a sword could write better than this pen

nontraumagenic "systems" can have plural labels. i don't care. there is a clear divide there that i'm pretty sure everyone understands. if someone is using the term "plural" with no stance indicator, it's safe to assume that they're pro-nontraumagenic, right?

what we're not going to do is use the term "multiple" or "multiplicity" outside of CDD spaces. that term is NOT for people without a CDD. multiple/multiplicity is a medical term that i will not let get demedicalised

(pro)endos have enough labels and terms to last several lifetimes without ever repeating a single one. this is a fantastic example of how nontraumagenic "systems" are ableist. there is no excuse

"but it doesn't help your goals!" meanwhile men are beating, raping, oppressing, and killing women everywhere to advance the goals of the patriarchy. don't tell me what I should and should not feel about that.

"but it harms trans men/men of color/other oppressed men!" does it? because trans men and men of color have way more serious shit to deal with than women expressing their feelings on the internet. such as transphobia and racism. meanwhile, women in their communities (trans women, women of color) have to deal with all of that PLUS oppression from the men.

I’m going to be blunt, because posts like this rely on emotionally charged language instead of clear definitions, and that directly contributes to the ableism and stigma surrounding CDDs and psychiatric disorders. To say that people with CDDs have privilege over someone who identifies as plural without a CDD is egregious.

This rhetoric ultimately narrows a severe trauma based disorder into an identity category and then weaponizes the language of oppression to shield it from critique.

Terms like “endophobia” are used to moralize disagreement, especially when there is no evidence that a mechanism separate from structural dissociation produces autonomous identity states in a functionally equivalent way. If you're against it, you're a bigot and therefore anything you say- any evidence or rebuttal you provide is oppression.

But disagreement is not oppression. Being questioned is not oppression. Lacking clinical validation is not oppression.

There are plenty of people who outright do not believe that CDDs exist. And that invalidation leads to systemic harm that is genuinely oppressive. I'm not just talking about some Joe schmoe online saying "you don't really have DID!" but it seems that some people think that's how deep it goes.

Oppression involves material harm, things like loss of rights, threats on immigration status, violation of bodily autonomy, medical malpractice, hate crimes, loss of custody, medical coercion, institutional discrimination, violence, or barriers to survival. People with complex dissociative disorders experience these things regularly. They are involuntarily hospitalized, disbelieved by professionals, treated as dangerous or unreliable, and denied credibility in legal and medical settings.That is not “recognition privilege.” Calling it privilege is ignorant at best and is nonetheless deeply disrespectful to people living with these disorders.

Endogenic systems are not oppressed because clinicians do not recognize endogenic plurality as a phenomenon. Psychological research does not exist to validate identities, but to describe mechanisms, impairments, and treatments. The reason there is little research on endogenic plurality is not bias or prejudice. it's because there is no agreed upon clinical construct, diagnostic criteria, or measurable mechanism to study beyond self report. And self reports are highly inconsistent, too inconsistent to even provide any testable hypotheses.

Scientists and clinicians saying that subjective experience alone does not establish etiology is not an act of oppression. It is the baseline standard for every field of medicine and psychology.

Calling this distinction “endophobia” is nothing more than a rhetorical move, and in this case thinly, poorly veiled behind a tone of empowerment and positivity. Saying dissociative disorders and it's features- switches, autonomous identity states with agency, co-consciousness, affect, and memory variations are trauma based is not hatred. Not even close. You are placing your need for validation above decades of the medicalized institutional harm that comes with a diagnosis and the absolute nightmare that is experiencing a dissociative disorder.

What’s being defended here isn’t safety or access to care, but affirmation. Disability advocacy exists to fight for dignity, accommodation, and protection from harm, not to shield identity claims from criticism. It takes a lot of audacity (and ironically, privilege) to essentially say that it is a privilege to have a diagnosis associated with oppressive institutional harm. A diagnosis isn't a privilege when you have any understanding of how pwCDDs have been persecuted historically, how they are treated and always have been treated.

I hate seeing this bastardization of something that not only ruined my life but is statistically likely to end my life sooner than others. You think it’s fun and quirky, you think that we’re bitter, you think we simply aren’t enjoying it or aren’t making it enjoyable for other parts. There’s nothing fun about this, there’s nothing fun about my life never being my own because someone stole that from me as a child.

Willomance yourself a fucking job application.

MY OWN THOUGHTS by Helena Minginowicz (Polish, b. 1984)

DID and OSDD are DISSOCIATIVE disorders. The existence of a system/alters is a SYMPTOM of the disorders. They are caused by DISSOCIATION. OSDD1 is not the only valid type of OSDD, and other types don't have alters as a symptom-- they are still dissociative disorders.