The hosts issue a major boob-related correction, talk about TikTok influencers who (appear to) have dissociative identity disorder, and discuss the recent meltdown of a site that (claims that it) is "science-based." Plus: Some other, often-cringeworthy recent skepticism/atheism history, including Elevatorgate (tm).
People keep memory-holing that DID—particularly the dissociative amnesia aspect—was/is a major part of the repression narrative and even a part of the Michelle Remembers story. The Tiktok thing is partially an extension of the multiple personality subculture that always kinda pissed off the satanic panic "experts" who themselves went on a diagnostic frenzy. There's also the absurdity that the review boards to keep it in the DSM can have the same ritual abuse promoters given deciding votes—often because they point to an ass-covering story of theirs and seem to successfully gamble on people not watching the footage or read the documents of them blatantly endorsing the existence of massive networks of satanic cults.
And some multiples do take on marginalized identities or non-human identities, though many social justice oriented communities tend to shout down appropriative ones that they feel are making light of social struggles. Depends on the community really.
Including epigenetics pseudoscience to explain intergenerational mind control cults.
It also sorta links with the Rebecca story because I originally fell into the Atheism+ crowd, in part thanks to her, but recently she's been pushing the narrative of that weird group who are still definitely altering memories of trauma: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6826861/
-
As a trans person I'm definitely uncomfortable with some overlap with these cultures and it's making me amenable to some people maybe finding a trans identity more due to social input than something they'd have arrived at if exploring the subject on their own; even if it's still in an uncomfortable area where certain political intuitions about having to hold the ideological line (e.g. the Cass Review being used to shut down puberty blockers) are validated enough that I doubt people are going to be open to exploring any weaknesses in the research.
I've definitely seen people—especially in arguments against perceived political threats—erase some of the known caveats that I can recall, like puberty blockers past 3(?) years opening the potential for more bone growth issues. There are also some ambiguous areas in that we can reasonably expect changed hormones to change brain development, but actually answering "if it's bad" can be a complicated question in that e.g. increased estrogen (even in cis men) tends to increase someone's response to some negative stimulus and that in itself can be a double-edged sword. Turning the nuance necessary for useful scientific research into policy is difficult and prone to misrepresentation.
Similarly, statements about general mental health improvements can be very hard to prove with so many variables involved. Most of us are pretty happy with the lives we've made regardless of whether an entirely satisfactory "true trans" type can be identified. Given the complexity of biology and brains/minds, we should expect some frustrated legibility.
Even the DID Tiktok/Plural community doesn't have all of the same self-destructive qualities that "proper DID diagnosis" often entails; tho some of that is also down to which parts of the mythos and their implementation have been picked up. I believe there's still some issues of compromised reality detection and depersonalization/derealization which might carry over regardless of whether one accepts the 'Complex Trauma' thesis.
I thought I was the only DID skeptic! This is why I sub, ya'll make me realize maybe I'm not an evil bigot fascist who deserves to die for having some good faith questions about things. Keep it up
People keep memory-holing that DID—particularly the dissociative amnesia aspect—was/is a major part of the repression narrative and even a part of the Michelle Remembers story. The Tiktok thing is partially an extension of the multiple personality subculture that always kinda pissed off the satanic panic "experts" who themselves went on a diagnostic frenzy. There's also the absurdity that the review boards to keep it in the DSM can have the same ritual abuse promoters given deciding votes—often because they point to an ass-covering story of theirs and seem to successfully gamble on people not watching the footage or read the documents of them blatantly endorsing the existence of massive networks of satanic cults.
And some multiples do take on marginalized identities or non-human identities, though many social justice oriented communities tend to shout down appropriative ones that they feel are making light of social struggles. Depends on the community really.
Also y'all should catch up on the trauma-based mind control aspects that are still an ongoing trainwreck: https://www.psychotherapeutenjournal.de/2025/2/ptj202502.003
Including epigenetics pseudoscience to explain intergenerational mind control cults.
It also sorta links with the Rebecca story because I originally fell into the Atheism+ crowd, in part thanks to her, but recently she's been pushing the narrative of that weird group who are still definitely altering memories of trauma: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6826861/
-
As a trans person I'm definitely uncomfortable with some overlap with these cultures and it's making me amenable to some people maybe finding a trans identity more due to social input than something they'd have arrived at if exploring the subject on their own; even if it's still in an uncomfortable area where certain political intuitions about having to hold the ideological line (e.g. the Cass Review being used to shut down puberty blockers) are validated enough that I doubt people are going to be open to exploring any weaknesses in the research.
I've definitely seen people—especially in arguments against perceived political threats—erase some of the known caveats that I can recall, like puberty blockers past 3(?) years opening the potential for more bone growth issues. There are also some ambiguous areas in that we can reasonably expect changed hormones to change brain development, but actually answering "if it's bad" can be a complicated question in that e.g. increased estrogen (even in cis men) tends to increase someone's response to some negative stimulus and that in itself can be a double-edged sword. Turning the nuance necessary for useful scientific research into policy is difficult and prone to misrepresentation.
Similarly, statements about general mental health improvements can be very hard to prove with so many variables involved. Most of us are pretty happy with the lives we've made regardless of whether an entirely satisfactory "true trans" type can be identified. Given the complexity of biology and brains/minds, we should expect some frustrated legibility.
Even the DID Tiktok/Plural community doesn't have all of the same self-destructive qualities that "proper DID diagnosis" often entails; tho some of that is also down to which parts of the mythos and their implementation have been picked up. I believe there's still some issues of compromised reality detection and depersonalization/derealization which might carry over regardless of whether one accepts the 'Complex Trauma' thesis.
I thought I was the only DID skeptic! This is why I sub, ya'll make me realize maybe I'm not an evil bigot fascist who deserves to die for having some good faith questions about things. Keep it up