personally , i'm leaning to the pro side of this discourse because i consider my attraction to men gay in some capacity , because i identify primarily as a male. but i wanted to ask some questions to both the anti , pro and anywhere in between sides !

for pro - mspec gays / lesbians , gaybians , lesboys / turigirls :

[ PT: for pro-mspec gays/lesbians, gaybians, lesboys/turigirls: END PT. ]

what r some reasons u believe what u do? just a basis of ur beliefs regarding it ig

what r some reasons someone might identify as these?

do you identify as one or multiple of these things ?

do you go out of your way to attack ppl who are on the pro side of this discourse? do you just block people who are on the anti side? ( mostly because i've heard stories from both abt getting death threats and such )

for gaybians: why not a different label? like , why not omnisexual , bisexual , or pansexual? why specifically gay & lesbian? ( question given by my friend )

how did u find out abt mspec lesbians / gays , gaybians && turigirls / lesboys? do you think how you found out about it influenced what side you were on?

mspec monos have apparently been apart of the queer community for years , so , do you have any sources and such to back this up? i see it commonly brought up in pro mspec mono spaces and haven't been able to find any myself ( i'm not doubting it! i'm just curious and want to read about more queer history )

for anti - mspec gays / lesbians , gaybians , lesboys / turigirls :

[ PT: for anti-mspec gays/lesbians, gaybians, lesboys/turigirls: END PT. ]

what are some of the reasons u believe what u do? like , just a basis

do u support people w fluid genders / sexualities , and / or multigender people?

if so , why is the case different when someone may be abro but primarily gay?

why are asexual and aromantic lesbians and gays okay but not someone who may identify as bisexual homoromantic? or homosexual omniromantic?

what abt someone who's a boygirl and identifies as a lesbian? are they suddenly not 'girl enough' to identify as a lesbian despite the term technically fitting them?

do you go out of your way to attack ppl who are on the pro side of this discourse? do you just block people who are on the pro side? ( mostly because i've heard stories from both abt getting death threats and such )

what r some reasons someone might identify as these? Because they feel as though those labels describe their experiences. Queerness is complicated. No two people of the same identity will have the exact same experiences or views on it. I could provide some examples, but honestly the best way to learn something like this is to talk to people who are in those groups.

do you identify as one or multiple of these things ? Yes and no. I have dissociative identity disorder, which means I have several distinct identities separated by dissociative barriers. These identities have their own gender identities, orientations, and relationships with such concepts. I do not know if any of us identify that way individually as alters. I do know many of us have very complex relationships with queerness. I do know that our alters who are lesbians and our alters who are men are not different people in the way I and you are, even if we have our own senses of selves and are dissociated from each other. This means all of our queerness co-exists within the same brain. If we did not have dissociative barriers anymore, I would be a man and a lesbian and all sorts all at once.

do you go out of your way to attack ppl who are on the pro side of this discourse? do you just block people who are on the anti side? ( mostly because i've heard stories from both abt getting death threats and such ) No, and I honestly do not believe questions like this are a good way to gauge which side is 'right' or not. If someone is a bad person, that does not mean it is caused by their stance on a specific aspect of discourse. I do not believe it reflects on the community nor stance itself in any way, shape, nor form. Beyond that, things like this are very online problems. That is not to say that they are not problems, but that these things exist well beyond what Tumblr users argue over. People with these identities exist in the real world, They live their lives just as anyone else does. And these people exist in queer spaces in the real world, where most of the time most people really do not care for what is the 'right' way to be queer. (Not to mention, it is genuinely impossible to distinguish between those who genuinely hold one of these stances attacking the other side, and someone who is a troll. Whether it is people from one side sending hateful things to their own side to make the other side look bad, or people unrelated just wanting to cause harm, it is difficult to tell. What I can say is that if you ever got a yes, I harass people over it, then it is almost certainly a troll. No one would admit to that, it makes them and their community look bad.)

for gaybians: why not a different label? like , why not omnisexual , bisexual , or pansexual? why specifically gay & lesbian? ( question given by my friend ) N/A

how did u find out abt mspec lesbians / gays , gaybians && turigirls / lesboys? do you think how you found out about it influenced what side you were on? Honestly, I cannot remember for certain, but it was probably when I was 12 and a transmedicalist. I recall distinctly a xenogender where someone's gender was mirroring the person they are attracted to. I recall it being mocked, people saying how they are faking being trans because they just want to be gay all the time so they can be special. How that's not how gender works, it cannot be based on who you're attracted to. It's just snowflakes who make their whole identity about being gay. It's fetishising gay/trans people, real gay/trans people do not identify that way. Which... Maybe it has influenced me. I believed so strongly that I was right, that they are just trenders who make real trans people look like jokes. Only, I discovered that they are real trans people. That they are real queer people, the same way I am. That their queerness does not exist to invalidate my own, it just exists because it exists. That, in actuality, people like that are actually the best to form community with. They believe in queer joy in all its forms. There is nothing you will ever do or say or be that is wrong to them. They are now the people I am most comfortable around.

