#nested subsystem

[masquerade-flags]

(general/all types) Subsystem flag, simplified

Separated Subsystem, Prism Subsystem, and Nested Subsystem flags

Separated Subsystem - A group of alters that have one or more things that tie them together, despite all having their own internal bodies.

The most common reasons a group of alters would be considered a separated subsystem are usually either, there are strong communication and/or memory barriers between them and the rest of the system. And/or they all split from the same alter and/or formed at the same time for the same reason.

Prism Subsystem - A term we have been using to describe one of our subsystem. More or less meaning a subsystem that often function like a nested subsystem, however alters may sometime leave the shared body, and begin functioning like a separated subsystem. Before returning to their previous state.

Nested Subsystem - A group of alter that share a internal body and usually function similarly to how systems function in the outer world. This is the type most usually think of when the hear the word subsystem.

This description is bad and rambly probably we didn't sleep well

The general flag is supposed to have design aspects reminiscent of the other three and the purple and the kind of orangish color is cuz that's kind of the colors I associate with Alters probably because of the oldest the cdd flag at the teal is for disassociation and dissociative barriers cuz it's the awareness color for disassociation

For the separated subsystem flag the transparency is supposed to represent the both them not sharing an inner World body and distance from other subgroupings within the system

I'm going to be honest the prism subsystem flag is mostly just designed like that cuz it looks kind of like a prism and I thought it would look cool

The nested subsystem is both supposed to resemble nesting dolls as well as having kind of a woven look to represent the physical subsystem of the altars

[defeathered-and-detached]

★ °. Hii, I'm Atticus and this is my personal blog.

★ °. I am agehazey but fall between 19-24.

★ °. Taken 1x by my sweet berry, Silas.

★ °. I hold anger and traumatic memories for my system, so please always iayor.

★ °. I am also the host of a subsystem. They will post here.

★ °. LABEL HOARD - TRANSMASC SUNBOY SUNTHING GRIMEBOY OMNIROMANTIC ENAROSE.

[virtualizationhowto]

Docker Desktop Unexpected WSL Error Fix

Docker Desktop Unexpected WSL Error Fix #docker #containers #DockerDesktopWSLError #WSLCommandErrorFix #DockerDesktopSettingsAdjustment #WindowsSubsystemForLinuxError #DockerDesktopConfigModification #DockerOnWindowsTroubleshooting #DockerDesktop

Docker Desktop is a great tool for developers, DevOps pros, and home lab enthusiasts and allows you to interact with the tool without having to install Docker and use it from the command line in Linux. However, the unexpected WSL error often appears post-Docker Desktop installation when executing a WSL command. Several different issues, including access rights, can trigger this error. This post…

[outnumberedsins]

what is a side system vs sub system vs layer? ive heard multiple definitions of subsystem and im confused (I'm sorry if this sends multiple times my wifi is bad)

No problem! All of these terms are very similar and rely heavily on inner structure. I hope this helps:

'Subsystem' can mean multiple things. The first meaning refers to groups of alters that are somehow linked together and separate from other alters somehow. This could be a group of alters very similar to one another, ones with better communication between one another, or separate in other ways. Subsystems may reside in specific areas of the innerworld or have a separate inner world themselves.

The second definition refers to 'alter-in-alter' subsystems. Think of it like a russian nesting doll - an alter has their own alters. These subsystems may have their own innerworlds and struggle with communicating with those in the main system when fronting.

The third definition is an overarching term for any groupings of alters, including layers and sidesystems. Basically, it's a catch-all term. This definition is the most common within clinical literature, so when reading them, it might be confusing.

Here's an attempt at a visual representation:

The larger subsystem has good communication with the rest of the system and resides in its own area of the innerworld. These parts could have all split to deal with the same specific trauma and are considered a subsystem because they sort of stick together.

The smaller subsystem is a possible example of an alter-in-alter subsystem. The part that's inside the main system may be the "host alter" for that subsystem. Their innerworld is disconnected from the main one and may have communication difficulties.

'Sidesystem' can refer to a programming-specific phenomenon where programmers specifically create programmed parts somewhere completely separate from the main system. I'm using this definition because it's what I was referring to in my previous post, and I don't feel like debating if non-programmed systems can have structures that are similar. In literature, this is seen referred to as 'Left' and 'Right' sides of systems, but they don't necessarily have to be right next to each other. Despite the name, they don't have to be left/right, that's just how some people describe them.

Sidesystems typically have their own innerworld and are used by programmers to keep programmed parts hidden and separate from the main system or those that deal with day to day life. Sidesystems themselves can be layers. There may be one or two higher ups that can travel between sidesystems.

A notable difference between sidesystems and other groupings of alters is the amnesia level. Amnesia barriers between sidesystem alters and non sidesystem alters are huge. While there can be amnesia between other groups, the whole point of sidesystems is to create a completely separate "system," and thus, very heavy amnesia is present.

An attempt at a visual representation:

Sidesystems have no connection with the main system. This can be changed through integration of course, but as a base, they are completely seperate. Ideally, none but a couple alters will know about each other.

'Layers' refers to groups of alters that are separate from the main system, often "stacked" on top of one another. Despite the name, they don't have to be stacked. That's just how some people describe them. Layers are very common within polyfragmented systems, especially programmed systems. Layers often have their own themed innerworld, for example, a city or forest. Alters are typically separated by purpose or other split patterns and may have communication difficulties with other layers. In programming, layers are often seen within sidesystems or are sidesystems themselves. There may be some connection between layers.

