( No Title )
Apparently, the newest thing going around is that “fictive” is the same as “fictional introject”, and non-traumagenic systems aren’t allowed to use “fictive”…
@lb_lee @solipsistful @liongoatsnake
Do any of you have any information about this, by any chance? Thank you for any input.
We don’t AT ALL remember this ever being the case; to our knowledge, “fictive” and “fictional introject” have always been different terms (though sometimes with people using “fictiv”e because it’s shorter?) with “fictive” being open use, and “fictional introject” being traumagenic-only.
“fictive” was coined in soulbonding communities lol. it and “headmate” i love seeing “endogenic systems are appropriators” folks use. and they do use ‘em, and sometimes, as you see, claim that nontraumagenic systems shouldn’t use them. :V
it’s just same old same old, “non-traumagenic multiplicity isn’t real therefore them using terms that refer to their fake experiences is Appropriation”. nothing really more than that.
– Ace
Discussion ¬