what we've written makes sense. Be kind and have a lovely day)

Plural as a word feels kinda infantilizing tbh

"Plural" is an incredibly simple word. It's one of the first you learn when you start delving past the most elementary linguistics (around 1st - 3rd grade in most cases). It's an essential, concise word.

Not only that, but it's also very short: 6 letters, 1-2 syllables depending on how you pronounce it. It's the definition of an "easy" word.

Then to top it all off, it's not medical. Medical words are often seen as intimidating or overcomplicated by the general population, so by having such an elementary word be used to describe an extremely complex topic, it makes it seem more approachable.

It feels so infantile because it is.

[PT: tips for people who wish they were systems (and dont want to think like that anymore). /End PT]

✅correct things to do✅

-read books/biographies on people with cdds. for me personally, reading and getting some insight on what cdds were truly like was very eye opening. i recommend “first person plural: my life as a multiple” by cameron west. its pretty old but i think it still represents DID well and really goes in depth on how difficult cdds can be to live with (and thats just an understatement, btw)

-or you can even just read people’s stories with cdds on the internet! as long as you arent in a system only space, you’ll be fine! im sure many systems are willing and/or happy to tell their stories to someone who may want to listen.

-MAKE OCS!! this is a huge one!! design them how you want! give them their own backstory, name, pronouns, etc

-roleplay and write fanfics!! i didnt really try this method myself but im sure it helps a lot. you could even make a cosplay while youre at it

❌incorrect things to do❌

-infiltrate system/cdd only spaces

-creating a tulpa (unless its for religious reasons, thats valid) or otherwise a willogenic ‘system’