Anti-endos and pro-endos can interact!

@anti-willo-vi

1. Yes, there is the whole "born of a hate group" issue. We seek to place that behind us, and condemn those hate groups that want to demedicalize CDDs. At least, those of us that know about the hate group thing. More people really should know of that. Still, modern endogenics are not a hate group like their predecessors. Next, I do not like harassment or the breaking of DNIs, and many of our endogenic friends do not tend to break the DNI unless theirs is broken first.

2. Tulpamancy is... I have no idea how to describe tulpamancy, and I don't trust myself to describe it well. I mean, I didn't practice it myself, as far as I know. Maybe someone else can describe it for you?

3. I don't believe that you should be rude to someone for simply being part of a community. It really depends on the community itself. (Also, how is it not a community, as you're implying with your quotation marks?)

4. A large majority of endogenics also are against harassment, but unfortunately, oddballs that do harass stand out. Please condemn them all the same you do your harassers.

Here's history behind Tulpamancy,

It's a result of cultural exchange. A translated term, and then a changed term (it's not the original term), alongside a similar phenomenon that already existed in theosophy; thoughtforms. You can see a simplified version of the book in this news article,

You can also see this from a Tibetan Buddhist in the Tulpamancy community.

-"I have understood the western Tulpamancy culture for awhile, I’ve been on the old forums but I haven’t really interacted much with the community. I don’t view it negatively, as long as you live your life and treat all sentient beings with kindness, including your tulpa, I don’t see an issue."

-"Considering that, from what I understand, tulpa in the western sense is a different culture than that of Tibetan or other shared origin, I don’t see a specific claim to the word. I don’t mind it. It’s fascinating how such a concept has travelled and deviated from its original sources and grew into a practice distinct in culture and community."

-"No one should feel ashamed of using the term “tulpa”. Buddhism, and practices related to it, are meant to be shared. That’s the whole point of the practice. And this greater community is unique and distinct from Tibetan and related origin, it isn’t “appropriation” and even if it was, no one owns the term, and as I see it; use it as you wish!"

If you're interested, you can also see where the claim that it's appropriation likely came from.

And the Dalai Lama talking about the sharing of practices

And information about actual appropriation. Because it does exist, and it's a big problem, but Tulpamancy isn't part of it.

As for what Tulpamancy actually is,

A form of created plurality

Supported by brain scans

Not part of a mental disorder

Autonomous, sentient, and sometimes able to possess the body

Not psychosis

Can even happen accidentally

No more or less difficult to study than any other inner experience

And you can see proper community descriptions here,

Can some Tulpamancers engage in some form of cultural appropriation? Absolutely. Just like anybody else can, including traumagenic systems, and anti-endos. But Tulpamancy itself isn't appropriation, and people claiming otherwise end up talking over people from the culture.

Additional sources

And yes, endogenic systems aren't a hate group. Unless you want to claim that culture and communities can never evolve or change. Then you're going to have to contend with history.

This new "endogenic systems are a hate group" claim is starting to piss us off. And we're traumagenic. The endogenic community is not the same community as natural multiples (which still exist in some places). They don't come from a desire to demedicalise CDDs. They come from a desire to tell people that they are not the same as those with CDDs, they just experience forms of multiplicity.

Systemhood has always existed in non-medical forms, as the term didn't originate for those with CDDs. It was applied to them because of the usage of "personality system", which is why it's also used in medical literature to refer to non-medical systems. You can find this in The Haunted Self.

The third paragraph is just saying "people are nice when they're not talking to people they don't like." Obviously. But there's a bit of a difference between 'I'm not being nice because I dislike this person based on my personal opinions' and 'I'm not being nice because this person literally does not believe that I exist and has said so repeatedly'

Don't call out the harassment in the endogenic community if you're not going to call out the harassment in the traumagenic community, and anti-endo community. Which we, as a traumagenic DID system, have repeatedly been a target of. These issues exist everywhere. Don't ignore all the other problems just so you can blame a community you dislike.

Also, a lot of the "breaking" DNIs we've seen isn't from endogenic systems. It's those who are neutral about, or supportive of endogenic systems. These are not the same as endogenic systems, as most of them are traumagenic. If you only have a DNI for endogenic systems, then traumagenic systems aren't breaking it by interacting.

Another also, don't post misinformation about a community and then tell that community not to interact. If you don't want a community to interact with you, then don't interact with the community.

(^all aimed towards the quoted)

Maybe you haven't seen enough evidence to believe in them but you're open.

Maybe you don't know/don't care.

Maybe you have a complex opinion on endos.

Maybe you just dont want to play into the culture of polarization that endo stance labels perpetuate in the community.

YES there CAN be nuance to opinions about endos. Anti endo and Pro endo often ignore these nuances and attempt to fit people into little boxes.