An attempt at a visual representation:

In this, there are three layers stacked on each other. The main system has a connection to the layer below them and may be able to communicate more easily. The layer above, however, has no connection, and it may require a higher up part to communicate with them.

As you can see, all of these terms are very similar and can overlap with one another, and all can exist within the same system. At the end of the day, use what you are most comfortable with. Do you just want to call everything a subsystem? That's fine. If you like the specification? That's also fine.

For example, one person says "I kind of visualise it as descending 'containers' of alters. Like it goes, 'sidesystem -> has multiple layers -> has multiple subsystems.' but I know that that isn't everyone's experience."

Another says, "I can't be assed to specify what kind of group it is. I call everything a subsystem. It works for me."

All in all, I hope this helped. Let me know if you have any other questions, and I'll do my best to answer them.

[syscultureis]

C-DID system culture is feeling like a russian nesting doll with the amount of subsystem we have

.

[sleepy-with-the-stars]

Subsystem Based On Our Partner System!

This is a mini subsystem, add-ons may come in the future!

Winter / Riri / Coco / BunBun / Badger / Pinkie / Lala she/they/rose/bow/heart/pink/fleur

Little Ògregulator Pacific Writer -- Bunnic Girl -- 2-14

Youtbers: LDShadowLady, Caryn & Connie

Very sweet and affectionate as well as clingy. Wants to spend all their time with their friends, sibbies, and caregivers. loves to write, colour, and watch disney movies!

Nest / Coax / Den / Clay / Clover / Dennis / Teddy they/he/she/cat/calico/sage/code

Caretaker Soother -- Source seperated Dream fictive -- Unlabeled -- 20s

Youtubers: any minecraft youtubers, esp speedrunners or longplays

Very caring, sarcastic, teasing. Loves to "give people a hard time" but in a very soft loving sort of way. Loves to play minecraft and take care of cats.

Cadence / Casen / Kaiden / Krys / Kody they/any/gold/hazel

Ex-Host Memory Holder -- Genderqueer -- 14-18

Youtubers: Good Mythical Morning, Tommyinnit

Social and easy to get along with but has an odd sadness to them. Very loving nd sweet, would literally give up their right hand if it meant you'd be happy (silly people pleaser / therapist friend)

[moonpool-system]

uh. ok chat what do we do if a facet of a median subsystem may also have their own nested subsystem. life is neverending confusion

[dailyanarchistposts]

"Ecologist" means different things to different people. Strictly speaking, an ecologist is a scientist (usually a biologist) who studies the interrelationships between organisms and their environments. "Deep ecologists," on the other hand, may or may not be scientifically trained, and their topic is not ecology per se but rather developing a harmonious relationship with Nature, and defending the Earth against human-generated threats. Scientific ecologists, to the extent that they want to appear respectable, may be quite anthropocentric in their day to day behavior; deep ecologists, on the other hand, are explicitly biocentric (or at least they try to be). To many people, an "ecologist" is simply an environmentalist, or someone who (unlike Hayduke) picks up bottles and cans along roadsides (I've seen garbage trucks labeled "Ecology Dept."). Some self-labeled environmentalists have added to the confusion by misinterpreting what ecology fundamentally means, and using it as a buzzword for various political goals.

More distributing to me, as a professional ecologist sensitive to people's lack of appreciation of ecology, is that environmentalists are often antagonistic toward science and scientists in general, not just toward manipulative science and technology. Some openly suggest that scientists are the enemy, and have nothing positive to offer the environmental movement. For example, in planning a recent Green Conference in Florida, organizers went out of their way to assure that no scientific ecologists were involved. When I criticized the program of the conference (which featured anti-deep ecologist Ynestra King as a keynote speaker) and asked why no ecologists had been invited to speak, the conference organizer responded that if I meant, by "ecologist," the "progressional, biological scientist type," then he saw no need for that kind of person to speak at a conference for activists.

I admit I feel a little uneasy about being called a scientists...somehow that label conjures up images of little men in white lab coats playing with test tubes and DNA. But a woman or man crouched in the forest, keying-out (and admiring) a fungus or recording details of bird behavior, is every bit as much of a scientist as the experimenter in the laboratory. And the lab scientists, too, may contribute invaluable information toward our understanding of how Nature works. I suggest that science phobia is often misguided, and that ecological science is a constructive approach to knowing Nature. By itself, science may be neither necessary not sufficient to understand Nature, but it is one fo the best tools we have. Deep ecologists and other environmentalists would do well to consider more thoughtfully what the Way of Ecology offers, both as a science and as a worldview.

The science of ecology developed from natural history, the lore of Nature. Since Charles Darwin, this lore has been unfused with concepts of interdependence, interrelationship, and co-adaptation—indeed, it was Darwin's thoroughly scientific theory of evolution that made ecology possible. Evolution made sense out of natural history; facts heretofore disconnected became interacting components of general patterns that should be explained in a rational and convincing way. Furthermore, elements in Darwin's theory were empirically testable—the hall-mark of science.

