Discover Top Posts Tagged with #community thoughts

Hello same Anon from before (https://www.tumblr.com/sysmedsaresexist/772569901323993088/hello-there-im-coming-from-a-place-of-genuine?source=share).

First of all, thank you for the insightful reply, I really appreciate it and im glad I didn't cause much distress or anger there! Altho apologies for my question(s) being a bit unclear.

To reply, I do see your POVs and having read other posts, I def know that there's been issues concerning the treatment of CDD systems by those in the Plural community in the past, and that parts of the community may have harmful believes (such as the whole "Integration = Bad", etc). At the same time I have my own thoughts on a lot of things said, as well as additional questions which I have organized here.

At its core I do disagree with the idea that CDD systems should be excluded from the Plural term. Regardless of origins, any community can change for the better or worse depending on how organized they are and who can, for lack of a better term, "Shepherd" the community. I always saw the term Plural as more of an identity which is usually loosely experience-based compared to how the list of criteria for a diagnosis is usually followed strictly. While I don't think a label should be forced on anyone (and truthfully, the Plural community has nothing to gain by forcing CDD systems to adopt the Plural label), should a CDD system experience themselves in a way that fits the Plural label the all power to them; I feel when it comes to these things, individual comfort and internal narrative is something important to account for. At least with the CDD systems I know, that sense of community is very comforting; I guess the way I see it, being on the Autism Spectrum, I don't relate to those with other mental health conditions, but we do find commonality in the sense of being neurodiverse.

Elaborating on what I brought up at the start of the last bullet point, I do partly believe that a lot of the issues found in the Plural community are the result of disorganization, infighting, and many sides trying to prove their own validity and not communicating well; this is def something both sides are guilty of. For instance, a lot of what TPA says is harmful for CDD systems from what you've said, I won't deny this, but its hard to fight against it when for a long while its been the only resource validating Endo systems, as such its... bound to make various defensive. While a Plural community may not be able to provide the trauma recovery or healing space that CDD systems can get from a dedicated DID community, I see no reason that outside of recovery a CDD system can't be part of the Plural community if they want to, and in turn the Plural community as a whole can adapt to acknowledge the intrinsic differences in how CDD systems function?

Furthermore, wouldn't separating communities create an echo chamber? Realistically speaking, we are past the point that this separation can happen without having either side have some knowledge of the other. I feel such separation may result in the revival of the whole "Natural Systems" thing from back then. This in turn, can lead to harm if a system within the Plural community were to discovery they are in fact a CDD system (For some the comfort of having that community there is what helps them discover they are a system; and in turn later discover they are in fact CDD).

I hope im not bothering too much with these, im just not sure what to think.

I'd certainly love to discuss things more but gotta remain anonymous, dunno if there's any other way to reach out let alone if you'd be comfortable with that... ^^;

Before we get into this one, which is very likely to turn into a bit of rant-- not at you, in general, I'm very passionate, I need to reiterate-- these experiences DO overlap. My intention with the last post wasn't to gatekeep the term or experience because there are people who like and appreciate the term plural and the EXPERIENCE it stands for.

Dropping in a cut here just because of the length.

To summarize very quickly, I think brain scans will be the deciding factor in this one. CDDs come with very specific trauma-related biomarkers. In MY opinion, this is where the inherent differences in CDD and plural come into play. I say this little blurb frequently.

These "injuries" to the brain affect the way we perceive and relate to the world. They affect the way we think, not only in relation to ourselves, but to others. It changes the way we interact with, hold, and access memories and emotions. It's tied to inherent triggers, behaviors, and how we react to people and things around us. These injuries never go away. We can re-learn healthier habits and train ourselves to path new neurological processes, but the brain is forever altered. We will always have a CDD.

There are things that I believe endogenic systems don't experience. If they ARE struggling with amnesia and volatile reactions to triggers, it's potentially smart to take a second look at CDDs, BEARING IN MIND, that treatment for PTSD is different than CPTSD, and figuring out which you're dealing with is very important. You can have PTSD without a CDD. People seem to forget this.

This is where we really get into the anti/pro stuff, and I'm DESPERATE to hear more experiences and thoughts. My most recent post asking for replies was about this topic-- the overlap of self-determination and labeling vs a physical reality in the form of scans. The use of MRI to help in the diagnosis of CDDs may never be mainstream, but it seems likely that it'll be utilized one day. How will this affect the syscourse landscape, and what will antis do when the proof is in front of them?

Because I DO expect we'll see differences in these presentations-- plural vs CDD.

How will this kind of thing affect the interactions of the communities? What about those who label one way and appear another on scans?

This is INCREDIBLY fascinating to me.

This stance does not discount the existence or possibility of endogenic systems.

The Stanford Tulpa Studies have already shown that the brain can be trained to act independently alongside its host, theories on consciousness grew right alongside Freud's and Janet's trauma focused theories, people have been describing multiplicity in nonpathological ways for centuries under various names, endogenic and plural just being the newest ones.

This stance only seeks to investigate those differences and correct misinformation on CDDs.

Point blank.

But to me, the plural vs. CDD divide may be the hot ticket everyone is looking for. Antis really just want a division in language, so these experiences are notably different for new people coming into the communities. The biggest fears antis have TYPICALLY have to do with vulnerable, young CDD systems falling into plural spaces and causing more harm for themselves. This happens. A lot, honestly.

In my opinion, by presenting plural and CDD as different experiences, we can make it easier for those struggling with their multiplicity to figure out where to go for help.

