I've noticed there tend to be a lot of assumptions in the syscourse community when it comes to stances. This is common for a lot of topics that create discourse, but syscourse is such a complex area of discussion that it's really difficult for some people to 100% agree with "pro" or "anti" non-traumagenic. I can't really say I fully agree with both, but I agree with anti endogenic far more than I do with pro.
I call myself anti endogenic or endogenic critical when in reality, I'm critical of most of the syscourse community and I find the repetitive arguments exhausting and completely ineffectual.
I call myself anti endo because I'm extremely uncomfortable with the involvement that non-traumagens have with the CDD community. It doesn't matter how many times a community SAYS they're separate from a disorder, when actions speak significantly louder than words.
I call myself anti endo even though I genuinely don't like a LOT of anti endo arguments. I have seen SO many accounts create anti endo posts just to be antagonistic/hostile. There is SO much fakeclaiming among anti endos and not enough people recognize that.
I don't call myself endo-neutral because of how much the anti endo community has stressed that "neutrality doesn't exist with ableism" and while I understand the argument, that is such an oversimplified view of what the endogenic community really is.
I don't call myself endo-neutral because a number of blogs have used "neutrality" as a pass to interact with whoever they want to and that's basically erased the "endo neutral" stance from being "allowed" to exist in syscourse.
I don't call myself endo neutral because I'm significantly more comfortable with the anti endo community than I am with the pro endo community—and if I were to say I'm neutral, most would assume I'm trying to evade DNIs like a number of the not-so-endo-neutrals.
I'm sure as hell not pro-endo, because I don't believe endogenic plurality exists. I also think, however, that beliefs like that shouldn't discredit the experiences non-traumagenics feel they have. I'm not cool with fakeclaiming, and saying "endos aren't real" is ultimately fakeclaiming.
I sure as hell am not pro-endo, because I believe their community as a whole is incredibly ableist—that fact being something they are very ignorant to. Non-traumagenics fail to see how their intrusion within disordered spaces can harm those with CDDs.
I generally believe a lot of non-traumagenics are either people with CDDs and repressed/forgotten trauma, or people who experience delusions. I ALSO need to convey how extremely harmful it is to directly tell them that, because THAT IS FORCED TRAUMA/DISORDER RECOGNITION. As a victim of both, myself, I GENUINELY CANNOT EXPRESS HOW BADLY THAT CAN FUCK SOMEONE UP. STOP DOING THAT.
Anyways that's all I have energy for tonight.
