you can't kill hydra

My right arm getting chewed off by a fox. Haven't been able to get that out of my head all day.

Maybe get catherine-clover on it and she'll see if we have the same writing styles.

clover ur a god what the hell was that excel sheet

-FrozenPantheonInquisitor

and I told them to go to Hell

and I told all of you that they mentioned me and that I told them to go to Hell, before Christmas

and I told you again and again that I was always involved

and you kept saying I wasn't involved

and other people repeated that I wasn't involved

-You weren’t in the original group where it all started

-You abused Ellipse’s and Cambrian’s patience and good faith for months prying out every single detail to see what happened and if Sophie was “innocent or not”. That wouldn’t have been necessary for you to do if you’d actually been involved from the beginning because you would have already known everything.

No one is going to give you what you want because we didn’t do the things you keep accusing us of. And falling to Mitsuki’s same tactics that created this in the first place is certainly not going to work.

"The drama" that includes me is FrozenPantheonInquisitor's posts, "Sunny's"/"Dia's" later post that interacting with that blog constituted causing a rape, and all of Kylar's identities being the same person.

"the original group where it all started" is very arguably syscourse. Oh no I wasn't in the innermost ingroup for the entire time. So I don't have a right to be angry? Fucking insane

Pantheon and Pxnk being the same person absofuckinglutely directly affected me

Do you believe I had a right to engage with discussion regarding FPI?

Do you believe I had a right to engage with discussion regarding Kylar's sockpuppets being sockpuppets?

My right arm getting chewed off by a fox. Haven't been able to get that out of my head all day.

Maybe get catherine-clover on it and she'll see if we have the same writing styles.

clover ur a god what the hell was that excel sheet

-FrozenPantheonInquisitor

and I told them to go to Hell

and I told all of you that they mentioned me and that I told them to go to Hell, before Christmas

and I told you again and again that I was always involved

and you kept saying I wasn't involved

and other people repeated that I wasn't involved

-You weren’t in the original group where it all started

-You abused Ellipse’s and Cambrian’s patience and good faith for months prying out every single detail to see what happened and if Sophie was “innocent or not”. That wouldn’t have been necessary for you to do if you’d actually been involved from the beginning because you would have already known everything.

No one is going to give you what you want because we didn’t do the things you keep accusing us of. And falling to Mitsuki’s same tactics that created this in the first place is certainly not going to work.

"The drama" that includes me is FrozenPantheonInquisitor's posts, "Sunny's"/"Dia's" later post that interacting with that blog constituted causing a rape, and all of Kylar's identities being the same person.

"the original group where it all started" is very arguably syscourse. Oh no I wasn't in the innermost ingroup for the entire time. So I don't have a right to be angry? Fucking insane

Pantheon and Pxnk being the same person absofuckinglutely directly affected me

My right arm getting chewed off by a fox. Haven't been able to get that out of my head all day.

Maybe get catherine-clover on it and she'll see if we have the same writing styles.

clover ur a god what the hell was that excel sheet

-FrozenPantheonInquisitor

and I told them to go to Hell

and I told all of you that they mentioned me and that I told them to go to Hell, before Christmas

and I told you again and again that I was always involved

and you kept saying I wasn't involved

and other people repeated that I wasn't involved

My right arm getting chewed off by a fox. Haven't been able to get that out of my head all day.

My right arm getting chewed off by a fox. Haven't been able to get that out of my head all day.

I

WAS

ALWAYS

INVOLVED

HOW MANY FUCKING TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY IT

KYLAR ON PANTHEON MOCKED ME REPEATEDLY

I TOLD THEM TO GO TO HELL

I WAS INVOLVED BEFORE YOU

THIS AFFECTED ME BEFORE IT AFFECTED YOU

KYLAR'S ACCUSATION AGAINST SOPHIE WAS AN ACCUSATION AGAINST ME

THIS IS NOT A PITY PARTY

ARE YOU ILLITERATE??? I EXPLICITLY SAID THIS IS NOT FOR SYMPATHY

I DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT PEOPLE'S EMOTIONAL REACTION TO THIS

If a being says something you do not like block them.

I want to have a discussion on why people label themselves Radqueer as well as Endogenic or any sub labels of these 2.

It's been well known for a long time that plurality, under various names, doesn't require trauma. There is a well-documented phenomenon of people experiencing plurality in many forms without trauma OR a disorder.

These experiences have historically been associated with spirituality, but it can be assumed that all or the majority of these nonpathological plural experiences are psychological in nature. (That is, because a majority of spiritual experiences involve conflicting mythologies, even if some were true, they would disprove the rest.)

In 2001, DID expert Richard Kluft discussed an older study by Dr. Colin Ross which found 3.1% of people in the general public met the criteria for DID, but only 1% were clinical DID patients.

When discussing possible explanations for this discrepancy, Kluft mentions that it's possible there were "nonpathological endogenous forms of dissociative identity disorder."

A few years ago, a prominent anti-endo in the syscourse community emailed Dr. Ross directly about his initial study and his thoughts on non-traumagenic multiplicity. Dr. Ross responded with this:

Now, let's step back in time for a moment, going back to the structural dissociation model.

This was a model used to explain the trauma association in DID and other dissociative disorders. It was made in 2005, after Ross's study and Kluft's commentary.

