peternstuff

i do things.

[dogpuppy]

[wired-arteries]

the minecraft movie is better if you pretend its two autistic gay men adopting a weird child instead of whatever it was actually meant to be idk i wasnt paying attention

[meadow-dot-7z]

Magical girl transformation where I look exactly the same by the end except my posture and speech are different and I have to be reminded of several details on the conversation we just had

[botanical-garden-system-deactiv]

I talked in a previous post about how many researchers are genuinely against DID and believe it to be a fake disorder, but I literally cannot understand how real researchers can claim it as fake anymore. Like researchers trying to DISPROVE IT while we have a pretty good amount of proof showing this happens.

Like Im bein deadass, I have quite some articles surrounding proof of existence through biomarker studies:

Dimitrova, L. I., Dean, S. L., Schlumpf, Y. R., Vissia, E. M., Nijenhuis, E. R. S., Chatzi, V., Jäncke, L., Veltman, D. J., Chalavi, S., & Antje, A. T. S. R. (2023). A neurostructural biomarker of dissociative amnesia: A hippocampal study in dissociative identity disorder. Psychological Medicine, 53(3), 805-813. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291721002154

Vissia, E. M., Lawrence, A. J., Chalavi, S., Giesen, M. E., Draijer, N., Nijenhuis, E. R. S., André, A., Veltman, D. J., & Antje, A. T. S. R. (2022). Dissociative identity state-dependent working memory in dissociative identity disorder: A controlled functional magnetic resonance imaging study. BJPsych Open, 8(3) https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2022.22

In addition, I highly recommend looking at Eline M. Vissia’s other work. They have done some really cool work regarding these things!

If yall are interested and cannot access something, please send me an ask. I can probably get it for you.

[theadhdace]

Systems, if an actual demon or ghost or something possessed you, how long do you think it'd take for you to realize something was up?

instantaneously

a few minutes

an hour or two

like, a day

a week

a month

6 months at least

a year or possibly even years

honestly it could take us decades

we'd literally never figure it out

idk honestly, it depends

singlet button for singlets who are very singlety :3

Voting ended onMar 26, 2025

[wired-arteries]

ive now got loads of alters with religious delusions or introjection so it'd just go like: "Hello Mortal I am Evil Demon from HELL!!!!" "yeah ok buddy go sit with the rest of em'" id say give it about a month till I realise the latin chanting in my head and terrible curses to those around me arent par for the course.

[mori-is-missing]

anti endos are perplexing

they’re trying so so hard to make cdd spaces anti endo that they’re making it cdd + a very specific view on a very specific topic and nobody who thinks otherwise.

as a pro-endo cdd system i just can’t be in cdd spaces because of how vicious they are. like guys. there are more important things to focus on.

like maybe let’s stop the general public from thinking we’re insane/dangerous/abusive/murderers before we start infighting?

[markupfox]

I hate adding introject profiles to simplyplural cus it's always like

"Is that the dude from..?

"Yeah. from that media I watched for like 15 hours straight."

"Hes actually up here??? Lord.."

"I know. im embarrassed too bro."

"It's not even the one you wanted..."

"I didnt want any of them dawg."

"Uh huh."

"Thats not even how it works tho."

"sure."

And when it's an introject from media you're friends are into it's like. "No bro, I didn't plan this bro. I swear bro. On my soul I promise this is not just so you like me bro." And it's true! It's coincidence! But like, did it have to be that thing from the thing that person likes?? Now they think I'm trying to use my mental shit to get closer with them..

[unfamiliar-ghostly-system]

Created systems are never traumatized. Because only people who have zero issues in life would have the (lack of) self awareness to claim they chose to have someone else’s issues.

This is a perfect example of what I meant by a lot of created system hate is detached from the reality of created systems.

First of all, anon has either never read a variety of experiences and stories from created systems and are making up their own version, or they are choosing to fake claim peoples trauma because they don't like them.