this is my sideblog. i dont want a derailed conversation under a positivity post on my main

anyway! i think youll find that the same words can have multiple meanings. what definition of a word is being used can usually be picked up by context clues. for example, if i hear see someone post about how they've run out of fags, its pretty safe to assume they're british and mean cigarettes and not the slur

i assume this is about the gang crips. which, i didnt even know existed until someone in the comments mentioned them. thats because i dont live wherever that gang lives. crips has no connotations with gangs here, and even if it did, i still can use it to mean cripples. its pretty clear by the context of my post where i added a whole disclaimer at the end using the full word, that its not about the gang

as a disabled person i am discriminated against because i can't openly plural. before you gasp shock horror! the reason i'm discriminated against for isnt because im plural, it is because im disabled. my plurality is symptoms of my disorder, and i cannot mask them. we have an overt presentation. if we are able to mask at all, it comes at the cost of our functioning.

recently our system destabilised due to a major trauma. we now have 3ish hosts, me being one of them, and i talk nothing like the rest of the system. i sound like im doing some sort of impression of fluttershy. the other two also don't talk like each other. tim talks really formally, and ashton talks like an aussie with an american accent.

this makes accessing the world really, really difficult. with tim and ashton its mostly find, most people dont notice, but with me its not. i cant stay grounded in the front unless i talk how i talk. but if i talk how i talk, people can tell that somethings wrong with us. either they think we're crazy, or we tell them and they know we're crazy

we also just have really different skills and abilities that make existing really hard when we can't explain to others why we are like this. tim is really articulate but cant express his tone very well. i dont think ashton can explain anything without swearing at least twice. and i can't word very well or express my tone much at all.

like. we're getting a job now. it's happening! we have no idea whos gonna do it because im the most consistent at grounding but i dont know what im doing ever. tim maybe, but he doesnt really do stuff good like school even though hes really smart. ashton maybe but he curses a lot and really struggles with filtering himself the way he'll need to.

the fact that we cant just openly state, 'hey, we have did, and that's why we're like this' without people thinking we're crazy! but because we can't, people are gonna think we're crazy because we act crazy and can't explain why.

this is really rambly and i didnt really say my point too good. but. i think you guys forget that systems can be overt, and say a lot of ableist stuff in your ploy against non-cdd plurals and their ableist existences. which. we have problems with that. i think if youre reading this you know about that and stuff. and if you dont i could maybe find tim explaining it.

I do get quite frustrated at the end. I do not feel the need to tone police myself when expressing my frustrations as a disabled person, and I hope that this conversation being respected is not conditional on me doing that.

To try and make this clearer since I am doubtful of my ability to be particularly articulate right now, it is broken up into three different sections.

---1---

Fearne as an alter really struggles with the ability to communicate clearly. This is a part of how our DID symptoms impact her and disable us as a system. Section two is going to try and clarify what fae meant, and section three is going to go into the fact that it is, for the lack of a better descripton, not appropriate to expect a disabled person to centre non-disabled people in their post about ableism they are experiencing.

---2---

She was specifically speaking to the people who treat non-CDD plurals this way in order to 'protect' CDD systems, and trying to explain how their efforts are actually more harmful than anything else.

She did attempt to begin to get at the fact that we do not believe it is an alright treatment for non-CDD plurals in the second to last paragraph.

We have made many, many posts advocating for kinder treatment of non-CDD plurals. It is not your fault if you do not know of them, but I wish to make clear we have dedicated hours upon hours of our time to educating people about non-CDD plurality and advocating for kinder treatment towards you all.

---3---

Disabled people do not owe non-disabled people anything in conversations about ableism we experience.

She was disscusing how ableism is impacting us as a disabled person. The entire reason for it was to address how their treatment towards non-CDD plurals is not actually helping disabled people, but that does not change that this post is a disabled person talking about experiencing ableism.

Your experiences and struggles are quite valid, and a disabled person talking about how ableist rhetoric impacts them is not invalidating that. It could have been phrased better to make it clearer that we do not believe that it is an alright way to treat anyone by someone else, but at the moment of writing that the disabling symptoms of not being able to communicate clearly because of the disorder we were talking about was impacting us at the time. Even if it were not, we are not obligated to centre the experiences of non-disabled people when talking about ableism we are experiencing as a disabled person.

