bitches on one website will have 4718 bloody fights like “is transblanker a slur or a valid intersectional positionality” then every other website will be like “tf is a transblanker”

@FagMode59er @woof sysmeds suck yea

im trans and undr blanket

@FagMode59er @patchuun that’s a deranged perspective she really need to be gently talked out of asap tbh

@FagMode59er @woof I'd say it's more analogous to being an anti-self-DX hardliner in the autism example, or the more classical definition of transmed (the "you have to meet all of these criteria and have exactly these kinds of dysphoria and have known when you were an infant and also you have to be exactly this type of woman" kind) before years of discourse muddied it up.

Most intracommunity plural discourse (colloq. "syscourse") boils down to a) fakeclaiming, i.e. accusing/being accused of faking it, and b) whether endogenic systems (that is, systems whose plurality didn't come from (known/identifiable) trauma) are legitimate, basically the biggest subset of fakeclaiming.

My thoughts on the matter are:
1) many systems who believe themselves to be endogenic (or worse, think they can't possibly be plural despite very obviously being so, because they "don't have the trauma profile for it" -- a very very common brainworm) are in fact traumagenic and simply invalidate their own trauma, similarly to how many trans people who think they don't have dysphoria totally do and just rationalize it away as not counting
2) plurality as a whole is a broader umbrella than the existing medical diagnoses can accommodate and, as most things, exists along a spectrum rather than a discrete essentialized enumeration (having a "worksona", "normiesona", compartmentalizing parts of oneself in general, is arguably a form of plurality, or at least somewhere on the spectrum)
3) faking being plural, especially in the way people seem to think people do, would be a really huge pain in the ass. like, that's a haaard bit to commit to, and for what benefit, at what cost? see also: the "what about men pretending to be trans to get into the women's room" argument

@patchuun @FagMode59er damn life sure is complicated when you don’t just roll with whatevs people tell u about themselves

@woof @FagMode59er yea p much lole

@patchuun @FagMode59er reminded of this https://fedi.aria.dog/notice/At5tpswNcnIwvXHqDY

@FagMode59er @woof I question whether it was really entirely for attention or if there was maybe something else going on that made you feel the need to do specifically that. That aside, malnutrition certainly checks out and you should stop subjecting yourself to that

@woof @FagMode59er @patchuun What I tend to think about plurality. Do I understand it? No. I'm I going to be incredulous when someone claims to be multiple people, and come up with a million reasons that can't be the case? Also no.

@NotAFemboy @FagMode59er @patchuun the way i see it is like, what if someone might be “just pretending”, that’s the worst case scenario? ok whatever i already pretend to be some dog plushie online myself, i can pretend whatever chuuni shit just fine. the chances i’m reinforcing something harmful seem way lower than the chances i’m giving them a chance to talk freely and figure stuff out

@patchuun @FagMode59er @NotAFemboy @woof

If someone believes systems are even real at all (and in some cases, even if they don’t) then enough known cases where even people who admit to initially pretending end up no longer actually pretending.

(We don’t know any personally but it’s reasonably well-understood as a “can happen”)

@FagMode59er @woof @patchuun

Non-disordered system here: Medicalism within plurality is linked to DID/OSDD labels, and to general perceptions of “disorderedness” - i.e. that plurality is a medical condition, and ultimately, a disorder - something that is a problem, something to be treated. Historically, that often meant integration into a single being, whether that was what was desired or not.

To clarify one thing: DID/OSDD systems are not inherently negatively seen, and systems who do see their plurality in a more medical perspective are still valid and have a place under the broader plural/multiple umbrella.

Sysmedicalism specifically as a term is generally a reference to those who have an absolutist view - they see medicalised plurality as the only type that is valid/real, extending to criticising and invalidating systems who do not fall under that model (e.g. small systems, systems without any/much amnesia, non-disordered systems, systems who pursue functional multiplicity rather than integration, systems with fictives/factives, endogenic and median systems, etc.

The two can and should be separated - systems who merely find a medically-based model helpful for themselves but don’t force it on others are not sysmeds, and the broader plurality/multiplicity is overall accepting of all origins, states, and intended goals. Consider the difference between the binary trans woman who accepts what her doctor tells her her levels should be, and the DIY biohacker transfemme. Both are valid if it’s how they want to be, and should respect others who prefer a different form.

Happy to discuss anything further.

@NotAFemboy @FagMode59er @patchuun @woof

Also all that discourse about pretending with any lean towards questioning validity at all ultimately drives people away who may have otherwise been part of the community, so with that in mind: All origins are valid, and questioning “am I faking or not” is just impostor syndrome in that people who are intentionally faking know that’s what they are doing.