Screenshotted to avoid getting the OP harassed , but I’m realizing that a lot younger folks truly have no idea why we’re saying Endo, Willo, Tulpas, etc are ableist.
So here’s a quick explainer for you.
In the capacity that systems are created, the Endogenic Umbrella cannot exist. The brain doesn’t just become a system. It’s a mental disorder caused by consistent abuse that makes the brain decide that being whole will only cause more stress. Once the brain learns this neat trick to avoid stress, it will do it over and over again for little stresses.
Endogenics as a general group claims that they have formed alters without the initial big trauma and therefore are not disordered. As Alters are a symptom not a cause for the disorder itself, calling yourself an “Endogenic System” is the equivalent of putting pepper in your nose and saying you’re allergic to pollen because you sneezed.
It would be perfectly fine if Endogenics and their Umbrella of Willos and Tulpas stayed in their own corner as a separate more spiritual thing. Maybe with a focus on making imaginary friends as a thought exercise. But instead, Endogenics are coming into system spaces and claiming to be the same as the very real mental disorder. If you are not a system, why are you trying to join system spaces?
And before folks come and tell that Endos aren’t doing that, I am an admin on a CDD Discord. Even with our stance publicly stating we are Anti-Endos, plenty of Endos come into the Discord anyway.
You can’t be like “We’re the pepper sniffing community! Completely removed from the seasonal allergy community, we promise” but then march into spaces where it says “Only people with seasonal allergies allowed”
This is not about young folks who don’t think they have trauma because they don’t remember it. This is not about folks who are genuinely young children who do not know any better. This is about the adults who are making 2+2=6 and then getting upset when folks are telling them it actually equals 4.
You’re not evil if you’re a child and you want alters. I can assure you, Endogenics do make having a system LOOK fun even though the reality is, it’s headaches, dissociation, and feeling like you lost days of your life.
You ARE sick. (In the most literal sense.) No healthy person wishes to be ill and I hope that one day you get the help you deserve to understand your own behavior.
This explainer was not quick. I am sorry. I had more that I wanted to say than I thought-
hii!!
this isn't meant to be mean or anything, but do you have sources for the fact endos started as a hate group?
HELLO ANON!!! It's not mean at all and I'm very happy you're asking for sources! This is gonna be a bit long as its a timeline and its sources.
Word Count; 3,984
Character Count: 26,839
Estimated Reading Time: 25 minutes
1989–1994: Early CDD Newsletters, Forums, and Online Communities
1989: Many Voices
Many Voices was established in 1989 as the first newsletter created specifically for people with complex dissociative disorders (pwCDDs). Although it remains available online today, it is no longer actively updated.
1991: alt.sexual.abuse.recovery (ASAR)
The Usenet group alt.sexual.abuse.recovery was created in 1991. It became home to a large community of CDD systems.
1994: ASARian Incorporated
In 1994, alt.sexual.abuse.recovery evolved into ASARian Incorporated. ASARian provided peer support, web hosting, unix shell accounts, and resources for people with DID/MPD
1994: alt.support.dissociation
Also in 1994, the Usenet group alt.support.dissociation was created. It would go on to become the longest-running support group for people with dissociative disorders. The website remains active, but the last post was made in 2024 as Usenet had declined in its own usage.
1995–1997: Astraea's Web and the Emergence of Non-Disordered Plurality
Astraea's Website
In 1995, Astraea launched what is considered the first website dedicated to discussing non-disordered plurality. This was the first known website to explicitly address plurality outside of a clinical or disorder-based framework.
Coining of Natural Multiplicity
Around 1996, Astraea introduced the term natural multiplicity. The concept proposed that having multiple personalities was not inherently disordered. Instead, it was framed as a naturally occurring phenomenon that could arise spontaneously, rather than solely through trauma or dissociation. You can find the archive here.
Criticism of Astraea's Web
While initially appealing to some, Astraea's work has been heavily criticized. Critics argue that its sources and rhetoric reflect of extreme ableism, saneism, and dangerous ideological positions that have caused lasting harm There have also been highly credible claims of plagiarism, misattribution, and strong anti-psychiatry bias.
Every source is here, here, here, and here
Astraea's Web is widely regarded as the starting point of what would later become the endogenic community.
1996–1999: The Development of Mid-Continuum
Sometime in 1996, an early internet plural named Vickis coined the term mid-continuum. The label quickly gained popularity among both dissociative and non-dissociative plural people.
Mid-continuum was rooted in the dissociative continuum model developed by Braun in 1988. Braun's model conceptualized dissociation as existing on a spectrum ranging from: normal experiences (such as daydreaming or zoning out) to polyfragmented DID at the far end. By 1997 and earlier, many DID-focused websites—including Astraea's Web—were sharing and discussing this model.
Archive of article by Joan A. Turkus, M.D. (1997)
Proof that this article was shared on Astraea’s Web.
