User:Tiffany/Draft:Sysmed

From Pluralpedia, the collaborative plurality dictionary
sysmed ( n., adv.)
Other formssysmedicalist (n., adv.)
Applies tosystems, headmates

A sysmed, or sysmedicalist, is an individual or system that believes in a medicalist view of plurality which involves rejecting the experiences of others.

These views typically include the rejection of systems that are not diagnosed with DID or OSDD-1, that have an endogenic origin, or otherwise do not fit their world model of how systems work.

Sysmeds are frequently vocally against inclusive spaces for plurality, and disparage DID & OSDD-1 systems for being in such spaces. They may engage in gatekeeping – attempting to exclude others from identifying as plural, or joining into plurality communities.

Sysmeds should not be conflated with those that create communities that focus on DID/OSDD-1 systems, or on traumagenic systems.

History[edit | edit source]

The etymology of the term sysmedicalist is modeled after transmedicalist and transmed. This is because they both have similar ideologies – excluding others based on interpretations of medical definitions such as those in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).

The specific ideas behind sysmedicalism come down in part to the definitions of DID and OSDD-1 in the DSM, or reinterpretations thereof. This is frequently taken as a source of absolute authority, held above both other systems and even above their respective therapists and psychiatrists. This is despite:

  • Frequent changes to the actual criteria and codes in the DSM, and controversial assessments such as having originally categorized homosexuality as a paraphillia[1].
  • The debated status of being based in real theory[2].
  • The paid access, institutional nature of the DSM catalog meaning that few people have actually read the original text, and making it hard to quote and reference.
  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_DSM
  2. Welch, S., Klassen, C., Borisova, O., & Clothier, H. (2013). The DSM-5 controversies: How should psychologists respond? Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 54(3), 166–175. doi:10.1037/a0033841