I (alter) am fundamentally against being anti an identity. This is about syscourse. Anti-endo. Endogenic systems are a kind of people, not an ideology causing harm. You are anti-plural, anti a culture (and plurality has cultural markers).
Insisting on scientific evidence to practice cultural humility is dangerous, and that goes both ways; no one should be forcing you to justify your existence, and you should not be forcing anyone to justify theirs. They are not hurting us by having an experience and talking about their experience.
Being anti-endo is as being anti-plural the same way that being anti-drag is being anti-queer. Our communities overlap and intertwine because we built our spaces together. It’s bad enough refusing to tolerate a whole people based on a lack of evidence, but you are forcing a view of a culture that requires we medicalize ourselves and strive to fit a norm we did not choose. None of that is okay.
Again, there is a difference between hesitance around a group whose members have cause harm (making sure you will be safe-enough) and lashing out in your own pain or misunderstanding (regaining power in unhealthy ways). Being anti-endo is the lashing out, the telling a people you hate them and want them gone because they are not like you/cannot prove they are enough like you/others sharing their identity hurt you.
It’s okay to prefer psych circles, it’s okay to distance yourself/selves from groups you aren’t safe to be around (because of them or because of you), there are means of staying away that are not hate. Hate towards those who did not hurt you hurts them — these are people who have been hurt by a psychology that forces normalcy, an underlying ideology of the medicine we need. We don’t need to be hurting each other. Neither group has to be always wrong to acknowledge that both have our dangerous members/concepts. This is growth, this is how communities coexist.
We do not get better by attempting to dispose of an entire group. Inanna — whatever force you(&) cuss to — we need to do better.