It does impact you. And it is shitty. I am not saying it is not, and she was not trying to either. But those experiences of oppression we were discussing were explicitly stated to not be because we are plural, it is because we are disabled from a complex dissociative disorder. Even if you experience similar problems from being plural, you are not a disabled person being oppressed for being disabled. Disabled people do not have to go, "Well, this non-disabled group has similar struggles, so I must also include their experiences in a post where I am talking about me experiencing ableism."

You said you were not trying to detract from our post about experiences in the tags, but the experiences we were talking about there was specifically because our mind is broken up into dissociative parts. Even if some of our experiences look similar, it is important not to act like those similarities mean the same thing.

This post was not just, "Oh, I struggle to meet the expectations of singlets in how they expect me to act!" It was about how having to try and meet these expectations worsen our symptoms of our disability.

For example, the problem with us getting employed is that having to mask our symptoms causes us dissociate, and prevents us from being able to function because we are barely able to hold any memory from what happened five seconds ago.

She did not exactly go into that level of depth, because our disability prevents her from being able to do so. But even if she could, we as a disabled person talking about ableism we personally are experiencing is not something that has to be nuanced and focus on the harm it causes to a seperate, non-disabled group.

We do not owe people an explicit explanation of how this impacts us specifically because of our disorder and therefore is not applicable to people without that disorder regardless of similar experiences, because that group has nothing to do with us experiencing ableism for our disorder.

I also do not believe that the shit that non-CDD systems go through should be defined by the experiences of CDD systems. But I cannot, cannot stress enough how our experiences with ableism on the basis of a disorder we have has absolutely nothing to do with people without that disorders.

----

I believe that people deserve to live how they want. I want this post to be good-faith. I do not want arguments. Harassment. Threats. I know I will get these things, but I do not care.

I believe endos. I believe y'all. I believe that what you are experiencing is real and deserves to be believed, validated and respected. I genuinely do. I do not necessarily believe that it is "endogenic", though. That's my problem.

Every time I've tried to see y'alls side, I come out of it more and more concerned, constantly. I can see the research like 10, 20 years from now and it's going to be about how much horrific ableist misinformation there is in these Godforsaken spaces.

Y'all will say "these things can cause an endo system!" and then list off shit that causes DID or OSDD, claiming that they aren't traumatizing or traumatizing ""enough"" to cause DID/OSDD, when they are, and literally DO, and have been documented to countless times over. Shit like medical trauma and neglect, which are horrifically fucking abusive and traumatizing.

Y'all will say the most nastiest fucking shit about people with DID or OSDD. That we aren't human. That we're LESS than human. That we aren't as individual as y'all.

Y'all will cherry pick information and twist anything and everything. Y'all will call us lucky for being traumatized and abuse. Y'all will tell us we're "traumascum", it's fucking horrid.

I genuinely want to see this pro endo side. The arguments. But all I see is a generation of people who are being prevented from getting the proper help they need, all because they believe they are not disordered.

I've seen too many stories and met too many people who have gone into these endogenic circles and came out horrifically traumatizing, horrifically abused, battling horrific denial of their DID or OSDD, all because they spent years in these circles of pseudoscience and misinformation and 0 critical thinking.

I see these popular sources of endogenic misinformation, and not just endogenic stuff, but misinformation and horrific ableism towards DID/OSDD as well - I see things like "sophieinwonderland" and "The Plural Association" spreading awful misinformation, ableism and racism on a large scale.

It scares me.

It seriously concerns me how huge these things have become and how many people this is going to affect.

The biggest issue I see with the pro-endogenic community is how quick it is to turn on itself. Being anything other than unquestioningly supportive to every claim those around you make is necessary, lest you be considered not 'pro-endo enough' and driven out. I have seen that happen to many pro-endogenic and even just endogenic systems. And outside of the pro-endogenic community, where are many of these people supposed to turn?

If someone is an endogenic system, they do not really have any other options. Not when they are blacklisted from even spaces completely unrelated to plurality for something about themselves they cannot control. Not when people are blacklisted for believing they exist, or even being neutral to their existence. Not when people hate them for their existence. There's no amount of being anti-misinformation or using terms unrelated to DID/OSDD that will ever be good enough for many anti-endogenics.

For someone talking about deconstructing the gender binary, you really are reinforcing it with this post. I know that you did not mean to, but you *did*.

