No Text ID but I'll be quoting everything in these text images.
Anon Says: Hi! Just an fyi, the endophobia blog is anti-endo. Also, best of luck on ur blog! :D
indigenous-poc-culture-is answered: The original context of "endophobia" has nothing to do with "endogenic" individuals, which is one reason I recommend their blog.
Very true! I agree that the distinction between endophobia and endomisia should definitely be made. :)
However, if our dni was not clear enough, this blog does not support endos/willows/tulpas/ect.
Hm, perhaps anon didn't know? Last time I checked, the DNI is under one of those "read more" cuts where you have to press the link and I've heard that sometimes those can mess with screen readers, perhaps anon uses one!
We do support nondisordered plurality that has religious origins esp within the context of indigenous spirituality but none of those are endo/willo/tulpa/ect. Cultural plurality has it's own terms and has nothing to do with complex dissociative disorders, as it is not a disorder, but a cultural aspect & practice. Cultural forms of plurality are explicitly ruled out of the diagnostic criteria for complex dissociative disorders for this reason.
But thank you for the well wishes
Oh but wait, tulpas ARE one of those. Tulpas come from tulpamancy which comes from Tibetan Buddhism, which is a religious and cultural practice. Perhaps this person doesn't know that? I should say something.
this-is-anti-religion (aka ME :D) comments: Hello! Just an fyi, tulpas ARE a religious practice! Tulpamancy is found in an (open) branch of Buddhism. :))
There we go! Cheerful and respectful. What could possibly go wrong?
indigenous-poc-culture-is replied:
I don't need your fyi. I am aware, I have a background in Buddhism and lived at a Buddhist monastery.
As I mentioned I am differentiating between endo"genic", willo"genic", and tulpa"genic" individuals who make claims to have a disorder.
Unfortunately, the tone here is very passive aggressive but I also don't wish to make assumptions as I understand that some individuals have tonality issues.
Also unfortunately, this then completely spiraled as we're about to get into.
indigenous-poc-culture-is, reblogging from the post answering the ask: This is NOT a syscourse blog shut up about abelist identities and being intentionally obtuse.
The accusation that I'm being "intentionally obtuse" is... something. I wasn't being obtuse, I genuinely thought that you were unaware that tulpas come from tulpamancy, a religious practice. There is absolutely no context in your DNI that you aren't talking about genuine tulpamancers when you say "tulpas DNI but religious plurality is cool". I've genuinely met a large amount of anti-endos who didn't know that tulpas come from a religious practice.
Tulpamancy falls under a religious practice that stems from a certain culture. "Tulpagenics" are appropriators.
For those unaware, tulpamancy is a Tibetan Buddhist practice. While Tibetan Buddhism is open, tulpamancy is considered semi-closed. Not because you need to to be a certain race or something like that, but because tulpamancy is essentially a very advanced form of tantric yoga.
The certain kind of tantric yoga that is needed in order to do this spiritual practice are considered extremely advanced and hold large amounts of divine energy. So attempting to do it when you haven't even done the basics of tantra, or even Buddhism, is considered dangerous because you could accidentally overwhelm yourself psychologically and spiritually.
The knowledge is highly guarded and you MUST find yourself a guru who is knowledgeable in the practice to initiate you and guide you through the process.
However, creating a sentient thoughtform to share your body with isn't closed at all. Exploring the capabilities of the human (or nonhuman 😉) mind is open to everyone. Although I would argue that calling it "tulpamancy" is indeed appropriation.
Taking a practice that requires initiation and carries decades of religious and cultural contexts and stripping it of them (even if you acknowledge it's origins) is indeed appropriation.
I clearly made this distinction in the above post.
You actually didn't! And it's exactly why I made my comment. Because your wording genuinely didn't clarify that you do not include genuine tulpamancers initiated into the practice. You just said "tulpas DNI" and with the pairing of "religious/cultural plurality is valid" I thought you genuinely didn't know that tulpas come from a religious practice.
No one needs your um actually because you think a BIPOC can't possibly be educated and you need to be their white savior. It is not even a fully open practice.
Okay so WOW. These are some pretty serious, and baseless, accusations. (Also I think there was a typing error and I genuinely can't tell what it was supposed to be). No where in my comment did I even mention an INKLING of race, I didn't even insinuate it! And insinuations can be hard for me anyways because I'm autistic. Gently and respectfully correcting what I thought was misinformation because your wording wasn't clear enough is not a white savior complex or thinking that you can't possibly know that because your BIPOC.
Which part of endo & co and their supporters dni was not clicking the first and second time this-is-anti -religion?
Eugh. This reads as vaguely ableist. "What's not clicking?" Perhaps your wording wasn't clear enough (it wasn't), perhaps I'm autistic (I am), perhaps I have a learning disability (also have that), perhaps I have a screen reader and your DNI is inaccessible (don't have one of those but it IS possible).
Stay out of Indigenous poc spaces about indigenous poc culture unless you are an indigenous poc- but even then, the dni. [Plain Text: the dni.]
I actually am indigenous poc! I'm Louisiana Creole/Soulani and also Cherokee Indigenous. I also don't understand why you're mentioning your DNI when there is absolutely no way to tell if I'm pro, neutral, or anti endo from my comment or even my pinned.
But let me make this clear: Saying only disordered plurality is real treats suffering as needed for being taken seriously. That’s an ableist framework because it defines legitimacy through dysfunction.
