I absolutely hate the term hc-did and how it’s only to be used by ramcoa survivors. It feels like gatekeeping a system structure behind a certain level of trauma. Trauma effects everyone differently and in different severities and claiming you can only have sidesystems and can only be highly complex if you are a ramcoa survivor just feels wrong. And honestly if you look at our system you will find a highly complex system structure with sidesystems both of which are supposedly only for ramcoa survivors to experience? It just doesn’t make sense to gatekeep things that can happen to others behind a certain set of trauma.

HC-DID does not describe the experiences of all RAMCOA survivors. It is a very specific term that exists to explain the experiences of systems with programming and things that are only possible through programming. This is the Mind Control (MC) in RAMCOA. Not all survivors of RAMCOA experience MC. You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of terminology, which I understand happens a lot due to the ways that people tend to portray our community and the misinformation spread by many people.

Sidesystems are not possible unless you have programming because sidesystems, by the way they are defined within this specific community, are what amounts to:

a subsystem comprised with alters who have no awareness of the RAMCOA trauma that have been created for the explicit purpose of making sure the system cannot remember any of the RAMCOA trauma. A sidesystem will be triggered to push out all fronters who are aware of the horrific torture the individual has or is enduring to replace it with alters who appear to be fully functional and have no signs of RAMCOA.

If you are not a survivor of RAMCOA, you do not have a sidesystem. Now if you went by the different definition that the broader community seems to have which is really just another presentation of a subsystem that's disconnected from other subsystems- then yes you could have that. But that's just a typical polyfragmented presentation. That is not more complex than other polyfragmented presentations. (At least to our knowledge, feel free to correct us if that does indeed make it harder for you to access treatment versus if all subsystems were clustered close together).

If you have programmed alters you must be a RAMCOA survivor. Having programming means you have experienced Mind Control (MC). It is literally impossible to have the structure be the same without programming because HC-DID describes things that are a direct result of programming along with being a polyfragmented system. People like us require more intensive care than those without it. There is a very low number of deprogramming therapists worldwide compared to literally every other type of therapy because of how little of us survive long enough to get help- and those who do get help are very few in number.

Programming comes with alters that have been purposefully created by another person either as states you were meant to be in without knowledge of a system or with direct knowledge of the system by the perpetrators. No form of organic alter (i.e; alters not created with the direct intention to create a subservient state to force function on for the use of the abusers) can ever be similar to a programmed alter because these are very different concepts.

I used to think that I had osdd-1b and my symptoms presented almost identical to it. So with polyfragmented osdd systems specifically, I'd not attack them for it. Especially since people are not aware of the multiple types of dissociative amnesia.

I honestly don't think endos should be allowed to use "polyfragmented", so I'm not touching on that. Also I would not call you a "sysmed", that's stupid.

It's not misinfo, I'm just challenging the idea that it's a 100% accurate statement.

I'm not saying you ARE or will attack OSDD systems. I'm just stating that it's not entirely accurate to state that only DID systems experience polyfragmentation. It's not fair to insinuate that it's 100% truthful that only DID systems can be polyfragmented, as we as a community know little in terms of polyfragmented research.

I was also one of the first people in the community to make a post about how the definition of "big system" does not fit the bill, as it does not explain why there is a larger amount of alters. So me challenging the idea that DID may not be the only viable diagnosis for polyfragmented systems, falls in line with me challenging preconceived notions about polyfragmentation.

My point is that, I believe Complex Dissociative Disorders may exist on a spectrum, instead of multiple different diagnoses for each one. So that's why I don't find this debate on whether or not OSDD systems can or can't be polyfragmented, to be helpful. It's been said multiple times that OSDD being a diagnosis is not set in stone all that well, mainly because doctors don't see textbook symptoms and people don't present like other DID systems. So potentially diagnosed OSDD systems may have DID instead of OSDD. I'm just saying that this debate is stupid and it's not worth blocking people or arguing with others over it. Whatever you do, it's just a waste of effort, as it is possible that diagnosed OSDD systems, can have polyfragmentation, even if OSDD is not the true disorder they have.

But you do make good points so I will continue this conversation. Though do understand I am not the best at wording things nor the best at reading and understanding long texts. I do appreciate this being in good faith and I do hope you take what I say as in good faith too but do keep in mind I’m not saying what I believe is a fact fact just that it has been shown to hold good enough ground through research to be presented as a pretty solid statement.

Okay so there is a good chance that it doesn’t matter and honestly that’s cool. But it does matter to me. Following what TOSD says (which is the best we got as of now) CDDs are on a linear spectrum with OSDD having the least amount of dissociation while polyfragmented has the most and to me it does not make sense to be both. And I get this information through research so to me this info has been proven by research granted we don’t have much on it but what we do has pointed to OSDD = less dissociation and Polyfragmented = most dissociation. So using what I know from research to me saying people with OSDD can be polyfragmented is misinfo.

This is where I got that you implied that we would attack others. Maybe I miss interpreted it but I do tend to take things literally.

you, according to your own words, don't need any of that. you insist that your plurality is indeed real, but not disordered in any way. you feel entitled to use our terminology and language, including medical language, but insist that you're not fucked up and broken like us. but do you actually need anything? or do you just want to be part of the club? to feel included? to pass around our memes and jokes? to shove everyone into one umbrella term and "community", no matter how absurd that may be?

if, for the sake of argument, genuine, non-disordered plurality exists, it doesn't change the fact that we deserve our own spaces without you infiltrating. it doesn't change the fact that we are a minority with real needs and rights, and you aren't. it doesn't change the fact that we have every right to avoid you, block you, and not associate with you. it doesn't change the fact that we must, necessarily, remain distinct in order to advocate for ourselves and our right to accessible care and treatment. it doesn't change the fact that our disorders are actually disorders.

I used to think that I had osdd-1b and my symptoms presented almost identical to it. So with polyfragmented osdd systems specifically, I'd not attack them for it. Especially since people are not aware of the multiple types of dissociative amnesia.

I honestly don't think endos should be allowed to use "polyfragmented", so I'm not touching on that. Also I would not call you a "sysmed", that's stupid.

I’m genuinely confused as to why endogenic nondisordered plurals want to use and claim medical terminology