What Mid-Continuum Meant
1. It Was Based on a Psychological Model
Many people in the dissociative community identified with Braun's dissociative continuum. Vickis created the term for individuals who felt they fell somewhere in the middle of that spectrum. The label was referred to as 'mid-continuum dissociation' or simply mid-continuum for short. People using the label were often called mid-continuum dissociatives. Vickis later created a webpage devoted to the concept called The Wonderful World of the MidContinuum.
2. It Was Created for Dissociative People
In 1997, Vickis announced the new website on alt.support.dissociation. In that announcement, mid-continuum was explicitly described as a label for dissociative people who did not meet all criteria for DID. On the website, Vickis explained that mid-continuum applied to people who experienced dissociated parts, fell somewhere in the middle of Braun's dissociative continuum—This included experiences ranging from different roles in different situations, inner children, ego states, parts or fragments that did not feel like whole people, and having some, but not all, diagnostic criteria for DID.
A quote from the homepage:
“Everyone dissociates. At one end of the dissociative continuum is ‘normal’ or ‘common’ dissociation that nearly everyone engages in[…] At the other end are the behaviors that characterize ‘classical’ multiples, who may have large numbers of very distinct insiders with little internal communication, serious difficulties with time loss, amnesia, and so on.
Between these two extremes, there is a lot of gray. Ranging from having different ‘roles’ that you live out in different situations, to having an ‘inner child’ or ‘inner children’ with varying degrees of separateness, to having ‘ego states,’ ‘parts’ or ‘fragments’ that don’t seem to be whole people, to having some but not all of the diagnostic criteria for what is now known as DID[…]”
Message Archive
Mid-Continuum Website Archive
3. It Was Created Out of Respect for People with DID
At the time, DID was still commonly referred to as MPD or simply multiplicity within online dissociative communities. Vickis and others believed it would be disrespectful to call themselves multiple if they did not have DID. They felt that doing so could minimize the struggles of people with DID. This was a major reason for creating the mid-continuum label. Vickis specifically noted that they did not experience time loss, had never experienced amnesia in that way, did not have communication barriers between parts, and did not face the same struggles as those further along the dissociative continuum Because of this, they did not want to equate their experiences with those of people living with DID.
From their essay on the subject (here):
“[…] someone elsewhere in this thread said something like ‘I don’t want to call myself multiple because I don’t want to minimize the sufferings of those who are really multiple’. And I can really relate to that. That’s why I say I’m not-quite-multiple usually. Because I don’t lose time and never have, I can’t possibly know what that’s like… I don’t have barriers that prevent communication between parts… I don’t have the struggles that people who are further down the continuum from me have, and I would never want to minimize their issues by claiming that my own are the same.”
4. Mid-Continuum and OSDD
Much of Vickis' writing strongly resembles what is now recognized as OSDD (formerly DDNOS). However, OSDD/DDNOS was rarely mentioned directly in their earlier work. It might've been due to the lack of research surrounding OSDD then—as it only was properly researched in the 2000's and 2010's—and Vickis wanting to use a less clinical term.
In 1999, Vickis remarked that people identifying as mid-continuum often received an OSDD diagnosis if they pursued formal evaluation. This was only mentioned briefly.
Late 1990's: The Precursor to Median
Over several years, mid-continuum became increasingly popular across the internet. It attracted a broad range of people within plural communities. As the label grew, anti-DID/OSDD and anti-psychiatry communities began objecting to it. Their objections were largely tied to mid-continuum's origins in dissociative theory and psychology.
Dark Personalities listed many psychological terms as derogatory to empowered and natural multiples, including DID, alter, and host. Mid-continuum itself also became a target of criticism.
The Push for a Replacement Term
Dark Personalities stated: "Since many people feel the idea of a continuum to be inaccurate, many are seeking a new term instead of mid-continuum." This effort to replace mid-continuum would eventually lead, in the 2000s, to the rise of the term median.
2000s: Median Replaces Mid-Continuum
An anti-DID/OSDD organization later coined the term median as a replacement for mid-continuum. Median became significantly more popular. As a result, mid-continuum gradually fell out of common use.
On the Pavilion website, Astraea’s Web wrote an essay on the midcontinuum and why they came up with the median label to replace it.
“It’s important to allow the concept to be inclusive of everyone who fits, regardless of past abuse history or origins, much as is currently being done for ‘multiplicity.’ With its roots in the abuse-dissociation model, midcontinuum is too limiting; it is no longer useful to us. Median creates a certain measure of psychological distance and gives the concept a fresh start, without the dissociative baggage of the past, and embraces all who feel they are more than one.”
(X X X)
ARCHIVE , ALSO APPLIED TO BELOW TIMELINE;
Pavillion's Policies Archive — "MPD/DID vs. Multiple"
Pavillion's Library Archive — "A brief history of Midcontinuum"
The Lancers' Codex — "Addressing the MPD/DID Issue"
2002–2007: The Rise of Median, Natural Multiplicity Activism, and Organized Anti-DID Campaigns
2003: Median Replaces Mid-Continuum
In 2003, the natural multiplicity organizations The Lancers and Pavilion Hall decided that mid-continuum was too rooted in psychology and dissociation. They argued that it was overly limiting because it was based on the abuse-dissociation model and did not adequately include people whose plurality was understood as non-traumagenic or non-dissociative.
