#idk. whatever.

Maybe that was why, as Noel worked out a particular snarl in his hair, that he felt the need to even them out. To invite Noel into his space in some vulnerable way. To give Noel a chance to take from him instead.

“Will you cut my hair?” John asked.

Noel stopped short, the brush just freeing through the end of a strand. He fixed John with a raised eyebrow.

“Like a trim?” he said slowly. John couldn’t read his tone.

“No.” John shook his head. Noel rested the brush on John’s shoulder. “I cut yours. Now I’m asking you to cut mine.”

because if you're arguing for plurality to only mean "multiple separate individual selves", that's much different than those using it for any experience of multiple "selves", even if those multiple selves are fragments/parts/fractions of a whole singular person, separated by something.

and seeing people argue if cdds are "plurality plus disorder/distress" is like... if you're seeing plurality as any form of multiplicity/"more than one-ness"/two or more "me's", you could say that's the case, but if plurality is only "separate individuals in one body", then some people with cdds are absolutely not that.

and for some, their systemhood/plurality/multiplicity isn't a plus or an addon to their disorder/distress, sometimes it's deeply intertwined.

you can be plural and be deeply distressed and disordered by the circumstances that caused your plurality, as if there's no separation between that.

you can consider yourself not-plural and be a system and have the same experience.

or you can be plural or a system and consider your distress entirely separate from your systemhood/multiplicity/plurality.

i see it the same as how some systems see their religious beliefs. some people loathe the idea of mixing together religious beliefs and systemhood and identity. other people, they find it to be soothing and comforting or integral to how they see themselves. some see it as a positive, some see it as a negative.

surprising, i know, but personal experiences relating to the self and identity are going to be personal and people will have different perspectives on similar or even the same experiences. and how other people define things should not bother you, and how you define things should not bother others. don't force labels onto other people, and don't forcibly remove labels from others as well.

edited to add a little more: the term system is also just as vague as the term plural and arguing that it should be for certain people vs not also shows that you think that the experience is separate definitionally, even though there's a lot of different colorful overlaps between different experiences. i think arguing if there should be a separation between relatively arbitrary groups is enforcing your definitions of labels onto others and gatekeeping words based on your definition.