A divide in language doesn't call for a divide in spaces, and I didn't clarify that in the last post. I HAVE a mixed origin space with people that I respect and adore that have helped me become a better person. These shared spaces have value and benefit, so long as differences are acknowledged. My friends accept and understand that I don't relate to "plural" at all, but I equally respect their experiences, and we use the language that's comfortable for each other. These things don't need to cause arguments or fights.

This is a really watered-down explanation, like I could ramble on and on, but I hope that kind of gives a bit of a glimpse into my thinking?

So, let's push on and get into a history lesson.

Now that I've clarified that I don't mind plural for those use who want to use it, let's get into why I REALLY hate it.

Speaking of, to pause here, if you come off anon, I won't post it, but I'll reach out from my main if you want to talk more and we can go from there! The option is there, if you'd like, or we can just continue in asks if you want to carry on :) You seem very knowledgeable, so there's a big chance you're already aware of a lot of what I'm going to say now, so what I'm about to get into is for everyone, and maybe you, maybe not, let's see!

HISTORY TIME

Plural was coined specifically to be an anti psych alternative. Plural was the word used to get away from multiple, which was seen as too similar to MPD. It's a word based in anti psych rhetoric because its entire purpose was to get away from psychiatry by choosing a word about grammar instead to describe their nondisordered experiences. Here's the coining post.

I have a hard time understanding why any CDD system would want to use it, and it's incredibly frustrating to see anti endos co-opt the term as their own and then demand endogenic systems make a new one. They did that. It's plural.

They did the thing antis wanted. Of course, it's not good enough, but they did.

System is such a vague, overused word that no one has a claim to it. Let everyone be systems, and let plural and CDD be that dividing line.

Again, I don't get it, but I do. CDD systems can relate heavily to the plural experience and what it stands for, and while I want to say all the power to them, I also wonder where they got the idea that the CDD experience is so limited that it can't have those same sentiments of personhood, family, wholeness, and health.

Oh, wait, yes, I do. TPA. Sorority. Crisses. Big names that actively shit on CDD systems daily, push debunked research, and say it's a limited experience based on misreadings and misinformation.

This doesn't even get into my favorite topic-- sophie is going to hate me, GO REBLOG YOUR OWN POST ABOUT FREUD, THIS ONE IS MINE, SHOO

Freud's use of "endogenic" to refer to the fantasy theory, which was completely overlooked by the coiner, who then attacked those upset by this fact.

Personally, prefer plural over endogenic.

I 1000% agree that disorganization on both sides is a huge problem, but IN MY OPINION, it boils down to a complete lack of interest in researching CDD history on the plural side. Antis react to that with anger and scream for extreme separation that often leads to straight up fakeclaiming plurals. Syscourse happens. Just as a very simple example, mediumship is very much a system-adjacent experience, but there's no fighting there and people know the difference quite well because the language doesn't overlap. I think this can happen for plurality and CDDs, too.

I want to jump in here to say, I'm not discounting the damage antis do to the plural community. I see it, I hear about it from my friends, I'm learning. It's not something I can speak on, I haven't experienced it firsthand. I imagine it's a terrible feeling, and it's this behaviour that made me leave the anti community. My own unique way of contributing to syscourse doesn't directly address this and I don't know how to help, other than to keep trying to educate antis and promote kindness and discussion over hostility and total separation.

There HAS to be an exchange in these conversations. For example, if I'm going to broaden my very personal spiritual beliefs to talk to someone, or reassess my entire understanding of human consciousness, the least they can do is acknowledge the history of the term endogenic.

As a reminder, that didn't go very well.

I think it boils down to both sides not wanting to be the bad guy. The plural community has harmed the CDD community just as much as the anti community has harmed the plural community (note that CDD/anti distinction, some of you all are getting way too comfortable conflating the two again), it's just different types of damage. If we're going to organize both communities, this needs to be acknowledged, worked on, and put in the past.

Unfortunately, we're still working on getting it acknowledged, and there's still a lot of work to be done.

Which goes into the next point-- echo chambers.

Having clarified that I DO support shared spaces, this is a bit easier to tackle.

... I don't actually really know what to say. I think both sides are stuck in echo chambers, but how do you even fix that? My reach is limited, and just because of who I am, my following, my past, my activity in syscourse, I refuse to join discord servers unless invited, and I think these servers are the biggest culprit.

In an ideal world, it could be really simple. Have someone look over the rules and any resource channels, make suggestions for changes, help educate the moderators and prepare them with standard replies for when arguments come up between members. Maybe it's a standard outside resource shared around, but I've YET to see one created by plurals that DOESN'T include the paper Normal Dimensions, which is a fucking paper fakeclaiming all systemhood.

And despite me pointing out this paper to several creators of these resources, only one has ever removed it, and it took a different person bringing it up to FINALLY have it removed.

But going back to the "bad guys" thing, no one actually wants this. No one wants to acknowledge that they had bad information up for others to view and integrate into their own thoughts.

I'm not suggesting myself, I'm one person, I'm educated, but I've been out of the field for over a decade. How do you determine who's trustworthy to assess this information?

Echo chambers are a massive problem... I have no idea how it could be tackled.

All I can really do is just keep pushing BOTH types of research out to BOTH sides of the community, and trust they're making the right choices about what resources they're pushing to their members, to further spread themselves.

We're still in the acknowledgment phase. Tackling some of these problems is a LONG way off.

I hope... this was okay??? I hope it answered your questions.

#community thoughts

Trending Tags

Recently Viewed Tags

#community thoughts