Same As An Endo (without A Cdd) Couldnt Tell You About A CDD Experience - Tumblr Posts

Understanding the difference between systemic oppression and social stigma: Why endogenic systems aren't oppressed for being plural, and why that doesn't mean that their struggles are unimportant

Time for the newest syscourse topic, one that I’ve actually been thinking about quite a bit lately. I had a conversation with my very pro-endo friend about it a while back, and it caused me to realize that the entire issue is really that we don’t understand the distinction between oppression and social stigma, and why exactly endogenic plurals are stigmatized, but not oppressed. And why this doesn’t mean that struggles that they do face are “invalid” (boy, do I hate that whole concept. I hate the whole valid thing. It doesn’t do anything any justice.) 

To start off with, it's important to clarify each of these terms. Oppression refers to the systematic mistreatment, subjugation, and denial of rights by those in power against a specific group. On the other hand, social stigma involves societal disapproval or mistreatment directed at individuals who possess certain characteristics or identities. While the two concepts may intersect, they are not synonymous. 

Endogenic plurals, despite facing challenges in the form of social stigma, do not experience systemic oppression in the same way as historically marginalized groups. The comparison I drew in my conversation with the previously mentioned friend was to communities like furries and therians, who similarly encounter varying degrees of societal rejection. While they may be subjected to ridicule, bullying, or social ostracization, these experiences are not the same as being actively oppressed by institutions and systemic structures.

I would also like to highlight that the challenges endogenic plurals face are largely only present within the Western context. Outside of that, they not only ‘would be’ but are very easily accepted, sometimes for religious/spiritual reasons. I had someone from the Middle East (not going to specify which country because I don’t know if anyone knows who this is and would prefer to not dox them lol) describe to me that they once thought that they were endogenic – they were open to their family and community about this, and were very widely accepted for it. It was seen as creative, and a beautiful thing! But once they discovered that they had formed their system through trauma, and that they had DID, it became different. Suddenly it was something to be shunned – this is largely because it isn’t the system that’s the issue. It isn’t the concept of plurality that is an issue, by and large, it’s the trauma. It’s the fact that this is a disabling condition. It’s the fact that when you have DID, you have a rare mental illness. It’s the fact that you are experiencing trauma responses that are unpalatable to those who don’t understand them. 

That’s far from the only story I’ve heard of that type, and I’ve particularly seen a LOT of Asian systems speaking about acceptance of endogenic plurality vs. rejection of DID in their cultures. This is a very West-centric argument, and also goes to show how narrow of a perspective many of the current larger syscoursers pushing endo oppression as a concept have on the subject of oppression. 

You may say, “But, there’s a potential for systemic oppression and violence against endogenic plurals! We just don’t have enough data, because they’re not “out” yet.” My friend said this! I appreciated the point, because it allowed me to highlight my above argument about endogenic plurality outside of the west and also the fact that historical patterns of systemic oppression and the reasoning for such and the examination of parallels with other marginalized groups and their histories with oppression reveal that such concerns are really just… Not warranted. Genuinely, the struggles that endogenic plurals face are much closer to that of the furry community, or that of the therian community. These groups also have to deal with with societal misunderstandings and negative perceptions. Just as with endogenic plurals, the issues they face stem from a lack of understanding rather than a deliberate effort to oppress. If either of those groups were to be open about their identities, they’d face similar struggles – and they do. It’s not exactly the wisest thing to talk to your boss about being a furry or a therian, and it’s liable to get you some hate/bullying/mistreatment directed towards you at some point. It’s stigma.

While endogenic plurals may experience interpersonal mistreatment and possibly even limited job opportunities due to being open about their identities, these challenges are primarily driven by social stigma and negative perceptions. It's worth noting that any systemic violence or marginalization they encounter often stems from an intersection with already marginalized groups, such as the queer or neurodiverse communities. Sure, many endogenic plurals are queer or otherwise neurodiverse, but that intersection and further the violence directed towards it can’t exist without the existence of those other identities. A cishet, white, NT and otherwise non-marginalized endogenic plural isn’t oppressed. A trans, ND, POC who is an endogenic plural is, but not because of their plurality, though it does create a different (and notable) intersection with a few of these aspects. 

It's really important to recognize that conflating social stigma with systemic oppression oversimplifies the experiences of truly systemically oppressed groups, while at the same time not even doing any justice to the issues endogenic plurals themselves DO face. If we can just… Understand that these are two very separate issues, the distinct challenges that endogenic plurals DO face can be more accurately and effectively addressed and advocated for. If we can just ACKNOWLEDGE this, that’s already contributing to a broader, more informed discourse that fosters so much more inclusivity and empathy than what we’ve got right now.