Anti–endo plurality rhetoric usually mirrors broader ableist attitudes aka people are accepted only when they fit medicalized, externally recognizable models of disability.
indigenous-poc-culture-is in a new post: Stop messaging me in the ask box about this-is-anti-religion idgaf. I told them that this is a space for indigenous poc and indigenous poc who are not/do not support abelism. If they don't check those boxes doesn't mean they are or aren't white- it means they check at least one of the boxes not welcome here. I don't care if they are or aren't an poc, especially if they're not an indigenous poc which this blog is for-because the later half of the dni is abelism supporters dni.
Being anti-endo is literally ableist but okayyyyyy.
And the "evidence" you were looking for is that they tried to "educate" me multiple times on something I already addressed to them multiple times and they explicitly ignored what I said and the topic itself, there was no confusion on their end they just ignored what I said and I deleted their comments and blocked them bc I don't want that shit here.
I'm going to assume that somebody sent in an ask asking for proof of my racism. And would you look at that? Instead of providing actual evidence, it's doubling down and more baseless accusations.
You also didn't address anything to me multiple times. I made a comment and you replied. Once. One single time. I also didn't explicitly ignore what you said because, again, your wording IS NOT CLEAR ON WHAT YOU MEAN.
I didn't ignore anything because you never spoke to me before that comment. There also was genuine confusion on my end, which is why I made my comment in the first place. Again. Baseless accusations and pure assumptions.
I don't need to be helped, I don't need to be "educated", I don't need their 'white' savior complex, I am already educated.
Never said you weren't. 😮💨 Also again, someone respectfully correcting what they genuinely believed was misinformation isn't having a white savior complex.
It's anti-indigenous because of this savior complex they have esp in regards to religion. You didn't see the other comment in which they tried to discredit me but saying there's little to no endos & co who claim to have a CDD.
Again, don't have a savior complex. And I never discredited anything. You said, and I quote, "I am differentiating between endo"genic", willo"genic", and tulpa"genic" individuals who make claims to have a disorder."
I replied with my own comment asking which endogenic, willogenic, and tulpagenic systems were identifying as having DID/OSDD/UDD/Other CDDs because, excluding mixed origin systems, no non-disordered system is going to claim to have a disorder they don't have and I made it known that the community is actually very adamant that claiming to be an endogenic system doesn't mean you're claiming to have DID or that no willogenic system is claiming to have OSDD/be an OSDD system (again, excluding mixed origin systems). That's not discrediting. I was asking for evidence. Asking for evidence or even for personal experience isn't discrediting or having a white savior complex. You getting angry, blowing up, and completely avoiding the topic altogether actually makes YOU look suspicious.
White folk made it a strong point to put indigenous people in school to "educate" the savage Indian with smiles on their face thinking they were doing a righteous deed.
Separating this without comment because despite our disagreement, this is a very true fact and an important part of history we should remember. 💗
I don't need their descendants coming into this space where I repeatedly asked them to leave. It's anti-indigenous that they insisted they have a space here to spread misinformation.
My bad, I'll just tell my white ancestors that they shouldn't rape and colonize my indigenous ancestors. /sarcasm I also wasn't spreading misinformation.
They don't get to tell me how to feel and think about indigenous poc closed practices which is what the conversation was originally about.
Aaaaand I never told you how to feel. You're allowed to feel weird about non-Buddhists taking a semi-closed Buddhist practice that requires study, understanding, and a guru to even teach you this secret knowledge and stripping it of it's cultural and historical contexts to turn it into something else.
And what's anti-indigenous is the fact that I have to sit here and explain all this bc people want to give them the benefit of the doubt which is so incredibly common for other indigenous issues. Indigenous people always have to justify themselves but the latter does not- however they choose to identify. [Plain Text: however they choose to identify.]
It's actually a reasonable thing to give individuals the benefit of the doubt. Unless you have a history or track record of an individuals previous racism in which you can check and go "yeah no this person was probably being intentionally racist" then you can't automatically assume that I was intentionally being racist.
And even then, nothing about my comment was passive aggressive, white saviory, racist, or even generally disrespectful.
Also, the "however they choose to identify" in italics reads as extremely condescending and like you don't believe that I'm actually indigenous. But perhaps I'm reading into it too much. 🤷♀️
And to add- even after this they are still continuing to engage. Even after I blocked them they're still sending asks.
And now we're just straight up LYING, holy cow! 😂 So in my defense, when you reblogged with a screenshot of my comment and your reply, I actually went to reblog with my own reply but my son woke up in the middle of my reply and I had to put my phone down in order to put him back down. So I interacted on that end because I genuinely didn't realize that I was blocked. But I don't think you'd get a notification for that.
I also didn't send ANY asks from the time you posted your reblog to the time you made your second post. And I only sent ONE ask after I found your second post full of even more baseless accusations and assumptions and I signed off on it. And honestly? I shouldn't have! And I take responsibility for that!
I unfortunately have a fatal flaw that if I feel like somebody is accusing me of something that isn't true, I feel this strong urge to do everything I can to explain myself that you don't think I'm a bad person. This unfortunately stems from my mother accusing me of things that I didn't do or misinterpreting things that I had done as bad and I started to defend myself which would make her call me manipulative and a liar, which would spur me to try and explain myself/defend myself even more until I was in tears.
That isn't an excuse though, I should have screenshot the second post and left it alone but yes, I DID send ONE ask. But not multiple. Do not lie.
*sigh* I don't think I have much more to say. Moral of the story, don't fucking go around making accusations and lies about me simply because I (politely) attempted to correct what I thought was misinformation due to unclear wording.
Tagging for insight, feel free to call me out or point out things I may have missed! Ask to untag: @this-is-neuropsych-ableism @this-is-monoracism @this-is-anti-indigenous @this-is-pluralphobia @this-is-metapluralmisia
discoholicmusic
jbbartram-illu
theartofmadeline
kianamaiart
blakekathryn