You are implying that men cannot wear 'women's' clothing. That there are 'men's' things and 'woman's' things, that gender non-conformity from 'men's' things makes someone not a man.

When a transgender man makes a post saying that they feel represented by a characters gender expression, it is not really appropriate to respond to that by saying, 'Well, this stuff makes him not a man actually!'

You responded to his post saying those experiences of his manhood he saw in Crowley are not something men are capable of doing.

I am a man who wears women's clothes and looks androgynous. And I really, really ask that you consider not saying that doing those things makes people not men.

You can interpret Crowley however. But I view him personally as a transgender man *because* his gender expression is just like mine, and none of those things you listed are things men cannot do.

Crowley is canonically nonbinary and has been since 1990.

And I find it awfully funny the number of people who insist he’s “actually male” when it’s been in the text ever since the book, and Neil has stated multiple times that Crowley is not a man.

One way this is shown is by occasionally having him show up as a woman (Golgotha, Nanny Ashtoreth), and one is by having him wear women’s clothing. You can yell all you like about how there’s no such thing as gendered clothing, but the fact is, this show is being made in 2019/2022, when there are in fact men’s and women’s sections and wearing clothes associated with the opposite gender is, in case you hadn’t noticed, under attack because it’s bad to play with gender and be trans/nonbinary/both.

Maybe instead of yelling about “how dare you recognize this common shorthand!” you should ask yourself why it bothers you that genderqueer and nonbinary people got some representation who’s just out here living his life and not being A Very Special Episode.

Sincerely,

You said, "I hear what you're saying, but Crowley very much fucks around with gender. He's not a man. He dresses in women's clothing (even when not required as a disguise) and in the first season has androgynous hair and clothing in the 2010s scenes."

You did not say, "He is canonically nonbinary and acting as though he is not is erasing the representation." You said that he cannot be a man because he wears women's clothing and has an androgynous haircut. If you did not mean that, you should not have said that. But you did say that, and that is why I sent you this ask.

If you want to talk about coding, and how gender nonconformity is often times a way to code characters as nonbinary, you can do so without saying that someone who wears women's clothing cannot be a man.

As someone who--as I explicitly stated-- is a man who wears women's clothing, I am keenly aware of the fact that people who wear clothing associated with the opposite gender are under attack. A big part of the way I experience bigotry in regards to my gender nonconformity is the idea that I am not a man because I wear these clothes, because men cannot do 'women's' things. Which is what you said was why Crowley is not a man, because he wears women's clothing and has an androgynous haircut.

From what you said here, you clearly do understand the bigotry I am talking about here. We are on the same page. I just ask to be more mindful before you say things that uphold that bigoted rhetoric, as unintentional as it may have been. Especially when you are speaking to a transgender man who is genderqueer, like you were in that post.

it is very difficult to exist in queer spaces as a hyper masculine person & a man. you're made to feel like you need to walk a tight rope feeling like you're inherently out of place, as if you existing and being masculine or a man in queer spaces makes others uncomfortable inherently.. just know that when i make positivity posts it is to remind us all that masculinity/manhood and queerness are not opposites and that you do not have to be a feminine man or masc person to be viewed/seen/heard as queer.

Trans women and girls are dying (a crushing majority of them being racialized and Black) and that’s what you’re doing ?

I’m not going to go down a list even though there’s a whole essay to be written there. Also did butches and studs call you and tell you that...

I can only assume you made this response because you genuinely do not know that transgender men also face the same violent bigotry transgender women do. That you believe that the biggest issue we have is people demonising our masculinity, which you also do not believe is happening.

I can only assume you are mad at this post because you are upset that men/mascs dare speak about the bigotry we are experiencing without centering women/fems. The bigotry you brought up is literally something we experience, but on top of that we experience a unique form of bigotry based on being men/mascs.

Do you want to know what that bigotry involves? Being unable to speak about any of our problems without people acting as though we are saying we have it worse than women/fems. Things like, I don't know, a post asking people to stop demonising men/mascs getting responded to with 'you think YOU have problems??? WHAT ABOUT TRANS WOMEN EXPERIENCING THE SAME ISSUES TRANS MEN DO!!'

This is what OP was talking about. It is in fact demonisation when you decide that everything a man/masc man says about our experiences with bigotry is us actually meaning that women/fems don't have it as bad.

The issue is not whether or not transgender men or women experience the higher rate of violence than the other, it is that we experience it higher than cis people. In fact, a lot of studies show equal experiences. You may not think that's right given you hear far more about violence towards transgender women, but perhaps that is because the moment transgender men talk about our experiences with bigotry this happens.

