The anti-endo and pro-endo positions shouldn't be treated like they're equivalent. This isn't a case of "Well, they are just two sides of an argument," because they're not.
The anti-end stance is one that includes the refusal to acknowledge or accept the personal experience of fellow human beings. It can be inherently dehumanizing, and it absolutely treats some people and their lived experiences as lesser than others because of how they present and understand themselves.
In comparison, the pro-endo stance is basically an "I believe my fellow beings" stance that's largely neutral in its position.
These two things are not the same, and it really bothers me when they're treated like they are just two sides of the same coin.
And yeah, some people choose to call themselves anti-endo for reasons that are not tied to their beliefs about endogenic systems. It's possible to accept that systems with different origin labels are having real experiences and not want to interact with them even then. I get that.
But plenty of folks on Tumblr use the tag and label to describe the underlying belief that systems not directly tied to severe trauma are either faking their experience, lying to themselves, or in some way misinformed about themselves. And the common terminology in other spaces absolutely ties anti-endos with these beliefs.
So, I don't recommend treating these two opinions as roughly the same when discussing them. They're far from similar, and only one of them is dehumanizing and bigoted in the same way as "I don't believe you're a woman, but sure, I'll play along until you grow out of it" is.