Both of which are ignoring the lived reality of many created systems (who also happen to be traumatised).

And second, created systems don't see themselves as "creating other people's issues" or even as creating an issue at all. This is just another outside perspective on created plurality.

Using this argument also raising the question, does creating a system protect people from becoming traumatised in the future? And is it also the most effective form of trauma recovery?

I don't know, maybe we should just stop weaponizing trauma in discourse and individualise our idea of people who have trauma, because it's just a constant cycle of "these people can't have trauma because I think they suck, and clearly no person with trauma would suck".

Listen to me y'all, it's starting to sound like those stupid fucking "trauma made me stronger" quote posters they put in psych wards or "trauma makes you good" shit.

NO! Fuck you, people with trauma are still people too.

So, thanks anon, for giving me an example of how created system hate doesn't even make a lick of sense.

[wired-arteries]

Saying that created systems create their alters because they dont have anything bad going on in their lives is both stupid and certainly not true. I'd imagine youd be more likely to turn to escapism if you were going through stress or trauma than in regular scenarios. And a lot of tulpamancers i've seen have other disorders which they oftentimes create their tulpas to deal with.

id also say traumagenic and created arent actually that mutually exclusive, you can try to intentionally create alters to deal with trauma. maybe it wouldnt be the "traditional" kind of traumagenic but still resultant from trauma.

[losers8]

okay gen question and don’t you dare start fucking syscourse on my blog

but what does the endo in endogenic even stand for?

[wired-arteries]

idk if u meant to restrict replies but basically endo is a prefix meaning within/inner/containing, and -genic means producing/produced from. so endogenic just means like created from within or created from inside i guess. which id say isnt terribly applicable to all endos but thats the term that is used.

[reivvne]

I'm SO JELOUS of everyone who's able to tell who's fronting or can communicate with headmates (I'm literally only able to talk to our comforter, when I was feeling very unwell there was an alter who would switch when I started crying and shouting in my headspace and I was able to communicate with him too). If we communicate its only through simply plural but its so fucking hard bcs I DONT KNOW WHOS FRONTING we're in such blurr, the system is so well masked I'm only aware of dissociation and SOME memory loss but I have absolutely no idea hiw to communicate with the system 😞 any tips would be very appreciated

[wired-arteries]

it might be easier to start out with physical communication methods. like leaving notes around, or starting a journal/diary that you allow all alters to write in if they want. Key word if they want, dont force communication with others both internally and externally because they might not be uncomfortable and ive found that forcing shit just ends up in shit happening you arent ready for, trust that alters will reveal themselves more when they are comfortable. Just make it known to them that you want to communicate with them. Internally ive found mediation to be helpful, during it imagine some kind of internal place if you dont have one already, try to make it comforting and nice somewhere theyll want to be and is safe. And attempt to reach out to whoever, again dont force it, sometimes nobody will show up and thats ok these things take time. Its best to do these things with a therapist or at least have someone close on dial that you can easily contact if shit goes wrong, especially for reaching out internally, theres a possibility of contacting alters who hold real severe shit you might not be ready for necessarily.

[wired-arteries]

does anyone know what is up with these accounts recently? clearly the same person... i mean they start with basically the same words.

feels like this is bait or satire but they are geniunely arguing with people so idk...? I cant imagine why someone would do this unless they are tryna make maybe anti-endos look bad because these guys are actin real weird.

[sandstorms-syscourse-archive]

What the actual fuck is happening.

[wired-arteries]

everyday on this tag its something stupider

[lgbtranswoman]

My imposter syndrome for diagnosed DID went away when my answer for "Oh God what if I'm faking what if I'm just so mentally ill and making it all up?" Became "If I think I'm plural I can just... Be plural. No prerequisites, no trauma needed. I can just be comfortable with what's going on in my head."