I will not get into what the structural dissociation model is aside from saying that it was made in 2005 by Dr. Ellert Nijenhuis, Dr. Onno van der Hart, and Dr. Kathy Steel. This model, while flawed, is generally used to explain trauma dissociation.

Notably though, it is not an explanation for all dissociation. In a 2011 paper by Nijenhuis and van der Hart, they explain that their definition of dissociation only pertains to trauma dissociation, and that they're aware that it's possible for dissociative parts to be involved in hypnosis and mediumship, and that these non-traumagenic dissociative parts may possess their own self-consciousness.

2015, the first study into the online multiplicity community is conducted. Authors conclude multiplicity may be placed on a continuum between identity disturbance and DID.

2018, the American Psychiatric Association publishes Transgender Mental Health by Dr. Eric Yarbrough. This book included a chapter entitled "Plurality" which discusses how you can be plural without trauma or a disorder.

In 2019, the World Health Organization puts out the ICD-11 which states you can experience the presence of "distinct personality states" without a disorder. "Distinct identity states" is the same exact term it uses for dissociative identities in DID.

There is also an ongoing fMRI study into tulpa systems conducted by Stanford University. The study looked at the brains of tulpa systems during possession and found differences in the brain when the tulpa was controlling a limb, as discussed in this AMA with the doctors who conducted the experiment:

(Note: There's a distinction in the above post between switching and possession. This is because "possession" is a tulpamancy term for a headmate taking partial control over the body or part of the body without truly fronting. Switching is fully taking front. I want to clarify this because most people will not be familiar with tulpamancy terms and might assume possession is used in the way it's used by spiritual communities.)

There is more I could cite, but I will conclude instead by saying there is nothing sysmeds can cite. There are no doctors they can point to who contradict any of the above experts. When sysmeds do cite anything, it will always be some variation of "dissociation that is caused by trauma is caused by trauma." It will be papers that are discussing traumagenic and pathological multiplicity, that aren't saying anything about nonpathological forms.

When doctors actually do discuss the existence of nonpathological plurality, opinions range from neutral ("it may exist but needs more research.") to affirmative ("it exists!") but never negative ("it doesn't exist!")

[SOURCED]

D. W. Brown, Frischholz, & Scheflin, 1999

Gleaves, 1996

I repeat...

When sysmeds do cite anything, it will always be some variation of "dissociation that is caused by trauma is caused by trauma." It will be papers that are discussing traumagenic and pathological multiplicity, that aren't saying anything about nonpathological forms.

We're not talking about DID, but plurality in general, so this is useless.

Hell, it technically doesn't even say anything about related disorders like OSDD and Partial DID.

Gods, what a completely useless citation.

The specific sections that I quoted were about non-DID phenomena.

The irrelevant quote you screenshoted is about DID, only DID, and it doesn't mention non-DID phenomena at all. It doesn't say anything relevant about non-DID phenomena.

I genuinely don't know what more there is to say here.

The reason Sophie's words are hitting a brick wall is because the entire vocabulary of anti-endos has been systematically warped to fit their narrative.

5-10 years ago when sources talking about endogenic plurality were sparser, disagreement could be more complex. People knew more or less what they were talking about and where terms came from. That is not the case anymore. (This is not to say that sysmedicalism was philosophically justifiable at the time, just that this specific problem is relatively new.) Every single anti-endo from those days who did intelligent debate has converted. All that's left are people who have either walled themselves off or, more commonly as time goes on, people whose first exposure to this land was the walled city.

The reason Jungkooks here is doing exactly what Sophie predicted he'd do, repeatedly, without understanding what the problem is, is because every single word of the syscourse glossary among anti-endos has been warped to fit the narrative "people who self-identify as endogenic are claiming to have DID without trauma".

As a comparison: have you ever tried talking to the median American about any economically-left-of-center politics? The ideas you attempt to communicate never land because the vocabulary to describe them has been poisoned by decades of propaganda. Capitalism, socialism, communism, anarchism, exploitation, surplus value, meritocracy, hegemony, commodification, "pull yourself up by your bootstraps", class, redistribution, the list goes on. In the common person's mind, every single key phrase has been reoriented to point toward Stalin in the negative cases, and The Chad Hard-Working Hustler in the positive cases. They cannot be corrected one at a time because every corrupted word is propped up by the other related corrupted words; they cannot be corrected in succession because the recipient will just see a series of one-case miscorrections and eventually leave; they cannot be corrected in whole because most human brains are not at any given moment open to such a large change. And remember, I'm not even talking about persuading someone to be a leftist! This is only about trying to talk about leftism!

So in the same way: endogenic, plural, system, dissociate, disorder, many more I'm forgetting because I haven't wasted my time on this in half a year. Every single key phrase is reoriented to support the narrative the endos' existence is attacking the existence of DID (and the reason this narrative is popular is because for some DID Systems, the idea that there are people experiencing something even vaguely similar without having suffered like them feels unfair). And you can say "endos don't claim DID" until your face goes blue, but the antis will see you saying "plural" and "system", and they think those mean DID, so we get the same problem: any attack on a corrupted word will be defended against by using other corrupted words, so it can't be fixed. The fallacies can't be seen when the words themselves, under false definitions, seem to fit together perfectly.

But this is unthinkable to the anti-endo. That the ideas they and all of their friends have connected with every single key word here are wrong? It seems impossible.