As a result, they coined the term median to replace mid-continuum. Unlike mid-continuum, which was grounded in Braun's dissociative continuum model, median was intentionally broader and more abstract. Pavilion described plurality not as a linear spectrum, but as a sphere with infinitely many possible points, emphasizing fluidity, diversity, and nonlinear identity. According to their framework, someone could identify as median if they experienced themselves as multiple selves, but did not perceive those selves as fully independent.
This shift represented a significant philosophical departure. Mid-continuum had originally been created by dissociative people for dissociative people. Median, by contrast, was created by non-dissociative natural multiplicity advocates who believed mid-continuum was too psychologically grounded and insufficiently inclusive of their experiences.
Median and the Exclusion of DID/OSDD Systems
The Lancers and Pavilion Hall did not intend for people with DID or OSDD to use the median label. Their philosophy held that people with dissociative disorders were not truly plural, multiple, or median unless they no longer met diagnostic criteria. In their view, only "functional" and "non-disordered" individuals could properly claim these identities. If someone with DID or OSDD functioned according to their standards, they were considered no longer disordered.
Because their definitions of plurality and medianhood were often broad and vague, many people with DID and OSDD nevertheless identified with the concept despite the organizations' intentions.
1998–2014: Empowered Multiplicity, MultiGardens, and the Natural Multiplicity Movement
Empowered Multiplicity and MultiGardens
Out of the natural multiplicity movement emerged the concept of empowered multiplicity, which placed a strong emphasis on functionality and distinguished itself from what proponents called "survivor multiples."
In 1999, MultiGardens was established, though it was short-lived. Not long afterward, the person who coined the term "empowered multiplicity" stated that it had never been intended to exclude trauma survivors and that they had not meant to create so much conflict. Despite this, they continued to criticize survivors, as well as those who sought fusion or therapeutic treatment.
Natural Multiplicity as a Movement
By the early 2000s, natural multiplicity had evolved into a full-fledged movement. Its central aim was to establish that plural experiences were not inherently pathological. Many participants insisted that childhood trauma or abuse could not cause plurality or multiplicity.
Even to this day, plurals insist that pwCDDs are looking to blame someone for something they already had—pushing the narrative that pwCDDs were multiple prior to abuse and would've been multiple if it hadn't happened—and that we have internalized pluralphobia because we 'hate ourselves'
Natural multiplicity was not simply about advocating for non-disordered plurality; it also positioned itself in opposition to people with complex dissociative disorders (pwCDDs). Astraea and associated groups actively sought to challenge the legitimacy of DID and MPD as diagnoses, including attempts to have DID removed from the DSM.
Even after the term natural multiple began to be replaced by endogenic around 2014—largely because "natural" implied that systems with CDDs were somehow unnatural—the underlying ideological framework remained much the same. The earliest documented use of the term endogenic dates to 2014.
2000–2010s: The DID Boycott and Anti-Psychiatry Campaigns
For a whole decade, activists associated with the natural multiplicity and anti-psychiatry movements campaigned to challenge, revise, or remove the DID diagnosis from the DSM. This movement was deeply intertwined with both anti-psychology rhetoric and natural multiplicity ideology.
Prominent essays from this campaign included:
“Astraea’s Multiple Personality FAQ” by Astraea’s Web, archived in 2000.
“No More…” by Astraea’s Web, archived in 2000.
“Removing Diagnostic Labels” by Astraea’s Web, archived in 2001.
“Why We Are Not MPD/DID” by Dark Personalities, archived in 2001.
“Some Thoughts on Verbiage” by a guest on Astraea’s Web, archived in 2001.
“We don’t have Multiple Personality Disorder” by The Shire, archived in 2001.
“Terminology” by Those That Walk, archived in 2002.
“The Politics of Language” by Bent Spoons, archived in 2002.
“Fixing The DSM” by a guest on Astraea’s Web, archived in 2003.
This boycott significantly harmed people with complex dissociative disorders. Boycotters frequently argued that pwCDDs were not real, or that their diagnoses should be removed from diagnostic manuals. Natural and empowered multiplicity communities often paired their advocacy with broader opposition to psychiatry and psychology.
At a time when DID research was already sparse, controversial, and often inaccurate, these campaigns further complicated public and clinical understanding of dissociative disorders.
2002–2003: "Fixing The DSM"
"Fixing The DSM" was an essay written by The Jinkies in 2002 and published on Astraea's Web in 2003. It had previously appeared on Pavilion Hall's LiveJournal forum and in Pavilion's library. (X X X)
The essay argued that the DID and OSDD diagnoses should either be revised to better represent non-dissociative plural experiences or removed from the DSM entirely.