Unlike religious beliefs, scientific hypotheses are designed to be discarded if they no longer accord with observations. Much hogwash persists in science, but honest scientists do their best to weed it out. The subject of ecology is Nature, which has developed in all its beauty through organic evolution and is a vast web of interactions more complex than humans can ever fully comprehend. As ecologist Frank Egler has pointed out, "Nature is not only more complex than we think, but more complex than we can ever think." It is one intricate system composed of a hierarchy of nested subsystems, with structure flowing upward and constraints flowing downward. Although ecological complexity can never (and some would add, should never) be fully quantified, the study of complex interactions—ecology—produces overwhelming respect for the whole in all who approach it sensitively.

In becoming scientific, natural history does not denigrate into mechanism, but rather matured into holism while retaining the proven techniques of mechanistic science. Establishing facts through observation, experiment, and other reductionist methods, ecology unites them and integrates them into broad, general theories, into wholes greater than the sum of their parts. The wholes (theories) are there all along, of course, guiding the collection of data and providing context for facts. As Stephen Jay Gould has pointed out, facts do not speak for themselves, but are read in the light of theory. Perhaps most important to deep ecologists, ecology and evolutionary biology demonstrate unequivocally that humans are just one ephemeral component of an interrelated and interdependent biota. Ecology and evolutionary biology place us firmly within nature, not on top of it.

Natural science is explicitly non-anthropocentric, even though many of its practitioners are still stuck in anthropocentric modes of thought. Scientists, such as Jared Diamond, who have become familiar with taxonomies developed by indigenous cultures (i.e., the way they separate and classify wild organisms into types) are generally impressed by the similarity of indigenous taxonomy to scientific taxonomy. "Primitive" people recognize mostly the same species in Nature as do modern scientists. The differences usually involve those plants and animals that are not used directly for food, clothing, ornamentation, drugs, and other human purposes. These "useless" species tend to be "lumped"; thus, fewer distinctions and fewer species may be recognized by indigenous cultures than by scientific taxonomists. Indigenous people, like everyone else, have a utilitarian bias that has been naturally selected to foster their survival. For this reason, they have developed a taxonomy that is anthropocentric compared to that of biology, which seeks to classify all organisms with equivalent precision, regardless of their utility to humans. This is not to deny that most research money in biology is channeled into anthropocentric research (e.g., medical science and genetic engineering), and that vertebrates and vascular plants have received more attention than "lower" forms.

Ecologists, as scientists, devote their lives to studying, and hopefully understanding, how Nature works. These people love the Earth. As the British entomologist Miriam Rothschild remarked, "For someone studying natural history, life can never be long enough." Other approaches to this same end (or to no particular "end") are also valid, and are not mutually exclusive. Direct experience, contemplation, meditation, and simply the ecstasy of being immersed in wilderness are equally viable approaches and, in fact, provide many ecologists with the inspiration they need to carry on. These spontaneous or mystical experiences are accessible to scientist and non-scientist alike. Nothing in my professional code of conduct as an ecologist says that I cannot run naked and whooping with joy through the desert, or sit all day and stare at a rock. When I am actively engaged in research, of course, these particular activities may not be appropriate, but only because they may bias my results (for example, by scaring away all the fauna). A whole human being is one who is equally comfortable with rational and intuitive-spontaneous explorations of Nature---one who can deal with "hard facts" at one moment and be a wild animal the next. These two approaches, complementary and intertwined as yin and yang, are both essential to holistic understanding.

Aldo Leopold, my favorite deep ecologist, was able to carry his message so powerfully because he had the sensitivity of a poet and the objectivity of a scientist. He communicated in the hard, factual language of science, sprinkled with brilliant, experiential metaphors in the finest tradition of Nature essays. Virtually every faction within the environmental, ecosophical, and resource management fields claims old Aldo for its own, yet few people seem to comprehend the more radical, biocentric notions he developed gradually through his life, and articulated late in his career. Because he could write so damn well and is appreciated by so many people of such divergent worldviews, Leopold provides deep ecologists with an avenue along which to lead others toward biocentric understanding.

If yin and yang, intuition and rationality, emotion and thought, right brain and left brain are complementary, then so too are deep ecology and scientific ecology. It may be that their relationship is mutualistic: they need each other. Don't judge scientific ecology from your experience that most ecologists (or scientists, generally) are anthropocentric jerks. Most philosophers, accountants, lawyers, farmers, and television repairmen are anthropocentric jerks, too. At least ecology, "the subversive science," has a biocentric, holistic underpinning, which cannot be said for most other disciplines. If most scientific ecologists are not deep ecologists, it is because they have yet to grasp the radical implications of their science. If most deep ecologists are not scientific ecologists, then perhaps it would behoove them to explore natural history, evolution, and ecology. You don't need a college degree to be a good ecologist, though it helps, because it compels exposure to the cumulative knowledge of others through textbooks, journals, and symposia. But the best ecology is learned in the field from observation and reflection on why Nature works the way it does; and from just being there, out of doors and away from the human-dominated world.

It is no accident that many ecologists and field biologists are somewhat crude, wild-eyes, and uncivilized, or to put it simply—"earthy." As John Steinbeck, who was trained in zoology, noted in Log from the Sea of Cortez, "What good men most biologists are, the tenors of the scientific world---temperamental, moody, lecherous, loud-laughing, and healthy...The true biologists deals with life, with teeming, boisterous life, and learns something from it." The message of the ecological worldview, in its fullest expression, is this: Get out into the woods, the mountains, the deserts, the swamps. Feel it, explore it, examine it, think about it, understand it. Rational analysis and direct intuition do not conflict—you need both and your brain is built by natural selection to do both. It is your Nature.

