Whenever people claim that plurality/systemhood/CDDs are a social contagion it always seems a bit illogical to me (on top of being bigoted) because we lived what these people claim to be "proof" that this not only happens, but is a large issue.
We weren't a system — weren't plural at all — until we learned that systemhood and plurality existed.
Before we were plural, I was just a guy who was a bit complicated. I was a guy who didn't feel like a person, who had a very inconsistent view of who I was. I was a guy who used a lot of labels to describe his queerness, but sorted these labels into different groups for no apparent reason, just because it "felt right." I was a guy who would learn about a new term and get excited because it was perfect and I loved it so much... even though it obviously didn't describe me at all. I was a guy who fell in love with and wanted to use a load of different names, while simultaneously only wanting one name. I was a guy who's voice and manner of speaking/typing was all over the place. Who's personality changed all the time. Who felt insecure and confused and empty and lonely all the time.
And then I met someone who introduced themself as a headmate and had to ask what it meant. And then I looked into this whole "plural" thing. And then was just, like, really interested in plural stuff and didn't like being called a singlet. For no particular reason.
(It's really easy to put the pieces together in hindsight — not so much when you're living it).
Who we were never changed, just what words we used and how we understood/understand ourselves. It's part of why I am so adamant that plurality and systemhood are frameworks for understanding oneself/ves and are very broad, opt-in labels.
So, whenever I hear systems/plurals and people who think system/plurals don't exist alike talk about how systems/plurals/CDDs are a social contagion (with a side of "but I'm not, I'm a real one!" from sysmeds), and they use "people who didn't identify as systems until after they learned that systems exist" as proof, I just think that they aren't really thinking about any other reason that may happen. That they are being purposefully, maliciously, and harmfully ignorant. That they don't care about much other than ostensibly being right, so long as it gives them a feeling of superiority.
How in the diddly darn snickerdoodle are you meant to identify as a label that you don't yet know exists?
When We were young, We didn't identify as a system. We "identified as" so many different things that turned out to be signs that We were a system. Like "person who talks to themself" and "person who doesn't have a consistent favorite color" and "person who fears how others will respond when those others find out they're not exactly the same all the time".
That argument trying to fakeclaim systems is illogical nonsense. And honestly, pretty funny, in a way. Like, yeah, that's how words and labels work? People don't use words they don't know exist? No one can identify as a system unless they learn about their plurality and all the common terms for it through a spontaneous flash of omniscience, I guess. Or maybe if they create a time loop paradox of some sort... Genuinely not sure how to make this work for literally any system ever (maybe whoever first used the label is the One True System?), which goes to show how illogical it is
Someone in the notes mentioned how similar this is to transness/transmisia, and yeah. Social contagion accusations are a common tactic bigots like to play, and it's always the same level of silly nonsense at best. If anyone out there has been accused of "faking" their plurality or otherwise been told it's not real for this reason, feel free to laugh in the face of whoever told you that. It's an incredibly flawed and very silly argument at the best of times. Crush it underfoot and have a wonderful day to spite the haters.