Jinkies contended that people without DID or OSDD might feel excluded from plural identity because they did not meet diagnostic criteria. They criticized the DSM for defining DID and OSDD in terms of dissociation, arguing that this invalidated non-dissociative plural experiences.
The essay ultimately proposed replacing DID with the term Ego-Dystonic Plurality, a phrase coined by the creator of Astraea's Web. Modeled after the historical diagnosis of Ego-Dystonic Homosexuality, this proposed label would have stripped DID and OSDD of their established clinical frameworks.
Jinkies concluded by asserting that non-disordered experiences do not belong in the DSM. While that statement is true in itself, DID and OSDD are inherently disordered conditions, making the proposal fundamentally incompatible with the realities of those diagnoses.
2002: The Formation of The Lancers and Pavilion Hall
In June 2002, two sister organizations were formed: The Lancers and Pavilion Hall. Both were self-described natural multiplicity activist groups. Though inactive today, their influence remains substantial. Their last known activity appears to have been in 2015.
These organizations were responsible for coining the term median system, creating the Layman's Guide to Multiplicity, and popularizing the idea of plurality as an umbrella term. Their impact on modern plural terminology and discourse remains significant.
The Lancers
Formation and Purpose;
The Lancers were founded to "resolve the conflict between plural and non-plural types" and to foster understanding between singlets, medians, and multiples. Despite this stated goal, they did not support DID or what they disparagingly referred to as "survivorwhine sites."
Membership Requirements;
Membership was restricted to natural multiples. People with DID or OSDD were explicitly excluded.
Applicants were required to sign the In Essence Pledge—viewed here and here—affirming that they were functioning and sane. They were also expected to publicly display this pledge on their websites and follow the organization's codex. Failure to comply could result in removal.
The organization strongly emphasized appearing non-disordered. Prospective members who were not yet functioning well enough to present themselves as "strong, sane, and responsible" were discouraged from joining.
They stated that if your system “cannot yet work functionally together in daily life, do not ask to join. If you wish to help the Lancers but haven't got things sufficiently together to be able to present to the world as strong, sane, and responsible, look elsewhere for help -- Astraea's is a good place to begin [...]” (X)
The Codex;
The Lancers developed a body of internal theory known as the Codex, which outlined their views on natural multiplicity. Among its concepts were "paths," later renamed "fires," though these terms did not gain widespread use. Their most enduring contribution was the term median, which replaced mid-continuum.
Pavilion Hall
Formation and Purpose;
Pavilion Hall was founded around the same time as The Lancers by the same group of people. Like The Lancers, Pavilion excluded people with DID and OSDD.
Pavilion described itself as an activist organization dedicated to promoting positive views of healthy multiplicity. Its goals included challenging the classification of multiplicity as a mental disorder, establishing common ground among plurals, and promoting natural multiplicity theories in both academic and non-academic settings. [X]
Membership;
Members were expected to live as healthy multiples so as not to undermine their mission of ending the idea that multiplicity was a disorder. While signing the In Essence Pledge was encouraged, it was not mandatory. [X]
Hierarchy;
You can read a more in-depth explanation of these positions on their page here
Pavilion had a five-tier organizational hierarchy:
Frontliners: The Frontliners’ main job was to seek out places where they could spread the word of natural multiplicity. This mainly included any space specifically centering around DID/OSDD—forums (discussed more below), websites (X), and articles (X), as well as mental health clinics (X), and even dissociative specialists such as from the ISSTD (X). They also occasionally sought out spiritual or unorthodox spaces to “convert,” such as a soulbonding forum. (X)They usually referred to this job as responding to “action alerts.” This part of Pavilion was surprisingly coordinated. You can find an action alerts page on their website here. You can also find an action alerts tag on their forums here.Another job for Frontliners was to “monitor” DID/OSDD forums, find people who they suspected didn’t actually have DID/OSDD, and bring them into the natural multiplicity community. (X X X) Here is a page they wrote on their justification behind this.
The Pavilion website also had an entire section called The Armory, which was dedicated to hosting resources specifically for Frontliners to do this sort of work. (X)
Scholars: These were the members of Pavilion who wrote the essays that the Frontliners could use in their arguments or discourse. They also supported the organization through other means such as researching counterarguments against psychology, or creating new websites for Pavilion to spread their purpose.
Knights/Coordinators: This was a temporary position. Members became Coordinators for the duration that they were running a project for Pavilion. One example of a Pavilion project would be Project Bananarama (later renamed Paperchase), in which they mailed out over 200 Pavilion brochures to psychologists and dissociative specialists. (X)
Diplomats: These were the members who spread Pavilion’s purpose offline in real life areas. One example of Pavilion’s offline activism would be slipping notes about natural multiplicity inside of DID/OSDD books. (X)
Castles/Directors: This appeared to be the highest level of the hierarchy. Directors were the leaders of Pavilion who kept an eye on every other members’ activity and projects.
