#sysdiscourse tw

[lifeafterpsychiatry]

Being "anti-endo" is one of the most aggressively pro-psych hills to die on. Like what do you mean that any atypical experience that doesn't fit neatly into the DSMs diagnostic categories inherently isn't real or valid and should just be silenced in the name of protecting the "real" mental health experiences. Are you guys for fucking real right now

[lifeafterpsychiatry]

Sorry not sorry but being anti endo is violently and uncritically pro psych like what do you mean the only valid atypical experiences are exactly as dictated by the DSM and that anyone who claims to experience in this case identity compartmentalization outside that exact context are faking or wrong. What are you, a cop?

[lifeafterpsychiatry]

Glad to hear that you support endogenisis. I'm diagnosed DID but still vall myself quoigenic (aka WTFgenic) meaning idk/c how I came to be this way and it's not of your fucking business either. I have anti endo tags blocked and sometimes they pop up and I'll open it and it's like "all systems are valid" or pro traumagenic post. Need i mention that traumagenic is a word coined by an endo.

Thank you. I means a lot and so does your blog. I'm closeted about my plurality.

You're welcome. Genuinely the way people on this site are trying to turn the existence of "endos" into a real pressing problem worthy of endless discourse makes me feel insane

[lifeafterpsychiatry]

hello locely, im not gunna be on anon (not bc anyone would care who I am lol) I just wanted to say person to person im sorry I have to unfollow you for supporting "endo systems". they fill DID/OSDD spaces specifically to attack us (like specifically me as a DID system soooooooo many times over many years) and call us fake for our trauma that caused my DID. I just want to make it really clear that syscourse started with endos wanting to be quirky and spreading a TON of pure misinformation and false info (like blatantly false scientific "info") and attacking DID/OSDD systems so that they could claim the use of the word "system". systems retaliating in defence of our actual trauma is now seen as us being ablest? (not saying you said that kat!) I've followed you for so so so many years and ik you don't care and im just a rando but you've been a wonderful person to follow for so long im just personally saying goodbye and I wish you well but it's just too insanely painful to see support on my dash for people who basically claim to have PTSD without trauma since its literally only a traumagenic disorder (like DID/OSDD). I wish you genuinely well kat and that you find all the kind care and support you need and everyone that follows you does as well /gen

This is an anti psych blog, so if you think the DSM is an apolitical bible of objective facts and that any atypical experience not explicitly defined within it is inherently invalid and fake, this is absolutely not the place for you. Of course I don't support harassment or invasion of specifically traumagenic communities or whatever else you are talking about here as examples of why the "endos" are bad, but the main argument against endos still comes down to only accepting atypical experiences exactly as dictated in the DSM, which is not a position I can support or entertain. Of course there are genuinely shitty people on both sides of this discourse, but it's not like I haven't also seen traumagenic systems be horrible towards random "endos"

[lifeafterpsychiatry]

I feel like, regarding plurality, people tend to get an idea of a near perfect system with fully individual alters, perfect communication, and that its easy to tell who is in front. But that sort of experience isnt particularly common at all, or at the very least it isnt the only way that plurality can be experienced.

ive struggled with self doubt about my plurality a lot. it helps knowing that plurality can be experienced a variety of different ways, from extremely clear to extremely muddy. it really is a unique experience to each individual.

Plural is not a protected title - if any part of the concept feels useful as a framework for your experiences, go nuts.

[lifeafterpsychiatry]

The problem with saying anti-endo is pro-psych is that that's the point, many of these people are self-proclaimed "skeptics" will proudly tell you they follow what the DSM says no matter what and you're anti-science if you don't

I've seen people claim to be both psych critical and anti endo on several occasions, but either way I think attacking anti-endo rhetoric from an explicitly anti psych angle gets me closer to the underlying implications of that whole discourse than any other approach to the subject I've seen so far.

[lifeafterpsychiatry]

Us, a nondisordered endogenic who suspects they USED to be disordered but is still endogenic nonetheless: holy shit thank you, someone who (as far as we know, sorry if we are mistaken) is a very visible singlet and is willing to stand up for us. 😭 Genuinely appreciate it.

I am absolutely not a singlet (and this info is included in my bio) but you're welcome

[lifeafterpsychiatry]

If it isn't a bother... what is the anti endo rethoric? Asking out of genuine curiosity. I've heard about endogenics systems and never understood what's the problem with them?

I don't think there's a problem with them, but the rhetoric I'm opposing is that there is only one possible real and valid way of experiencing identity compartmentalization (the experience of having several separate identities within one body) and that this is DID and OSDD as defined and diagnosed in the DSM-5. And while I do recognize that people with these disorders likely have specific experiences that don't apply to all experiences of plurality, and recognize their need for community around these specific traumagenic experiences of dissociation, I strongly oppose the idea in explicit anti-endo rhetoric that experiencing any degree of plurality in any other context for any other reason is fake and impossible, and that people who claim to are faking and appropriating the only possible "real" experience of being multiple and are bad people for doing so. I don't think all experiences of plurality are basically the same, but I don't think declaring some atypical experiences inherently invalid and fake because they aren't in the DSM-5 is progressive or okay behavior