If science, in the form of the "new sciences" or ecology, evolutionary biology, and quantum mechanics, is capable of reinserting humans into Nature by enlarging the self to include the whole biosphere—"the world is my body" (Alan Watts)—then perhaps we have come full circle. We began as primitives, relatively un-self-conscious and inseparable from the ecosystem; we evolved into calculating, rational beings, becoming more and more alienated from our real home; we developed other-wordly religions to place us above other life-forms, and dualist reductionist science to ascribe mechanism to all of Nature; but then we developed new forms of science that put us, surprisingly but objectively, right back where we began and where we belong: as Earth-animals.

Most scientists don't want to think (or, at least, talk openly) about such things or feel they cannot do so without jeopardizing their scientific credibility and, therefore, their careers. Jobs and money are scarce for ecologists, and appearing radical or unscientific is usually a one-way ticket to poverty and obscurity. This does not excuse ecologists from active involvement in defending the Earth, but their hesitation is understandable. Deep ecologists must encourage scientific ecologists to get involved in saving that which they study. The battle to defend the Earth needs warriors who specialize in determining what the war is being fought over, what it takes to save what we have, and how we might be able to put it all back together again.

[sophieinwonderland]

Hi sophie, I have great news! earlier today i managed to switch out somewhat for the first time! i had a dissociative moment which left the front empty (it felt like getting possessed by the body's own will, or what some call body OS). I asked around the system to see who could front and eventually my second tulpa's tulpa (she was fronting in their nested subsystem) took front (and did really well)

i still felt lucid and perceived things in the body's perspective, as many systems do even while switched out, but I had no control over the body unless i chose to possess parts of it and my consciousness was certainly smaller - i could think and feel but it didn't occur to me to do it, unlike when i'm in front (i can't shut up in front, which makes forcing easier and more difficult in different ways)

That's awesome! Nice job! 👍😊

I hope your tulpa had fun with her time in front!

[masquerade-flags]

subsystem alter,

Subsystem Primary Host, Subsystem Secondary Host, and Subsystem Tertiary Host role flags

Primary Host, Secondary Host, and Tertiary Host but for subsystems. These flags are meant to refer to the alter(s) in a nested subsystem that functions as the fronting alter in the wider inner world. However these can also be used for whole subsystem that function as the hosts of the archsystem.

Subsystem Body (as a role) and Subsystem Body (as an attribute) flags

What/who a nested subsystem is contained within. The subsystem body may or may not resemble (one of) the alters within.

Two versions because sometimes it more of a role and others time it kinda just is.

[littlest-bugz]

What's a C-DID system? How does it feel do be like that?

I hope I'm not too insensitive, I don't want you to be uncomfortable answering to something as sensitive as this, if you even want to answer, don't feel pressured.

Hey Anon! No worries about being insensitive! I actually really like this question!! Thank you for asking it!

Going to start by saying I am not medical professional, nor am I the most well versed at this current moment in time [its a memory skill issue], but I can tell you what I know and anyone can respond to correct anything I may have gotten wrong! I've read a ton of studies and books but </3 It all escapes my mind because I am not the alter who studied all this stuff.

First, I have to start off with the fact that the DID aspect of C-DID stands for Dissociative Identity Disorder. DID is a dissociative disorder in which a person has multiple states of identity, referred to as alters, accompanied with periods of amnesia, and, of course, dissociation! It used to be called Multiple Personality Disorder [MPD] but this is no longer accurate! Honestly, I would read this tumblr blog post about DID because I'm not the best at explaining it [this is a link].

C-DID stands for Complex Dissociative Identity Disorder. This is a community term if I'm being honest, but we feel it describes our system very well [though we are formally diagnosed with DID]. In our eyes, our system functions very much like a polyfragmented system [which is a type of studied system, just not very well], minus the fragments [don't worry I'll explain this]. I'll give you a very basic understanding of what is commonly seen within C-DID, which is taken from the current understanding of Polyfragmented DID. Polyfragmented DID, and by extension C-DID, is characterized as having a complex system structure, complex splitting and fusing patterns, high fragment count [the part that differs in C-DID, another explanation coming], having a lack of non-dissociative coping skills, and early life trauma.

Complex System Structure : This means Layers, Subsystems, and other divisions between alters. These divisions are built up via amnesiac barriers between alters For our system, this presents in how our subsystems function and look like. We have 3 main subsystems in our system. One only has a handful of alters, the other has 2 other subsystems in it [often called nested subsystems! Think of it as a Russian nesting doll], and our 'main' subsystem is a series of 10 layers that present as floors in an apartment [it used to be 13! but as we heal more, it has lessened due to fusing of entire layers :)]. There used to be NO communication between any of the layers, or other subsystems. Not until we got into therapy with a specialist LOL If you need an explanation for subsystems, they are systems within systems! There are a few types, the only ones I remember are Nested Subsystems, and for that I apologize </3 If anyone can rb and help w/ this one, I would love it.

