finnegan🩷

But I personally do not think anti endos are inherently sysmeds like some people believe. Someone can be anti endo and still be anti sysmed.

People are anti endogenic for more reasons than just "I don't think Endos exist." For example someone may believe in the possibility of non-traumagenic systems and are simply anti endo because they do not feel comfortable with endogenic systems using traumagenic terms. Someone could be an anti endo for the sake of wanting their own space away from endogenic systems. Someone could be anti endo purely because they feel it best fits their own lived experience or because they personally see it more as being pro recovery, not anti people themselves. It's not always just "I hate endogenic systems", it's more complicated than that.

Sysmedicalism is a very SPECIFIC branch of basically: they see plurality through a purely medical lens. And while I believe there is overlap due to most if not all sysmeds in our experience being anti endo, not all anti endos are going to be sysmeds. I feel like saying all anti endos are sysmeds actually is very dehumanizing.

what would you wish was less talked about? are there topics and arguments you're tired of seeing?

I'll go first: I'd want more discussion on people who are both plural and have a CDD, instead of always hearing about how plurality is a different thing entirely, or how plurals could never understand what it's like to have a CDD.

so whenever we see other system members say, for example "I'm a trauma holder I do XYZ because of it", we feel.. weird as a system. because for us, in this example, our trauma holders are not trauma holders because of a role they were formed with (ie something that was assigned to them), but because they picked it up along the way and that's what they do (something they either chose to do, or started doing long enough it became their job since they're the only ones good at it)

when i was anti-endo, my reasoning was: CDDs are only formed from trauma and it's the only way to be "plural"/a system.

but then i started to, yk educate myself. plurality isn't inherently CDDs (and doesn't inherently INCLUDE CDDs) and that "more than one" thing is just a symptom. researching into "plural" communities, like tulpamancy, soulbonding, etc that stuff, i realized how un-medical they are.

for example: everyone gets intrusive thoughts, everyone has probably hallucinated once in their lives, all of that. that doesn't mean disorder. it only becomes a disorder if it's impacting you negatively, or you share more symptoms of it. you wouldn't tell me that im not experiencing hallucinations or intrusive thoughts just because i don't have OCD or schizophrenia

i just don't have a reason why to disbelieve plurality outside of CDDs. we can all agree that DID/OSDD require childhood trauma, and that the therapy/recovery from it is a LOT different from a lot of disorders (including other traumatic disorder.)

idk like...people who have had TBI (traumatic brain injury) have changed SO much as people and experienced things very differently, are able to do things they've never been able to do before, etc.

I'm anti endo in the sense "endos are surely experiencing something and if they wanna call it plurality sure why not, I don't know how that would be like anyways, and as long as they're decent about purely traumagenic and CDD systems I'll be decent too"

I have no reason to go after them, I'm normal towards them, and I'm not gonna start shit. I just want the communities of people with CDDs and people without these disorders to be kept separate. pretty much that's it.

“Pro-endo” is not the only stance here that recognizes endogenic plurality.

There are people with CDDs who are strongly anti-endo and still believe that endogenic systems are genuinely plural.

It is possible to oppose the pro-endo movement as a community, including concerns about misinformation, the misuse of clinical language, the way pwCDDs are often treated, and to use the label anti-endo for those reasons, while still acknowledging endogenic plurality as real.

Being anti-endo does not automatically mean fakeclaiming all endogenics.

It does not automatically mean believing plurality only exists within CDDs.

And it does not mean harboring blanket hostility toward anyone who identifies as wholly or partly endogenic.