One notable Pavilion project, originally called Project Bananarama and later renamed Paperchase, involved mailing more than 200 brochures promoting natural multiplicity to psychologists and dissociative specialists.
MEMBERS;
An archived list of The Lancer’s members can be found here.
An archived list of Pavilion’s members can be found here.
Another archived list of Pavilion’s members can be found here.
Concerning Activities of The Lancers and Pavilion
Documented behaviors included:
Mailing hundreds of natural multiplicity brochures to dissociative specialists
Editing and vandalizing the DID Wikipedia page (SEE BELOW)
Arguing that people with DID could not truly be multiple until they were no longer "dysfunctional" (X X)
Ridiculing PTSD- and DID-focused events, writings, and individuals (X X)
Joking about disrupting DID/OSDD conventions (X)
Monitoring DID/OSDD forums for potential recruits (SEE HIERARCHY ABOVE)
Coordinating "action alerts" to target specific spaces or publications (SEE HIERARCHY ABOVE)
Joking about "converting" others to natural multiplicity (X)
Drawing inspiration from anti-DID groups such as the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (FMSF) (X)
Openly advocating for the removal of DID and OSDD from diagnostic manuals (X)
ARCHIVES
The Lancers’ Website Archive
The Lancers’ Public LiveJournal Forum
The Lancers’ Codex Archive
Pavilion’s Website Archive
Pavilions’ Public LiveJournal Forum
The Layman’s Guide to Multiplicity
Lancers/Pavilions’ Multiplicity Brochure
2003–2006: Pavilion and the DID Wikipedia Article
In February 2003, Pavilion members coordinated an effort to edit the Wikipedia article on Dissociative Identity Disorder.
Using Pavilion's "action alert" system, Astraea Household encouraged members to revise the article. Pavilion member Amorpha drafted and implemented substantial edits. You can read their rough draft here.
These changes shifted the article's focus toward controversy and introduced extensive material about "healthy multiplicity" (also called natural multiplicity). The revised article suggested that many multiples were not diagnosed, did not need therapy, did not have histories of childhood trauma, and did not wish to integrate
It also proposed that DID should be revised or removed from the DSM to accommodate natural multiples.
“Because such multiples do not experience their condition as disordered or sick in any way, some have proposed that the diagnosis of DID be removed from the DSM entirely, or revised to classify multiples who have difficulty communicating and sharing memories and/or wish to integrate.”
These additions remained in the article until 2006, when they were removed for lacking relevance to DID. Shortly afterward, the broader controversy section was also removed.
Archive of natural/healthy multiplicity removal & reasoning.
Archive of controversy removal & reasoning.
archive of the edit Amorpha made to the Wikipedia article
2005–2007: The Natural/Healthy Multiplicity Wikipedia Article
A separate Wikipedia article on natural or healthy multiplicity was later created. This article blended concepts of natural multiplicity with the clinical treatment goal of healthy multiplicity (also called resolution). Here is an archive of the edit Amorpha made to the Wikipedia article.
It also reflected Pavilion's belief that people with DID or OSDD who cooperated well internally no longer truly had those disorders.
The article relied heavily on sources created by Pavilion members, including:
Astraea's Web
Collective Phenomenon
Their shared LiveJournal community
The Layman's Guide to Multiplicity
Pavilion Hall
The Lancers
In 2007, the article was nominated for deletion due to its reliance on blogs, forums, and original research rather than reliable secondary sources. The nomination was successful, and the article was deleted.
This deletion highlighted a central problem for natural multiplicity advocates: despite extensive searching, they were unable to find substantial professional or academic support for the concept as an innate, non-pathological state. You can read the thread about it here.
Amorpha expressed frustration towards the reasons for deletion, specifically regarding 'reliable' sources. They explained that no matter how much they searched the Internet for proof, they could not find any professionals discussing natural multiplicity. The only thing they could find on healthy multiplicity was, obviously, related to CDD treatment.
“We helped to work on that article. It was deleted for containing ‘too much original research’ and ‘not enough acceptable sources.’ The sources thing was the real problem-- we've really tried combing the Internet for that, but they're looking for ‘secondary sources’, aka articles by doctors or journalists or someone working in some ‘professional’ capacity. And there honestly just isn't much. Most of the professionally-written material we've come across that mentions healthy multiplicity in any way approached it from the standpoint that it's all MPD/DID, and proposing the ‘radical’ idea that multiples don't have to integrate (though, of course, it's always suggested that they're only supposed to be capable of living independently and non-integrated after being in therapy for years).
I don't object to using those as sources, as I think a big point to be emphasized in the whole concept of healthy multiplicity is that a system can start out disordered and come to be healthy and stable in time, but what we needed and couldn't find were sources talking about it as a natural state of being-- not necessarily in terms of a pathological deviation from the norm[...]”
Screenshotted to avoid sending harassment to the OP.
They did not provide a source for their claims, so I figured that I would do so for them and go over what the information actually means!