Complex Splitting and Fusing Patterns: This presents as splitting multiple alters, subsystems, and/or groups from a single traumatic event, splitting alters who only hold an aspect of trauma [such as, alters splitting from different emotions and feelings during the trauma, feelings or sensations, and more], and splitting due to seemingly perceived minor stressors. Complex fusing patterns are not actually a studied or listed characteristic, but I know other C-DID and Polyfrag systems would be able to relate in this aspect. This can mean alters seemingly fusing into multiple alters [x alter fused parts of themself into a, b, and c alters], unwilling fusing [fusion is a part of healing but sometimes alters are not ready to give up their perceived individuality], and what I personally called failed fusion [two alters that are in the process of fusing, but due to a traumatic event, it results in two or more alters- Like complex splitting but somehow more complex]. Take all the fusing pattern stuff with a grain of salt because I am not a professional and this isn't formally researched. In our system, we have very very complex splitting patterns, and we do not even label ourself as having a 'high' or 'low' splitting frequency because of this. Individual alters in our system have higher or lower chances of splitting. The Bugz subsystem [which we are relatively open about because they are our namesake] is a subsystem of copies of the same alter [a former host] in having each alter being him during various different times of our life, and on top of that, one of The Bugz split his own nested subsystem with all alters that represented an aspect of a single trauma.

High Fragment Count: This is the part differs in C-DID. Fragments are defined as an alter that is not fully differentiated or developed. Fragments may exist to carry out a single function or job, to hold a single memory or emotion, or to represent a single idea... Fragments usually have not been exposed to enough complex, different, or interactive experiences to incorporate more into their sense of self and so become more developed and differentiated. C-DID does have a high alter count, but it is not made up of fragments. In C-DID, which again, is a community term at this current point in time, alters that split in complex ways are fully or mostly differentiated. This is hard to explain, as it's up to anyone's interpretation due to it's origin being within the community. How this looks for us is that we have a "shared memory bank". This includes all the memories that are common knowledge in our system [this can include anything from the memory of getting a job to a whole traumatic event]. We have worked hard in therapy to expand and refine this aspect of our system, but because of the good ol' CEO, it still happened pre-diagnosis [which we didn't know we were a system until we were diagnosed- we actually thought we had BPD]. This means when alters split, they will still retain some of the common knowledge, which can lead to them being more differentiated than a fragment. For example: Alters X, Y, and Z split of from a traumatic event- One holds the feeling of helplessness during the event, one retains a repeated phrase or thought we had during the trauma, one holds the fear during the event. X retained knowledge of a favorite color and place from the perceived 'memory bank', leading them to have a different Identity than Y or Z who may hold different parts. These usually [in our system] correlate with the trauma that occurred. So lets say its a Religious Traumatic Event [very terrible example but I'm rolling with it]. Y may retain the knowledge that we currently hold a spiritual practice, and knows certain aspects of it that X or Z would not know. And Z might remember a time in our life when we had no religion or spiritual belief, and maintains that set of beliefs. X might be more fearful of religion as a whole as a result of the religious trauma, but might only remember a time where we were a part of whatever religion. If this makes no sense, or you want further clarity, feel free to ask! I feel like this aspect of C-DID is not talked about in the community or anything. I have never seen anyone's experience with this aspect.

Having a lack of non-dissociative coping skills or mechanisms: systems typically split as a last resort to a traumatic event- In polyfragmented systems [and by extension C-DID systems], a system can split from daily life stressors and other similar things. Having a lack of non-dissociative coping skills, in my non-professional opinion, may stem from not being allowed use or taught coping skills during integral parts of childhood development, or even further into adolescence and adulthood. But that's a theory- A game theory. /ref/ This we experience a lot less in our current stage in healing. Our 'automatic' response is to dissociate, but as we have been in therapy and learned how to regulate emotions and cope with traumatic events, it's gotten better. Sometimes we have to 'fight' dissociation. It's doing everything I can to stay in the present here and now- Forcing myself to ground even though dissociation is an instantaneous reaction. It's harder or easier depending on the alter, but we try to help each other out with remembering our skills [shout out to our beloved caretaker-gatekeeper! Love that guy].

Early Childhood Trauma: Typically, this means trauma that stems from infancy to 3-5ish y/o. Don't quote me on that one, but that's what I've seen be described as 'early childhood trauma'. This can range from Severe or Organized Abuse to a disruptions in primary caregiver attachments [don't quote me on that one]. I-- Don't have to explain how this one works in our system LMAO. Just know our trauma does meet that 'criteria'.

Commonly seen in Polyfragmented Systems and C-DID systems is a higher frequency in switching, but this is not a necessity.

About how it feels to live like this, It's very complicated. Even as healed as we are, and continue to do so, it is still really rough and confusing. There's a lot of things that most singlets wouldn't think about, but are pretty common as a system.

We have, as of today, 83 documented alters. That's not including the ones we refuse to put in because they're oc introjects or abuser + familial introjects. Like can you imagine me putting one of my abusers into my pink, cutesy aesthetic alter log LMAO. That's just ridiculous to me. I acknowledge their existences, and they're included in meetings, but I feel uncomfortable documenting, like, my abuser introjects especially. But having 83+ alters is complicated- it makes life messy. Some of us love certain friends- others want to cut contact every day- Some don't even know how to socialize. Just today we had a job interview and someone who switched in hadn't ever been in an interview, didn't know what to say. We had planned in a meeting a specific alter to front, but DID switches are very hard to control. Our gatekeepers tried to help, but when an alter is triggered to front, it's mostly out of our control.