Thank you endo systems ❤️

[sysmed-supreme]

Trauma makes systems. Full stop. This blog is for clinically recognized dissociative disorders, not roleplay, not spirituality, not "self-discovery." If you don’t have trauma, you don’t have DID or OSDD. This is not a safe space. It’s a reality check.

[syscourse-shmiscourse]

"Reality check" endogenics aren't claiming to have dissociative disorders. Perhaps research a group before you decide to become some "authority" on them. If you don't even know what the basis of their plurality is and the differences between them and dissociative disorders, then you don't have the information to act like any kind of authority at all in this topic.

[sysmed-supreme]

If endogenics are not claiming to have dissociative disorders, then why are they trying to redefine language that originates from dissociative disorders? "System" was coined to describe the experience of identity alteration in trauma-based dissociation. You can call yourselves whatever you want, but when you step into a space discussing clinical conditions and expect to be included, that is when the issue arises.

I know exactly what the basis of endogenic plurality is: an attempt to blur the line between clinical dissociation and other forms of identity exploration. If you acknowledge that it is not a dissociative disorder, then stop using terminology rooted in dissociation. If you want a label, make your own—do not take one from a disorder you do not have.

[wired-arteries]

I mean the sources ive read actually suggest some types of endogenic plurality are still dissociation, its just not to a pathological level.

As colin ross said, the issue in DID is not just the presence of alters, and he suggests that there is a non-pathological but still abnormal plurality that some people can have. It just wouldnt be DID or any disorder. (1)(2)

Also a lot of cultural practices that include types of endogenic plurality have been looked at under the guise of dissociation. I feel like people forget dissociation can be a completely normal experience. (3)

Them using language for dissociative people isn't that weird in this case because its likely what they are also going through. Additionally, "system" is a very common term in psychology. it's even used in IFS. I've also seen psychologists call endogenic plurals systems. (4) It's also just been in use by systems of all types for like 30 years and for awhile traumagenics actually drifted away from it.

1. https://z-library.sk/book/22079911/22b92e/the-plural-self.html

2. https://www.tumblr.com/sysmedsaresexist/750286600085372928/changing-mindsets-from-a-real-anti-endo?source=share

3. https://sci-hub.se/10.1097/NMD.0b013e31816ff3a1

4. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/cpp.2910

[sysmed-supreme]

Dissociation as a general phenomenon is not the same as DID or OSDD, and "non-pathological plurality" is not the same as being a system in the clinical sense. Ross discussing dissociation outside of disorder does not validate endogenic systemhood as a legitimate, comparable experience. And yes, cultural practices may involve dissociation, but they are not interchangeable with a dissociative disorder. The fact that "system" appears in other psychological contexts does not justify its use for self-identified plurality that lacks a dissociative basis.

[wired-arteries]

"Ross discussing dissociation outside of disorder" not just what he was doing, please read the sources i provided, below is one part that is relevant. He was literally discussing non-pathological & non-traumagenic alter states. This guy is an expert on DID and former ISSTD president.

https://z-library.sk/book/22079911/22b92e/the-plural-self.html "The fact that "system" appears in other psychological contexts does not justify its use for self-identified plurality that lacks a dissociative basis." Researchers have used it quite literally in the context of endogenic plurality, which you'd know had you read the sources id provided. This is also just semantics. "System" has been used for 30+ years by endogenic systems AND traumagenic systems, it is unlikely to change.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/cpp.2910

"And yes, cultural practices may involve dissociation, but they are not interchangeable with a dissociative disorder" youd know if you had read the sources id provided that the study i sent you on cultural practices was looking at it under the idea that it was a dissociative phenomenon. Its not a disorder because it can be non-pathological, endogenic plurality usually is non-pathological so of course it is not DID, but many researchers believe the alter aspect could be similar, including literally the researchers who created the main traumagenic model.

If you cant read some of these sources because z-library or sci-hub arent loading, I recommend you use a vpn or tor, its blocked in some areas.

