Howdy! I am the anon here and really wanted to share my thoughts and respond to this!
https://www.tumblr.com/anti-willo-mark-grayson/818871394537488384/if-you-dont-mind-me-asking-if-you-dont-think?source=share
I'm not responding to argue - just to have some respectful discussion. I'm not trying to change your opinion, just sharing mine. Feel free to respond/not respond at your comfort level. I really appreciated the thoroughness of your response!
As I respond, I'd like to start with the context that I'm a thoughtform-based plural.
FIRST, the issues with the Pro-Endo community
Yeah the mixed community has a lot of issues. As one person in syscourse recently pointed out, the "get more plural now" thing is an issue for endos and traumagenics alike. They explained that better than I can, but essentially that attitude is irresponsible and bad on multiple fronts. Just generally there can be a lot of harm in traumagenic systems "growing up" so to say in endogenic spaces instead of traumagenic spaces. It can change the expectation that pwCDDs have for how their disorder should look and should work, and I have heard a lot of horror stories from folks who started out in endogenic spaces and had it result in a lot of internal fake claiming and other set backs to their recovery.
I have also seen it happen in reverse, stories of some endogenic systems that "grow up" in traumagenic spaces, believing they have CDDs and exaggerating or making up trauma because they are told that they can only be plural with trauma, and how that harmed them and their systems in the long run.
I believe that access to resources that can better help someone sus out their origins sooner could help both camps find the communities they need to be in quicker and lead to less harm in the long run, but I also think that that requires more seperate spaces than there currently are. There are plenty of "pro-endo" spaces, but not many endo exclusive spaces, so its hard to keep seperate communities. :/ (I'll address shared terms in the next section :3)
SECOND, function!
I personally run under the assumption that ntg plurality does exist, but I agree with you (and many others) who have said it would/does function differently.
The similarity is mostly only in experiencing life as more than one, generally. Although thoughtform possession is often ascribed to be similiar to switching, the host maintains awareness within the possession, whereas it is my understanding that that isn't the case with pwCDDs. Generally, endogenic plurality doesn't include many of the disordered symptoms that CDDs include (obviously.) There are other examples but that's a couple. Most of the shared terms come from these similiar experiences. Though they aren't the same experience, there are only so many terms one can use for similar experiences.
I have seen traumaendo systems describe how their headmates of different origins function differently in mixed spaces before, but you might not see those descriptions if you aren't in mixed spaces. Generally I've seen it described that they have more control and clarity with their endogenic members than their traumagenic members, but for better descriptions you'd have to ask one of them.
As far as roles go, many endogenic systems have other disorders or issues and find the concept of "roles" to be helpful in their functioning. This is an example of a shared term that could probably be seperated, as I think jobs, assignments, or affects better describe this. "This is the person assigned to help with x task." "This is the person affected by x the most strongly." "This is the person best suited to do x." In endogenic plurals, I believe this is often chosen consciously, whereas its my understanding that CDD systems have less control over who has what role. (Please correct me if I'm wrong though!)
THIRD conclusions (because I don't feel I have the experience to properly address the topic of cultural plurality)
Overall, I don't quite know why there is such a push to describe these experiences as being the same, but I agree with a lot of your points. While they have some similiar aspects, there is a wide difference in experience that I think should be better explained and seperated on a wider scale. Your post was really excellent and well thought out and I appreciate the response :]
Have a good day!
You too anon! Although in the end our respective opinions haven’t changed, I’m glad we both received some clarity. (And I’m we could agree on some things)
I don’t have much to add to this (the stress of going back and forth has me in a chokehold hah.)
But! I will say it makes sense for traumaendo systems to describe having better communication with endogenic alters, although I don’t believe it’s possible to just… spontaneously form dissociative barriers out of thin air, (again, once you have a CDD you can form alters any time it’s deemed necessary + fragment elaboration is a jump scare) I do have a similar experience with our own parts who are disconnected from our trauma. It makes sense that alters that function like ANPs would have an easier time communicating or functioning, especially with other ANPs.