Speaking of meetings: We have to hold meetings with all, or most, of our alters. It helps to keep everyone in the loop, and prevent those amnesiac barriers, but they can become quite unruly and fights can happen because some of us don't like others [but we're working on that]. Getting everyone's voice in can be nearly impossible at times. We have a 'conference room', but visualization can only do so much [especially when there is 83+ of us]. But these meetings are super important for communication, but we don't always remember to do them.

Communication with us is very good, generally. We have near complete co-conciousness, as well as multiple fronters at all times, but it's still hard to remember things. I have made modifications for remembering things. For example, Right in front of my bed, the first thing I see, is a white board with important dates during the week [like birthdays, events, appts]. That helps with that stuff, but we forget a lot of little stuff.

Voting is a necessity in our system. We can't make many decisions without voting, and... THERE ARE SO MANY OF US. It's like a town vote or something, it's just wild.

There are some good things about C-DID. We have a complex innerworld, and I think that's pretty cool because!! I love making maps and floorplans and all that kind of stuff!!! There's also times where my alters have made me laugh until I cried [last night, literally], and I don't get that joy often. I love my alters, they're all goobers!!! Even the abuser introjects lol

Again, thank you for asking!! If you want any more information, I can answer follow up questions <3

I encourage other C-DID systems to respond to this post with their experiences! Anyone can correct me with articles nd such!!

[requiemsystem]

I don't know if you're doing simply plural group formats anymore, but if so, I wanted to ask if you had any ideas of what we could put down for a system whose folders don't work well based around sources (too many miniscule amounts per source, making it redundant in our eyes, and sources aren't relevant fornus), and instead a strirct hierarchy of alters? We currently only have our subsystems (groups & nested), and birthdays in a folder. Roles are a 50/50 chance seeing as how there are more vague or hyper specific roles than "common" ones.

interaction status (ok to interact, interact with caution, do not interact), profile privacy (private, trusted friends, public), completeness of profile (finished, almost finished, halfway done, very incomplete), frequent fronters, innerworld locations this was all i could think of, but hopefully it gives you some ideas. we keep our folders pretty minimalistic, so i cant really base my ideas too much off of ours - grey

[the-firefly-jar-system]

id love for you guys to explain more about your headspace/mapping it! /nf

we're trying to map ours and not having the greatest luck so far haha

- michael

(tagging @siffrin-enthusiast bc they were also interested)

here’s the map again for reference

so starting with the one in the center is the flowers, this is the field and it has quite a few doors that lead to other areas. the doors that are open travel are the starry hallway (which leads to alter rooms), the pillow fort/pillow fort subsystem, the schoolhouse, and the glass beach. minus the pillow fort subsystem, this is where the secondary system inhabits. As well from the glass beach, the merfolk subsystem is under the water on the beach

then if you see the smaller circles that have the card suites, those are NPC gatekeeper/guard stations. they're just rooms with fake alters that will only let you past if you're allowed to/have clearance. they only let past mid-high level gatekeepers

past the stations are different subsystems. the one with the heart is the evenfall subsystem, they kinda have a house their own house separated from the rest. evenfall is probably the most functional subsystem

the one with the road and the leaves is the breezy subsystem, which is the largest subsystem both alter and headspace-wise (we also suspect that there may be some nested subsystems within it, but we can't confirm that so we're ignoring it for now). It's a long road and then an apartment complex where they all live, it's mostly fragments and fragment-leaning alters/fledglings with Ezra who leads them.

the one with the bandaids is the infirmary garden subsystem, it looks like a mental hospital and holds the most unstable alters. there's a special task fragment/fledgling named nurse Solace who oversees this subsystem. alters from the breezy subsystem are able to be moved here by Ezra and Solace if they become too unstable or too much of a danger to us

the one with the "zzz" is less of a subsystem, as it's the dormancy/"sleepy complex". i'm honestly not really sure how it works, all i know is that dormant alters stay here. only the highest level gatekeepers and sometimes nurse Solace are allowed in there

there's also kinda another layer not included in this map, we call it the cosmos layer. it has our highest (known) level gatekeeper, cosmosis. we're not sure how cosmosis works, but it's just kinda space. there's also a little guy named void, who is just a vaguely humanoid void, who floats around in there. we're not sure what void does, it might be an archivist of some sort

(there's also like one fragment/shard that doesn't exist within this system (no pun intended), named MAG. we're just gonna ignore mag)

this is VERY long, but yeah! this is kinda a run through of how i understand our headspace

we also used canva to make the map, if you're curious abt that :]

[fireboltsystem]

ok this is going to be an obnoxiously long ask jsyk ahead of time, i have a lot of little things to say/ask aoejrof. 1. this is our-library's main blog!! for context, since im sure youve seen us in your notifs lmao 2. related apologies for digging through so much of your blog we were really curious about you because weve been following you on sonicaspeed for a long time and we wanted to know more about you! 3. related again im about to ask a LOT of questions that youre totally free not to answer if theyre too invasive, but theyre all things were genuinely curious/confused about, so wed like to at least take the opportunity to ask! 4. i really hope you dont mind us jabbering at you like this too much alejfkfn we tend to yap ^^'

first thing were really interested in is how exactly an endogenic system works, talking as a traumagenic did (as far as we know) system, especially one thats partially endo and partially traumatic as you seem to be. in the past weve gone from negative (due to being around people who were very bitter about endogenic systems when we were first figuring ourselves out) to supporting it and knowing full well they exist but not understanding it, and wed like to go to understanding and supporting it, but thats really hard when we dont really have an example and looking things up, as always, leads nowhere.

