Pick one of James Baldwin's works and read it!!! The Fire Next Time is an excellent essay, most of us are familiar with the quote on gay white people from The Last Interview but not the rest of it. If Beale Street Could Talk even has a movie!
hashtag plural blocklist discourse? hastag plural? oh no! you posted in the plural tags! get screenshotted loser! lol im just kidding and tbh idrc about the plural blocklist discourse at all actually and this is just a silly thing i thought of when i saw the tags on your post
5. It’s hard to be offended when white people jokes involve bland food/tourist dads in socks and sandals/white girls in yoga pants obsessed with pumpkin spice/suburban PTA moms and other harmless and mostly true stereotypes while jokes about POC involve them being called thugs/criminals/slurs/uneducated/illegal immigrants.
6. They’re usually really fucking funny and don’t perpetuate stereotypes that will ever affect me economically, politically, or cause me any true harm, let alone create risks that “justify” my murder and/or death
them youthlib radq mfs don’t actually gaf about children in power or whatever they just love talking about fucking kids and the age of consent, disgusting freaks
when you’re youthlib in the “youth should have easy and reliable access to a way out of abusive households that isn’t the equally traumatizing foster care system. they should also be allowed to seek mental health care and their needs and wants should not be viewed as an extension of their parents,” way and somebody whos “youthlib” in the “i want to rape children” way starts talking
(Some) Logical fallacies commonly used by endogenic systems and their supporters
I wanted to compile a small amount of common fallacious arguments used by the pro-endo ideology.
You should also use these to help strengthen your own arguments by avoiding these fallacies. Remember that a statement can be true and still be argued with faulty logic, and denying so is a fallacy of its own. (It’s called the fallacy fallacy, where: If P, then Q. P is a fallacious argument. Therefore, Q is false.)
I don’t know if I should start adding “this post was made by”, but you should know most of my long posts are made by me (Neuvillette) or Cosine. This time it’s me with Cosine in co-front. My special interest is law and debate, so I had a lot of fun with this :)
requested tags: @dissociacho
Burden of Proof / Appeal To Ignorance:
The burden of proof is the obligation of the party providing the claim to provide ample proof of it. If a person says that X exists, they must provide evidence for X. Shifting the burden of proof occurs when the person making the claim demands that others prove them wrong as opposed to justifying their own claim.
The burden of proof is frequently shifted using an appeal to ignorance. In the appeal to ignorance, one makes the claim that a statement is true simply because it has not been proven false.
How pro-endos use it: You will frequently see pro-endos follow a similar logical train. They will state that endogenic systems exist and then require you to provide proof of the contrary. This is similar to religious debates where a theist will ask an atheist to “prove god doesn’t exist!”.
How you can avoid using it: If you are making a claim, provide reasoning. Since the endogenic model is nowhere close to an actual understanding of science, your best bet is studies that disprove the sociocognitive model of DID (which operates remarkably similar to the endogenic logic). Also, remind them that the primary medical term for the presence of alters is DID, and studies into alter formation and presence will use that term. (So the claim: “this isn’t about endos!! its about did!!” is stupid. If that were true, DID studies and framework wouldn’t be useful for OSDD)
Anecdotal:
Anecdotal evidence occurs when personal experiences and isolated incidents are used to draw broad strokes as opposed to empirical evidence.
How pro-endos use it: There two main ways pro-endogenic systems use this.
They might claim that their experience as an endogenic system, or the experiences of endogenic systems that they know, is evidence for endogenic systems existing. This isn’t logical evidence. People can misinterpret what they think and feel about themselves, and they can lie to others as well.
If the discussion is about the community, they may bring up negative experiences from anti-endos. While these experiences are valid and deserved to be brought into context for how we treat pro-endos as a community, it does not mean the anti-endo community as a whole has that behavior. That is another logical fallacy, part to whole, where somebody assumes what is true of a part is true of the whole. (EX: One anti-endo was mean, so all anti-endos are mean.)
Please note that the above doesn’t apply to anti-endos discussions of the history of pro-endos. We’re talking about the history and beliefs embedded into the endogenic community (beliefs that we have objective proof of existing), as opposed to negative experiences with individual pro-endos. (While those do have their merit, “I had a bad experience with a pro-endo so therefore all pro-endos are bad,” is not a logical argument. “I’ve noticed (X) pattern across experiences with pro-endos and it matches the negative history of their movement,” is.)
False Equivalence:
Informally known as ‘comparing apples and oranges’, the false equivalence where an equivalence is drawn between two things due to a small similarity. This is a form of oversimplification.
The structure goes as such:
If A is the set containing c and d, and B is the set containing d and e, then since they both contain d, A and B are equal.
How pro-endos use it: Pro-endos make the comparison between anti-endos and transmedicalists. Ironically, while searching for a post to show this type of reasoning, I found a comic made by a pro-endo doing.. the exact thing.
This is the exact same fallacy. The false equivalence here comes from equating multiplicity with gender identity, two things that are simply not comparable. Gender is an internal identity, while multiplicity is the result of dissociative barriers formed through trauma. They are not comparable.
Tu Quoque
Latin for “You too”. This is when somebody dismisses an argument by accusing the critic of the same or similar behavior, rather than addressing the argument itself. An arguments truth is not dependent on the speaker itself, yet this is a useful form of red-herring that redirects criticism instead of making the person engage with it.
How pro-endos use it: Primarly when anti-endos discussing their communities history or pointing out flaws in the pro-endo community. If they ever start an argument along the lines of, “Well, sysmeds do [insert thing],” then that’s what I’m speaking about.
Nothing brings me more joy than pointing out the fallacies in arguments bc it’s so funny, like u rlly typed that out and thought it sounded smart didn’t you?😭😭
I think the plural-blocklist person is lazy and lame, and regardless of intent is inviting harassment to people. At the end of the day it’s a very useful tool for those who want to harass others, because those who actually want to curate their spaces have easy ways to do so in filtering tags. they can slap a do not harass label onto it but that really doesn’t change the reality of their behavior.
truly i think the only helpful way to make this type of stuff for pro-endos is to compile a list of commonly used anti endo tags to block, as well as well known gore spammers.
otherwise it’s really helpful for harassers lol. and this is the same with ALL stance based blocklist blogs.
"omg you're a system!!! it just be so fun to have friends in your head!!!"
Yeah. They are my friends but you know what's really not fucking fun? Seeing how intelligent an alter is and how much they want to pursue their dream career but they can't because we share a body. Seeing how creative and talented alters are but we can't spend hours and hours drawing because we share a body and the body has to work. Seeing that an alter really wants to do something and we just don't have time, they say it's okay but we share a body and I know how they really feel.
Yeah I have friends in my head and I'm constantly letting them down because the things we all want aren't physically possible. Yeah that's really fun.
okay making an edit because this was months ago:
i was not mourning the fact someone can't do a career. this post was about feeling like a useless shitty fucking host that for some unknown reason needs to be the host of this system of genuinely incredible parts.
and yes, this is the least of my issues. there is so much fucking shit I go through bc of this disorder i don't talk about. but this is the internet and my blog. im allowed to vent.
(also this post originally was made at a time where part separation was hard/before we started did therapy. we didn't know much about our system back then)
Listen. Is a potted azalea cute and lovely decoration? Yes, absolutely. However. This isn't a competition of the prettiest block. It's about the BEST block.
Sand is so useful it's not even funny. It's used to make glass and concrete, has a lovely texture, one of the few blocks in the game affected by gravity which means it can be used to move down in the nether. Glass bottles are also ncessary for potions, that are incredibly diverse and powerful.
Sand does NOT deserve to go out on the first round! Vote sand!