[sophieinwonderland]

Endogenic plurality is a real phenomenon. It has been studied by multiple psychologists, psychiatrists and anthropologists. Not all of them have used those words, but it has been repeatedly acknowledged by professionals that people can have multiple distinct identity states, or have multiple self-conscious dissociative parts, or whatever words they like to use, without trauma or a disorder.

There is an as of yet unpublished FMRI study into tulpa systems where it has been shown that different parts of the brain activate when a tulpa is possessing a hand as opposed to when the host is simply imagining that someone else is moving them.

But this really shouldn't need to be published for endogenic systems to be believed about our experiences.

Nobody demands brain scans of people with aphantasia to recognize that it is a real psychological phenomenon.

When endogenic systems describe our experiences, it should be trusted that those experiences are real. That we aren't faking or lying. And that what we have experienced is not simply a belief.

[sophieinwonderland]

@razzleberryjam @syscourse-blog-01

Here is Transgender Mental Health by Eric Yarbrough, which was peer reviewed and published by the American Psychiatric Association, where it's explicitly stated that you can be plural without trauma or a disorder:

[razzleberryjam]

Whoever wrote this severely misunderstood why trauma is not included in the dsm, that being that the nature of the disorder causes one to forget their own trauma, so it's common for people who have DID to not remember their trauma until after years of therapy, that's why being able to remember and report trauma isn't a part of the diagnostic criteria, becuase many systems - Despite having experienced trauma *because it's necessary for plurality to exist as proven by mri* - will not be able to self report their trauma, due to the complex network of alters employed by the disorder to hide the self from said trauma.

[sophieinwonderland]

Really? If only Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association Dr. Eric Yarbrough or any of the American Psychiatric Association's peer reviewers or editorial reviewers who reviewed this book had as much of an understanding of the American Psychiatric Association's DSM-5 as you do. 🤷‍♀️

By the way, the DSM-5 also states that dissociative identity disorder may or may not be preceded by traumatic experiences, and may or may not have co-occurring PTSD symptoms.

This is in the differential diagnosis section for PTSD.

This is beside the point though because we're talking about plurality, not specifically DID.

Okay, so the goalposts have now moved from "you would post a scientific source if you could" to "you would post a scientific source specifically about DID to prove the existence of non-DID plurality."

This is a pretty silly and dishonest place to put the goalposts since a paper shouldn't need to be about DID to validate something that's not DID. But okay...

So what about a paper about DID and dissociation stating that it may be possible for self-conscious "dissociative parts of the personality" to form without a trauma disorder?

Would you count that?

To be fair, that's pretty neutral. "Maybe these are self-conscious dissociative parts but we need to do more research to make sure."

But what if the World Health Organization's ICD-11's entry on DID also echoed the above paper, using the phrasing that you can experience the presence of multiple "distinct personality states" without a disorder?

A term it uses synonymously with "dissociative identities."

Between these, terms like "dissociative identities," "dissociative parts of the personality" and "distinct personality states" all seem to be used more or less synonymously. And the boundaries with normality make it clear these can be experienced without a dissociative disorder.

[razzleberryjam]

Plurality only exists in DID, you're just fucking retarded.

Also none of what you've linked is a source to scientific study - it's screenshots from diagnostic manuals that you don't understand how to fucking read you moron.

Jesus christ, you're just so fucking retarded.

[sophieinwonderland]

Oh, okay!

So to recap, according to you, the first source from a book reviewed and published by the American Psychiatric Association is not a valid source because the paper was not about dissociative identity disorder specifically. (Even though plurality is a wide spectrum that goes beyond just DID)

Sources 2 and 4 are not valid sources to you because they are just "diagnostic manuals" and you do not consider diagnostic manuals to be valid sources, I guess?