this is of course a little more personal, but we wanted to ask about your subsystem a little, partially due to the fact that weve begun to form our own and arent totally sure how to handle them yet; i noticed a mention of a satellite subsystem within the solar subsystem? is that a nested subsystem? im both very curious, baffled, intrigued, and wanting to know in case it comes up for us, but either way, id love to know exactly how that organization works exactly!

and, um...oh, that might actually be all the questions. woopsie. overestimated that a lil, hehe. think we mightve answered some of them for ourselves as we were scrolling through your blog and then TOTALLY forgot that we didnt have as many questions as we did when we first read your pinned post. we did still manage to yap for a While though apwkrjgh hope this finds you well and all that and that you dont mind the long ask and all the notifs!!! were gonna go raid your sonic blog using our main blog to rb now lmao

🌪 - Oh snap hey! No worries about 'spam' it doesn't bother us at all lol.

Response got LONG so I'll throw it under a cut!

Endogenic systems have as wide a variety of experiences as traumagenic systems do, so describing how they "work" generally is kind of impossible KWNFWK. The only thing to keep in mind is that endogenic systems and system members form for reasons other than trauma - maybe they were born that way, maybe it's neurodivergence, maybe it's spiritual beliefs, intentional formation, or any number of other reasons! Not all endogenic systems lack trauma or even disorders - You can be a system and then experience trauma which causes problems for you later on. Or you can experience trauma that doesn't cause plurality in you, and then discover or become plural later, too! If you don't know yet about Pluralpedia, it can be confusing to navigate but has tons of info about different system origins, traumagenic and endogenic alike. Plus lots of other info about plurality as well!

We consider our system to be primarily traumagenic, but with many individual endogenic members. Most of our endo members exist as introjects and come from the process of creating or experiencing art - our brain is just naturally inclined to make headmates out of characters we connect with qkdnskcn.

As for our subsystems: Yeah, the Satellite subsystem is nested within the Solar subsystem. Team Solar consists of me (Zephyr) and everyone from my world, including my own headmates from back then. The Satellite subsystem is the Shadow I know from my world and all of his headmates that basically got carried over with him. That includes Mia - his protector and introject of his sister - and some of the Black Arms that hitched a ride. The Satellite subsystem is a classic "system-within-a-system". They experience shifting fronting patterns and stuff like that just like we do generally, sometimes cofronting/coconsciousness too. The Satellite subsystem is traumagenic, and Shadow is considered the host for them. They have protectors, persecutors, trauma holders, etc that revolve around Shadow, rather than the system as a whole or any other particular member. We think this is because they are his alters specifically!

For the most part, we use subsystems as organizational labels first, just to communicate and remember who is related or connected to who. Shared sources is usually the deciding factor for whether we lump headmates together in a subsystem or not. Headmates that are 'related' in some way tend to be more likely to be close to front for us at the same time, if that makes sense? Like loose package deals. The Satellite subsys is probably the closest thing we have to a traditional Subsystem as described by the general plural community, probably because they were a system before entering this one (and so was I actually!).

In another ask, you added the question "What are 'exomemories'?". Sometimes known as 'pseudomemories' (we don't like that term personally for reasons we'll get into), they're memories of things the body didn't experience. "Memories from outside", exo-memory. For us these can manifest as traumatic flashbacks to source moments, or positive memories of our lives before being in this system, or just basic facts about who we are and our home worlds. I have a TON of exomemories. I'm very close to source and care about it a lot! Since you follow our art blog you probably already know how much of our work is based on exomems akdnwkfsnci. We don't like using the term 'pseudomemory' for ourselves because there's nothing 'pseudo-' about them. They feel just as real as any of my memories of this life and shape who I am even more!

Hope this was interesting and/or helpful! Feel free to send more questions our way if you have any.

-Zephyr

[syscourse-confessions]

my syscourse take for today is endos stop using medical (and medical community) terms challenge (failed miserably). like I can somehow accept endos using "alter" and "system", they were originally medicalised but now it's murky and whatever anyway. but.

complex/polyfragmented is not for you, it's a DID term. it's not even a OSDD term what makes you think you can use it??? and for the love of god: HIGHLY COMPLEX AND EXTREMELY COMPLEX ARE NOT FOR YOU. subsystem and sidesystem are not for you. not even all polyfrag DID systems can claim HC, it's specific to programmed polyfrag DID.

extremely complex is a bullshit terms anyway but I'm including it here for the sake of arguments. "for systems who were not programmed but have an extremely complex structure". examples of an extremely complex structure from the OP include multiple sidesystems, subsystems within sidesystems, 900+ alters.

sincerely fuck off. you do not get a structure THAT complex without programming. it takes programming from an extremely young age, and that comes from multiple abusers, to even get close to that complexity. it takes severe brainwashing through FUCKING TORTURE or physically altering your brain chemistry with DRUGS. you can't just get something like that naturally, your brain wouldn't just... allow it. like there's a reason why the created endo plurals we've met had like, 10 headmates total. you know HOW FUCKING DIFFICULT would it be to create 900+ alters??? to nest them in subsystems, or worse, to create a whole ass sidesystem just because?