This demonisation is why people do not know we are experiencing violent bigotry. On the one hand we have bigots who view us as confused and delusional women who should be silenced and stripped of our autonomy, and the other hand we have people who have a gender affirming version of gender essentialist 'man/masc bad woman/fem good' that silence us and erase our experiences because clearly we all just hate trans women and don't care about their experiences if we do not centre them in every single conversation.

Seriously.

In the exact same way not every single conversation trans women have, especially about their unique experiences with bigotry that we don't have, needs to include trans men, ours do not need to include trans women. Ours do not inherently include trans women. I do not know if you mean a silent 'trans men do not have it as bad' when you speak about bigotry unique to trans women, but we sure as fuck don't when talking about our unique experiences.

Because clearly you meant one just then. With that of all fucking things, we die too. Just because they misgender us at our funerals and people like you silence the conversations we have around it does not mean that my brothers are not dying.

Statistics are actually pretty equal between trans men and women. The only demographic that has significantly more violence is black trans women. That is not because trans men, especially not black trans men, are privileged and not experiencing bigotry, but because black trans women are experiencing a unique intersection of bigotry, misogyny, and racism. Using the bigotry black trans women are experiencing, or fuck any trans women, to silence trans men speaking about our own struggles is disgusting.

I have two more things to say. One is I have no idea what you meant by the 'also did butches and studs call you to tell you that... you know what?' I don't know, actually. Call OP to tell them that they are experiencing demonisation for being masculine? If you think butches and studs have not spoken about their experiences of demonisation for being masculine then clearly you are not listening.

Second and final thing: This post is not about trans men. It is about all men and all mascs. Including masculine trans women. You know, the people who are dying? Or do you only care when it is a feminine trans woman dying?

Seriously, using the bigotry experienced by people who the post includes to silence the conversation is just...

I have no words.

endo systems

we deliberately didnt put anything about it in our intro post cus it doesnt really. its not like. it doesnt matter when we talk about ourselves imo

but since we're kinda dabbling in syscource ig its time to talk about it

point blank, we do not hate endos. we arent exactly neutral, but we arent anti or pro either

what we really Really dislike is endo culture. snatching did/osdd related terms, trying to get into did/osdd spaces, saying that did/osdd are miserable in their "disordered plurality" etc etc etc. thats fucking garbage, cut it out. get your own stuff! come up with your own terms! create your own spaces! and also maybe dont shit on traumatised people for being. yk. traumatised

but at the same time, we are nowhere near trying to tell people what's going on in their brain. it's just stupid. it's none of our business, just like its none of anybody else's. just like we personally arent obligated to share our trauma, all our alters, and anything of the sort (we still do, willingly, cus we like to talk about us, but its not the matter rn). besides, considering how little we know about how human brain works, its dumb to throw out a whole possible category of people just because research right now says its impossible to be a system without trauma

we are of a strong opinion that 1) the only one who knows for sure whats happening in your head is yourself, you just need proper resources to verbalise it and 2) for singlets who are opposed to the idea of plurality we are all the same freaks. it doesnt matter to them how we look, speak, present ourselves as systems, headcount, amount of introjects and all the other stuff. they will fakeclaim any of us anyway. and we need to bunch together in front of them

and no, its not contradictory to endos getting their own spaces and terminology. because the important part of bunching together is supporting each other, not just falling in one pile no matter what. because we are different. its not a bad thing, we just are, at the core. because yes, did/osdd is linked to trauma. but yes, there are also tulpas, spirutual experiences, other disorders and neurodivergencies that people might perceive as being a system. its not bad, and it doesnt call for one group to stigmatise and bastardise another. because to singlets we are the same, no matter what we say. we need system unity before we need to go at each others' throats for being the way we are

with that said, while we dont mind endos, we would highly prefer for you not to interact with us closely. we are a traumagenic system, and we frankly do not see a reason for you to want to talk to us, unless you are questioning your existence as an endo and/or trying to come to terms with your own trauma. however, if you are any of the above, we dont mind talking to you and helping you through it. we know it can be tough and if you are dealing with it you are welcome in our dms any time, we will try to help if we have the energy to do so

Them: Haha awesome! Is it on your fanfic?

Me: Uh… well. No…

Then: Oh, on your original novel?

Me: …

Me: glances at my syscourse drafts

i also think these conversations are possible without being a fakeclaiming asshole, or just resorting to completely bullying people (aka systemscringe). but i also think people get extremely sensitive and call people fakeclaimers and FDC assholes just for not being completely happy with the state of the community, correcting misinfo, or honestly just pointing out the obvious which is that DID is a trend right now.