DEBUNKING - “You can be Plural without Trauma and there is proof”
I see the claim that there is proof that you can be a system without trauma thrown around quite a lot and the most common place I see it is pointing at the ICD-11.
The International Classification of Disease (ICD) is the global standard for recording health— ICD-11 being the latest copy of the book at the time of this post. If there is proof of systems without trauma in this book it would be quite a “checkmate anti-endos” for pro-endo truthers. Unfortunately, the evidence does not hold up to the claim.
“WAIT, but Risa, I thought you said that this DIDN’T prove that Endos could exist!!” Thank you my metaphorical friend who is a bit confused, if you simply read the first sentence “The presence of 2 or more distinct personalities does not always indicate the presence of a mental disorder.” Then yes, that does seem like concrete proof that Endos exist.
But let’s actually take a second and break down what this actually means in a less confusing way.
“The presence of 2 or more distinct personalities does not always indicate the presence of a mental disorder” -> “Just because someone comes in with 2 or more personalities, that doesn’t mean they should be diagnosed with DID.”
“In certain circumstances (e.g., as experienced by ‘mediums’ or other culturally accepted spiritual practitioners) the presence of multiple personalities is not experienced as aversive and not associated with impaired function.” -> “Mediums and those who let a spirit of some kind inhabit them are an example of 2 or more personalities in one body that should NOT be considered disordered.”
“A diagnosis of Dissociative Identity Disorder should not be assigned in these cases.” -> “Don’t be racist and tell people that are spirit practitioners that they HAVE A MENTAL DISORDER.”
A lot of the proof for “Endogenic systems” talk about are in references to spiritual beliefs that are performed by a number of cultures. I don’t think I need to explain why claiming your alters are created from these often closed cultures is not the checkmate Endos think it is. (If I do, please tell me because I will and CAN explain.)
So ICD-11 is a bust, but here are surely other medical papers out there talking about Endos being real, right?
As an autistic system I do notice that the way endos/ntgs view/treat plurality/systems is very similar to how (mostly allistic but sometimes autistic folks too) view and treat autism.
"It's not a disability it's a superpower! You're not disabled your differently abled! Everyone's a little bit on the spectrum! Oh yeah I'm sooo autistic" autism has been made something cute and quirky. Men are wanting "autistic" girlfriends but I'm sure if a real autistic woman was anywhere near them they'd revert back to bully they were in middleschool. Traits like stimming and special interests are romanticised, while the more "ugly" parts are all ignored and forgotten. White autistics with Lower supports needs are centred and most often leave their POC and higher supports needs siblings behind and/or speak over them.
DID too has suffered from being sensationalised and glamorized, the alters/multiplicity aspect has been romanticised and taken by outsiders while the "ugly" parts have been left out and forgotten. "Plurality isn't a disorder it's just some vague phenomena anyone can experience! If you wish you were a system, now you can be!" It's just a quirky identity stripped of it's "baggage". Plural communities constantly decentre CDD systems, their most vulnerable group, we are not listened to because our disorder isn't pretty, because we don't want our experiences and language appropriated , because we don't abide by their idealised version of Plurality and blindly agree with their community.
The "tiktokification" of autism does not represent me, the "tiktokification" of systems doesn't either. I'm not against sharing the good parts of your disorder/disability but you must remember it IS a disorder/disability. There is also nothing wrong with relating to traits of a disorder without having it. But,once again, do not speak over us!!
(Sorry if what's written I all over the place, the post was started by one alter and its been a few day I've decided to finish it and post it. I hope what we've written makes sense. Be kind and have a lovely day)
( TW for links; I'll add what's in every link, but of course, always proceed with caution! )
Fun Fact:
Traumagenic is a real medical term that is typically used in therapeutic environments to describe beliefs or states that are impacted by the cognitive and emotional impact of trauma. ( It's also used to refer to the traumagenic neurodevelopmental model of psychosis. )
1 ) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8833025/ ( Mentions of SA & CSA )
2 ) https://www.mosac.net/TraumagenicStatesModel.aspx ( Discussion of SA & CSA )
Not only that, but there are papers out there that refer to CDDs as "Trauma-Related Dissociative Disorders" or caused by trauma, for all the weirdos out there who keep saying they can have a CDD without any form of trauma.
1 ) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9162402/ ( Mentions of abuse, neglect, sexual violence, suicide, substance use. )
2 ) https://www.isst-d.org/publications-resources/public-resources/fact-sheet-iv-what-are-the-dissociative-disorders/ ( Mentions of alcohol & drug use, torture, cults, coercive control )
3 ) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12406319/ ( Mentions of CSA and childhood abuse. )
4 ) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4959824/ ( Mentions of CSA, childhood abuse, neglect, suicide. )
5 ) https://pasadenatraumatherapy.com/dissociation/ ( Mentions of sexual abuse, physical abuse, incest, emotional abuse, neglect, torture, trafficking, CSA, drugs, alcohol, self-harm, and suicidality. )
Extremely, EXTREMELY sorry if I missed any triggers.