created "complex/polyfragmented" systems piss me off to no end already but just imagine the rage I get to see that fucking "extremely complex" shit used by endos. I'm specifically talking about created systems and not spontaneous systems, but even then I cannot fathom that a system would just... get? an enormous amount of alters, and an extremely complex structure. I'm taking with a few hundred pounds of salt.

not to mention that using extremely complex is a slap in the face to the highly complex label, since it's effectively claiming that an endo with no trauma whatsoever from programming can be more complex than an highly complex system, since you know. grammatically "extremely" is of a higher degree than "highly". I'm just done. I'm so fucking done with the endo community.

mad respect to endos who know where to draw a line with the rest of the community, and I sincerely hope y'all will see that this is taking it a LITTLE too far.

reply however I'm just exhausted

DISCLAIMER: Posts may or may not reflect accurate information. More info here: https://www.tumblr.com/syscourse-confessions/728819621058232320/disclaimer-treat-posts-here-like-you-would-any

[moonpool-system]

Hello! I've been questioning recently if I'm a median subsystem. You've mentioned having subsystems on your account before and I was wondering if you could give us some pointers on figuring out if I'm a subsystem or not. It might be helpful to share your experience with subsystems, but you don't have to do that if it makes you uncomfortable. Sorry if this is confusing, words are hard :P. Thanks :DDD

Hi! not confusing at all, we'd be happy to share!

We have quite a lot of subsystems so hopefully we can give you some broad information ^^ I'm personally a monoconscious median subsystem, and one of our other main fronters is a polyconscious median subsystem - those'll be our two main perspectives, but we'll touch on some others as well.

A subsystem is often defined as a "system within a system", but I find most people don't get much milage with this phrasing. I think of it more like Russian nesting dolls - within the larger overarching one is a "smaller" one that contains others itself. In headspace, this is often experienced as subsystems having a single mindform. For example, Member A and Subsystem B have one headspace body/mindform each, but subsystem B often switches between different subsystem members within that individual mindform. Subsystem B might even have an entire nested headspace only they can access where their members have individual forms, but not always.

Let's go over the different ways median subsystems can present!

Terminology: Facet, monoconscious, polyconscious, headspace, mindform: the form a system member(s) takes within headspace, alterhuman, otherkin

Monoconsciousness - the complexity of monoconsciousness is what held us back from realizing our subsystem isn't just otherkin shifts for a long time. While my identity/disposition/opinions/etc will significantly change depending on the facet, my sense of awareness is continued. Rather than feeling like I'm switching out with another iteration of myself, it feels like I'm shifting & transforming into something new. Telltale signs that I've changed facets include wanting to use a different name & pronouns, having a significantly different disposition or response to regular events, feeling much more connected to some alterhuman identities than others, having different speech patterns, having drastically different likes & dislikes for things like activities or food, or feeling uncomfortable with the idea of being identified as the exact same person as I was before. While I still feel like "me", I feel fundamentally different, as if my innate self has shifted. This is actually why we use the overarching name "Prism" - it's a crystal through which drastically different colors of light can be seen when held at different angles. The sea on the monocon flag is another good analogy- while the oceans might have unique names and be worth differentiating due to drastically different ecosystems and such, they still all connect and flow into each other, and they're all still the same connected sea in the end. If you've played Slay the Princess, the Princess is a good example of a monoconscious median system.

Polyconsciousness - Hello 👋 my subsystem is median and polyconscious. While we all consider ourselves facets of our overarching identity, we all have our individual differences & consciousness, which we can tell exist either when we communicate with each other or when we notice ourselves switch/someone else who knows us notices. All of us represent an aspect of our overarching identity - while I focus on pleasantries, self-care, and light communication, Healer focuses on our interest in medicine & magic as well as being our retionale, Red Jam is our righteousness and sense of justice, Vanilla Bean is our desire for peace, stability, and care within ourselves, and more. Originally, Healer Cookie was the only one self aware when we entered the system, but it didn't take incredibly long for more of us to come out of dormancy and realize that while we were a part of the same whole (Perhaps as a slice of pie may be?) we are still different in our own right. We also have our own headspace that we're able to interact in between ourselves, though this is not a constant for all subsystems. I do believe that about covers it! Please let us know if you have any questions.

Some other notes from the Prism:

- Not all headmates may feel like fully defined people completely separately from medianhood, and tend to hold intense emotions or singleminded thought processes - these are called fragments. We have one fragmented subsystem, and he struggles to settle on a single identity and feels as if he's constantly co-conscious with at least a couple of his subsystem members.

- Not all median system members are in a subsystem. For example, we have many median members formed from exomemories of others; they still share that intrinsic median connection of self, but they have an entirely separate mindform and exist as simply another member of the system rather than nesting within it.

- Not all subsystems are confined to a singular form all the time. Our Vessel subsystem is a median subsystem of two, and while they were originally one member, they separated equally into two one day and are still bound together via a strong mental link. They can't be too far apart from each other in headspace without being "pulled back", they instinctively know each others' emotions & thoughts as easily as breathing, and they're able to reform back into a singular body at will. They remind us of mitosis but if they could pop back together <3

Hope this gives some clarity for you!!