#sysconversation

You do not need to post about things to care about them. "I see you not reblogging" is guilt-tripping.

You're allowed to curate your own blog. "I don't care if this doesn't fit your blog aesthetic" is guilt-tripping.

You're allowed to skip past posts that distress you. "x amount of people must reblog" is guilt-tripping.

Permission is not needed but for those whom it will make more comfortable; you are allowed to block people who post bullcrap that makes you feel guilty.

This post has no DNI; everyone may reblog regardless of syscourse stance, but reblogs are not required. Spread love.

Plurality, often also called multiplicity, is "having more than one self in the mind and body" (Eve & Parry, 2021).

Plurality "is not a diagnosis" (Eve, et al., 2023) and is "a broader concept than DID" (Christensen, 2022).

Plurality is "a broad term, which encompasses a range of experiences" because "people have individual conceptualizations of what it means to be ‘more than one’" (Eve, et al., 2023).

Plurality is "a term coined to be more inclusive than only that of traumagenic multiplicity" (Christensen, 2022).

Not all people who experience plurality will identify as a 'plural' or 'multiple.' Plurality is a useful umbrella term for the experience of more-than-oneness "but not necessarily a term reflective of one's identity or self-expression" (Christensen, 2022).

"[N]ot everyone who identifies as multiple will want or require mental health intervention for the condition they experience" (Eve, et al., 2023).

The concept of non-traumagenic plurality does not hurt DID research. "[T]he research confirming DID as a trauma-based disorder is doing just that: confirming traumagenic DID, the disorder, not Plurality, the identity . . . Distinguishing between the two does not need to invalidate either" (Christensen, 2022).

The idea that plurality is inherently disordered is a product of Western culture. "Within Western linear frameworks . . . there has been an emphasis on the ‘healthy self’ being integrated and whole" (Eve & Parry, 2021). "In indigenous cultures, esp. shamanic societies, a polypsychism (i.e. many selves) prevails" (Scharfetter, 2008).

Once again, I explained to my boss, mentors and peers at work about my history with DID and how I now operate with very detailed and defined facets each with names and everything

And now my CEO (small company) is in semi-public team meetings going "Yeah we need XIV" and shit

Apparently he thought it was the coolest shit he heard in a while and raved about it to my direct mentor

Literally 30-50 year old Christian professionals and business owners know what Im talking about when I say "Oh I'm in XIV brain lol" or "Yeah XIV wrote that" and genuinely respect it, get it, and are genuinely super normal about it.

Like, Ive seen people in the DID community and plural community be weirder about it.

"Emotional neglect in childhood is one of the most misunderstood—and overlooked—forms of relational trauma. Unlike overt abuse, it leaves no visible scars. There is no defining event to point to. Instead, it’s marked by what was absent: comfort that never came, attunement that never formed, needs that were quietly dismissed, feelings that were too often met with silence or subtle disapproval.

Now imagine that someone who is colourblind because of his genetics but has no diagnose for it (let's imagine there is no scientifical recognition for colourblind people) talks about his experience as a colourblind. He doesn't pretend like he has your headaches or your dizziness, he doesn't claim your diagnosis, he doesn't claim to be disabled, he just says he sees colours differently. Maybe not the way you do, but pretty close to it comparing to other people. He doesn't come straight to you and take your medicine, he doesn't invade your space, he doesn't say you're not valid. He just exists as a colourblind.

Would you start a bullying campaign against him and all the other colorblinds ? Real question. Would you consider feeling like he's stealing your disorder and say he's faking, he can perfectly see colours, he's doing it for attention, he doesn't exist, ...

Boundaries are basically what you're willing to put up with and what you aren't. But they are also yours to enforce. They are not something you hold others to, but where you put your foot down. So lets talk about why DNIs aren't boundaries.

Example: I do not talk about my physical health with my mother because she has a habit of demanding proof.

Not a boundary: My mother is not allowed to talk about my physical health at all. She is not allowed to ask me questions or inquire in any way and if she does I'll lose it.

Boundary: If my mother starts asking about my physical health and being nosy and demanding, I cease communication.

So why isn't the first one a boundary? Because I cannot control my mother. I cannot control what she asks or what triggers her concern or suspicion. But I can control how much I talk to her and my ability to walk away.

DNIs are the same. They're a warning at best. You do not control other tumblr users. They can do what they like and, as commonly happens, if you cross tag, use the site wrong and invade tags, your DNI is completely useless. It does not come into play. People are allowed to talk to you regardless of what you think of them. The real boundary is blocking the people you don't want to associate with.