anon i love you for this /p
but yeah this is exactly why i hate the whole “traumaendo” thing. endos stop using clinical terms for what y’all say isnt a clinical thing.
your persecutors are not beyond saving, by the way. you are not beyond saving, "bad parts" and all.
the whole narrative of "evil" or "bad" alters needs to be dismantled. whether you like it or not, whether you prefer to be addressed as individuals or not (i know that we do), whether your goal is final fusion or functional multiplicity or some other thing, alters are still parts of a whole and continuing to punch down at your "worst" alters is punching down at yourself.
until you learn to accept and work with all parts of yourself, you're never going to move anywhere.
when you back an animal into a corner, it's going to bite. if you keep screaming at that animal, it's going to keep biting. if you hit that animal, it's going to bite harder. until you learn to approach with kindness and understanding, that animal is going to bite. it's never going to want to work with you.
anti - persecutor sentiment doesn't seem to be as prevalent this side of tumblr, but it absolutely runs rampant on other social platforms like discord or tiktok. not like i'd expect anything else.
and just... to be clear. i am not dictating how you address your system. i am not dictating your recovery. i am, however, stating my opinion based on my own experiences and others' that i've interacted. thanks
what’s your take on the claim that non traumagenic systems are proved by medical documents such as the DSM-5? for example, the line “D. The disturbance is not a normal part of a cultural or religious practice” from the diagnostic criterion of DID in the DSM-5
My take is that the claim is quite literally trying to cherry-pick something to prove ableism. It's no different to us then those who take criteria for something and try to pull "well, it said that it DOESN'T include this so clearly this is true!"
Here's how we take it.
There are several cultures (especially with indigenous groups (I do want to make it known, I am not indigenous anywhere. If I am incorrect, please feel free to correct me)) that use/have used drugs such as Datura, Peyote, Ayahuasca, mushrooms, LSD, Psilocybin and more as part of their practices. Those drugs can cause people to lose their sense of identity, and some (like Datura) can last long after the intoxication ends. That can cause someone to experience things similar to a system.
To me, that's an example of what it means. Cultures that believe that you can be possessed by a spirit and have them take control of your body, can have them live, does not make them a system and is another thing I believe that can be.
I have never seen anyone from any sort of culture or religion that actually has things like that claim to be related to a system. What I have seen is a lot of people (especially white people, and I'm saying this as someone who isn't much darker than a literal piece of white printer paper (I don't go in the sun really and am naturally very pale)) with 0 ties to the culture/religion claim that. For example, people with tulpas.
It's funny how part of the endogenic narrative is reading the DSM-5 backwards and studying absolutely nothing else. I spent more than 6 years studying DID from my adolescence into adulthood, and I will keep doing so until I graduate and can finally specialize, but you can't tell me all that knowledge is garbage just because people who haven't done a rigorous study to verify what can already be seen with the naked eye (that endogenic systems do not exist, and being neutral is directly or indirectly supporting the abuse of other systems) say so—just because you want to engage in deep roleplay and feel special in a fantasy world to which you will never belong, because your parents didn't love you enough and you weren't taught the core values given to another human being in kindergarten.
You cannot approach me, a survivor of child sex trafficking, to tell me that you are multiple and that you didn't survive trauma. That you are happy that way and that your life is all rainbows and butterflies because, according to your criteria and three Tumblr posts, that's fine. Let me remind you that the endogenic narrative subjects young survivors to befriending them because they are highly manipulable, and you, in your erotic madness, can abuse that child by saying it is an identity, because child abusers already do that without claiming to be endogenic.
They have problems, and serious ones. They don't even seem to have the gift of reading, because they read three paragraphs and shield themselves behind a supposed system that has DID, is endogenic, and is a psychologist. That kind of person is a danger to society; they should revoke their license for going against what is known as established studies.
let's say hypothetically that endogenic systems are a real thing. if they really wanna separate from CDD's, they need to stop using clinical terms
they need to stop using "alters", "parts", switching, fronting, host, persecutor, protector, gatekeeper, little, caregiver, and introject. why? these are clinical terms used by therapists when treating those with DIDOSDD.
you can't claim to not be invading CDD spaces, and claim to not be disorders while using these terms.
"RAMCOA & OEA isn't real; it's fake or exaggerated for attention online. We'd see a lot more cases if it was."
Except you do see us.
We're on the front page of your favorite porn site. We're the tweaking homeless person you pretend not to look at on the street. We're your favorite political talking point. We're the infant in the emergency room screaming from a pain they can't comprehend. We're the black lines in classified files you make jokes about. We're buried in the backyards of farmhouses that have long since returned to nature. We're the ones who sold you drugs in high school. We're the classmate you bullied for growling and barking like an animal. We're the product of a $200 billion industry. We're the blood on your favorite politician's hands. We're alive and dead and existing as fragmented states in between.
You just refuse to look too closely because it makes you uncomfortable.