You seem to have skipped over the third source, which mentions the possibility of self-conscious dissociative parts of the personality being present in spiritual mediumship and hypnosis. This is a paper which is about dissociative identity disorder specifically, and is written by the creators of the structural dissociation model.. Was there going to be a rebuttal to that??? Or are you just going to pretend like you didn't see it?

As for your claim that plurality is only DID, I will point to this study discussing a multiplicity continuum of experiences that would include those who do not meet the criteria for a disorder.

(And also, the fact that "plurality" specifically is a term coined by non-disordered plurals as a rejection of the medical model.)

[wwtbgd]

Lady you sound really stupid, you have to be talking about dissociation. You cannot form a system without trauma. Systems REALLY systems have been in human trafficking, sexually abused, physically abused, mentally abused, and a weird ass mother fucker like you comes on here acting as if you’re one of us? Get a fucking life.

[sophieinwonderland]

Respectfully, we're talking about research. We're talking about the professional opinions of experts. And we're talking about what has been published and reviewed, and deemed credible.

You are coming in here with insults and emotional appeals.

Dr. Eric Yarbough, a Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association, says that you can be plural without trauma or a disorder. This was in a book reviewed and published by the American Psychiatric Association. The same organization that publishes the DSM.

The creators of the structural dissociation model have stated that it may be possible to have self-conscious dissociative parts of the personality without trauma or a disorder from hypnosis and mediumship.

If you disagree with these on scientific grounds, then so be it. Present your case with academic sources.

But if all you're going to say is some variation of "systems are traumatized and think of all the abused people you're hurting by claiming to be systems without trauma," I don't think that has any place in this discussion.

If you want to claim that you need trauma to be plural, the burden of proof is firmly on you.

[wwtbgd]

[sophieinwonderland]

There are two big problems with this. First, unlike the sources I provided, this website is just a website. It hasn't undergone any peer review. No one has gone over any of its claims.

But hey, it at least has a named author who is an actual therapist, so that's slightly more credibility than most anti-endo sources.

We'll get back to her in a moment. But first, let me point out the second big problem...

It's irrelevant!

The topic is primarily about plurality outside of dissociative disorders. Non-pathological plurality.

The type of plurality referenced in Transgender Mental Health, the ICD-11's Boundaries with Normality and the article by the creators of the theory of structural dissociation, is not DID or OSDD, nor is it a disorder.

Simply pointing to an article saying DID and OSDD are caused by trauma doesn't help your case in the slightest.

Another thing is, just in case you are planning on shifting this to a language debate and gatekeeping the word "system," arguing that system can only be used by people with DID/OSDD, something tells me that Cristina Mardirossian, internal family systems specialist, might not agree with that particular language gatekeeping. 🤷‍♀️

[wired-arteries]

this has gotta be one of the most ridiculous threads ive ever seen

how can you guys claim to be the scientifically and morally correct side while calling people slurs, and ignoring actual evidence while sending sub-par sources. seriously guys you can do better...

[i-the-vezzel]

A lot of the time I'll see something in Syscourse that genuinely intrigues me. Like, for example, a post prompted me to ask the question, "Is it possible to have a stance against hate while also being syscourse aligned", but also there's not many people in this tag I'm interested in debating.

Born to debate, forced to lurk...*sigh"

[wired-arteries]

I mean I think so yeah. I dont think syscourse has to ever be about hate but people do like making it that way. Debate online in general has become something nasty and violent, when really it should be about both sides coming closer to the truth. there shouldnt be winners or losers necessarily everyone should benefit from a good debate bc knowledge yay. I think syscourse can be a good thing, ive seen and had a lot of productive conversations with people that led to them becoming more open minded, in the end thats all I want. i think you can engage with syscourse without being for hate or insults. srry if u didnt want an actual reply... i found this interesting.

[okiimii]

WOAH!!! anyway, changing minds of an anti-endo is a lot easier than people think! with kindness, polite conversations, sources, and experiences, people are able to have an open mind!!!

patience and kindness, is how we change people's minds.