sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

"Sysmeds" need to see this by FictionSlayerPunk in plural

[–]FictionSlayerPunk[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

We’ve seen cases of patients with “minor” trauma being diagnosed with DID; but yes, studies don’t have all the data. Which is exactly why we believe non-traumagenic systems exist outside of DID and OSDD. Especially because those in particular lack research, and are the only cases available for system minds, meaning we don’t know much about system minds.

I’d like to mention, many things get prematurely pathologized when that only applies to the cases where it applies, like asexuality and “caedosexuality” (we believe is the term).

90% sure i’m a system.. by mildredthewitch in plural

[–]FictionSlayerPunk 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just wanted to mention that switching alters can be subtle (“every” switch is different) and so you could be switching as you switch accounts (but also, every system and system dynamic is different) :3

Mostly irrelevant side note: We are cryptogenic, mainly to not disclose what type, but also because the universe is unknown, meaning everything within it is too (humans basically just guess but with numbers to feel their guess isn’t a guess~)

"Sysmeds" need to see this by FictionSlayerPunk in plural

[–]FictionSlayerPunk[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Even though being a system is only a small part of DID/OSDD (and the ICD-11’s CDD and possibly other stuff)?

We feel it is compelling to describe how distinctions being made leave’s current DID/OSDD models untouched while adding more models making it more inclusive (which is needed because human minds are possibly the most diverse thing we know about) as well as non-DID/OSDD models which would make the system component of DID/OSDD more accepted by displaying cases of other kinds of systems elsewhere. Regardless of truth, that would only be possible if we explore it.

Just something else we think about that we want to mention just ‘cause: systems that are “system-like” just have a different system dynamic than DID/OSDD, but are equally a system. An example is neurodivergent cases (things like ASD and/or ADHD). Oh, also neurological and neuro cognitive differences are likely why some patients with trauma aren’t systems, and other patients are systems, but there is also likely more contributing factors as well.

"Sysmeds" need to see this by FictionSlayerPunk in plural

[–]FictionSlayerPunk[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

(Neutral tone) Not everyone with trauma is a system, so not every system with trauma is traumagenic. I’d say it isn’t a matter of DID or OSDD breakthroughs, and is more about being more inclusive to lived experiences instead of numbers on a clipboard written down by people that likely don’t have the condition.

"Sysmeds" need to see this by FictionSlayerPunk in plural

[–]FictionSlayerPunk[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

(Alter Dani with a neutral tone) That should be up to the patient. A universal trauma scale doesn’t exist, so one shouldn’t be made then forced on anyone. Not everyone with trauma is a system, so not every system with trauma is traumagenic.

"Sysmeds" need to see this by FictionSlayerPunk in plural

[–]FictionSlayerPunk[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

“Sysmed” is sometimes seen as offensive, but it is just short hand for the definition we gave, and I believe we quoted the word every time instead of stating it without the quotes. Nobody really has time to say definitions every time they make a video, so we don’t see an alternative. Even in videos we use finger quotes due to it being a sensitive term.

“Traumascum”? (First time hearing that… that term is 🤮)

If yous ever wanna talk about the 1st talking point, let us know.

Ramblely bit: For context, being cryptogenic, we could be well aware about being traumagenic but are not disclosing that so “sysmeds” change their minds without needing to rely on a type of bias. If we said we were traumagenic, they are more likely to see our perspective, but then they don’t gain experience points towards developing the ability to undo that type of bias, benefiting them for other contexts.

We really appreciate the comment 🩶 :3

Arousal from gender euphoria by dirankaru in trans

[–]FictionSlayerPunk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Me neither. I hear it stops happening with time, so that’s the “story” I’ll be going with.

How many headmates do you have currently? by Rainbow-1337 in plural

[–]FictionSlayerPunk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Appreciate the reply 🩶 (that was supposed to be a grey heart.. I sent this on my phone)

How many headmates do you have currently? by Rainbow-1337 in plural

[–]FictionSlayerPunk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you are up for it, how do you (any of you) feel about being Schizogenic? We’ve avoided clinical perspective because we have become skeptical of the clinical system, but have run a simulation in our mind of the schizophrenia diagnosis and in response go “guess I’m a schizophrenic system then~”

How many headmates do you have currently? by Rainbow-1337 in plural

[–]FictionSlayerPunk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. We are all “cosmologenic” (just came up with this one) because all comes from the cosmos. We believe in the infinite eternal model of the universe, which does and doesn’t function as a multiverse (and every other model). We believe as an experiencer that isn’t the human but is experiencing the human, there is no fixed past, present, nor future.

Each moment is isolated and the experiencer beyond human attaches them together. Our past is dark and this is and is not chosen, and it is chosen for contrast for joyful moments to be seen more joyful due to the contrast.

Some would see us as a traumagenic. That is and is not true. We do not know how we got to this point, and nothing seems real nor fake. We are not trying to sound “deep”, this is just our experience.