Just because I follow medical texts and say “you need trauma in order to be a system” doesn’t mean:
I’ll not accept you for not remembering any trauma
I’ll force you to uncover traumatic memories
I’ll expect your system to function in one specific way
I’ll force you to talk about triggers
I’ll force you to tell me about all your trauma
And so much more that my brain has blanked on.
The only thing that I will expect of you is to go find a therapist or psychiatrist as soon as is feasible for you - and I don’t care if that means now, in a months time, when you move out of your current living situation, in a few years once you have some financial stability, whatever. I just want you to get help as soon as that opportunity comes.
I think what a lot of endos/willos/tulpas don't understand is that this isn't a "people in your head" disorder. It's disassociation, losing days or weeks at a time. It's being unaware when time is passing. It's not having a sense of self. Not knowing what you enjoy, or being unable to enjoy what you enjoy. It's looking in the mirror and not recognizing the person in it.
It's looking at close family photographs and not knowing who any of the people are. It's forgetting friends, forgetting family, forgetting loved ones. Forgetting peoples' faces, their voices, not understanding who's texting or calling you. It's not remembering even having fun, or happy events.
It's difficulty with school and work, sometimes being physically unable to comprehend the information you're receiving. It's losing your job because you forget that you even have one. It's being lucky if you even graduate. It's being unable to have a driver's license if you get diagnosed. It's not being able to even get a job if you have it listed as a disability in your paperwork.
It's being paranoid, afraid of the people around you. It's random bouts of emotions that make no sense, such as anger or fear. It's not being able to remember what some emotions feel like. It's even not being able to process emotions.
It's intrusive thoughts that feel impossible to get around. It's potentially endangering yourself or others, sometimes without even knowing why. In cases of abuse, it's intrusive thoughts about being abused. It's unwanted desires, impulses, and urges. It's being terrified of your own mind.
It's comorbid with other disorders that are created from trauma. Systems often are borderline, narcissistic, antisocial, histronic, obsessive compulsive, schizoid, etc etc etc, multiple of them, or in extremely severe cases, almost all of them.
Of course, these experiences vary from person to person, however this isn't "there are people in my head" funtimes. CDDs are created from extreme childhood trauma, usually abuse, where our personalities split to cope with the trauma. Alters are a symptom, not the whole disorder.
If you're endo/willo, or support them in any capacity, you're ableist. Point blank. And if you are tulpa or support them, you're racist, too.
You don't have people in your head, you don't have alters/headmates/parts if you don't have a dissociative disorder. Plain and simple.
No, amnesia isn’t *just* blacking out and coming to like you’ve passed out.
Amnesia is the lack of memory. It’s completely omitted from your mind. It’s akin to trying to remember before you were born. It’s simply impossible! You had no awareness before you’re born, and that lack of awareness is the same for amnesia.
Those who have not experienced it can only piece together what it is like through the accounts of those who have it, which leads to this popular idea of it being a hard transition from point a to point b. (Which it can be!!) But, it’s much more complex than just a singular expression. It can, and in my case, look like your mind blocking off the bad parts of a moment and keeping the parts it’s okay with to fill in the gap of time. That’s why things seem to happen so fast for those of us with it! Because we are experiencing that time— just way faster because we forget half of the moment we experienced.
The way it’s portrayed in such a single, specific way bothers me… （´-`）.｡oO
^ (As a quick edit, my wording was poor when I first wrote this!! Amnesia is not one size fit all and how it’s experienced is different. This is based off my experiences!! Sorry for that 0_0)
often times when willo systems say stuff like "I willo'd my system because they help me cope with my emotions as someone with autism", I dont think it registers to them that having autism at a young age CAN be traumatizing to children with it. kids with autism are often alienated and neglected, as we were treated that way as a kid too.
Do you have any advice for someone who wants to attempt begin tracking switches again after a while of not doing so (due to a multitude of factors)? What would be the best way to figure out if a switch happened or not or if they are a old or new part/alter?
Thank you in advance :)
[PT: Welcome! Please, take a seat.]
When it comes to switching itself, it can vary quite a bit between different parts. Often, we don't notice a switch has happened until we do something the previous fronter wouldn't. This particular method very much relies on knowing what actions do and do not match up to parts. More overt switches in our case come with a wave of much heavier dissociation and are easier to recognize.
Most often when we're uncertain as to who's in front, we first try to ground, and then go through a list of parts and think about what attributes sound "right" as fitting me. Pronouns, behaviors, personality traits, likes and dislikes, and similar things. We try to keep records of these as best we can and add other potential indicators. We keep a false member/"custom front" on our front tracking app labeled "blurry" for when we are too dissociated to figure this out.
However, one should try not to put too much pressure on recognizing who's fronting at every given moment. It can be helpful, but focusing on it too much can very easily cause undue stress. You aren't required to know everything about your system—that's just a part of how the disorder works.
As always, additions are welcome & appreciated.
[PT: The owner of the blog is anti-endo, anti-radqueer, and anti-proship. If you are a supporter of these, kindly do not interact!]
