yeah, i don't see why i shouldn't.

trying to define who or what counts as "real" or "fake" plurality doesn't solve anything. if only traumagenic systems count as "real," "valid," or "deserving of support," then people who don't want to be seen as fakers will start saying they're traumagenic. that's for any imposed criteria, really.

but if people make enough criteria that others must meet to be seen as "real," then the only ones who end up passing are incredibly skilled liars... making nobody "real."

it feels like an unwinnable battle, and a pointless one at that. i'd rather accept endogenic systems as "real" by default, instead of having my choice depend on if they meet whatever criteria for what "real" plurality is that week.

this goes for pretty much anyone / anything, by the way. i don't like having people (or a label) tell me who / what i should or shouldn't accept / support. i'll decide for myself... and i hope more people realize they can do the same, too.