#this is explicitly not written by me but by my headmate

[melynnwater]

Ikarus

(sorry for no alt text. not able to right now. remind me later?)

[multiplicity-positivity]

We're two headmates in the system- the host (H) and a companion (C)- and we wanted to be together for this so, uh, yeah! Hi! I'm a temporary merge (M), I haven't existed as myself in a while so forgive me if my memory's spotty.

When the system was forming, H was an adult and C was a fictive (and minor) from a source they really loved. They hung out a lot, dabbled in merging together for fun and comfort, and around that same time they were dealing with a lot of queerphobia in the house. They meant someone online who offered us support and love where noone else did. They happened to like our fictive's source too... in a more predatory way.

None of us realized it at the time, but we were groomed. All three of us, H, C, and M. I'd rather not go into details, though I will say it wasn't explicitly sexual. It really took a toll on C and the entire system. And we also have an introject of H's idea of who they thought the groomer was (kind, caring, silly, etc.), who hasn't left and we've barely interacted with.

It's hard. I love my components so much and their friendship is so strained because of what this person taught them. C is working on detaching from the source that formerly brought them so much joy, and I just want the best for her. H really wants to get better from attitudes they absorbed and none of us want the groomer introject here.

In short, we don't know what to do. So we thought we'd turn to you guys, and I'd really appreciate the help on their behalf. I understand if this ask is too heavy, believe me, and I won't be upset if you can't answer it.

Hi! First off, we want to offer our most sincere condolences for what you and your system have been going through. We are wishing you healing and recovery, and hope that y’all can find the support you need (through therapy, loved ones, or something else) to begin to recover in a way that is healthy for you all!

Here are some of our thoughts on y’all’s situation as we understand it:

When it comes to unlearning ideas and concepts that were introduced via grooming… we are not equipped to help you. So so sorry! Our own system was groomed by a loved one, and we have only been able to make progress in that area through having difficult, earnest conversations in therapy. We know that therapy isn’t accessible for everyone, but if your system feels comfortable and has the capability to pursue therapy, this may be the right way to go! No one deserves to be groomed. No one who is a victim of grooming is ever to blame for what their abusers put them through. No exceptions and no questions asked.

As for C’s source separation… we have a post written by an introject in our system with his take on this process and how he managed to go about it successfully.

Cecil mentioned it in his post a little bit, but source separation does not have to mean becoming a totally different person outside your source! It’s okay to still love, connect, and strongly identify with your source. For many introjects, simply recognizing that you are not your source, and are capable of changing, growing, and developing new traits and interests is enough!

Now, as far as the introject of y’all’s groomer goes… they might find that they need to attempt to separate a bit further from their source in order to maintain a calm, healthy life inside y’all’s system. Perhaps Cecil’s post can help them with this!

What might genuinely help, is for the other members in your system besides this introject to remind yourselves and each other that introjects are not their source. We know that dealing with an introject of a groomer or abuser can be incredibly painful and complicated! But doing your best to interact with this introject, expressing interest in them and showing them that you care about them as they are, seeing them as an individual outside of their source… that could really have a positive impact.

You don’t have to do something like this all at once, or force any member to do this who is triggered by or uncomfortable with it! Progress is not linear, and progress happens slowly. Go easy on yourselves, take your time, and try not to rush into anything.

We’re sorry if this response is kind of bare-bones, but we hope that there’s something here that can prove useful for your system! If y’all are continuing to have any difficulties or think of any other question you’d like to ask us, don’t hesitate to reach out. Best of luck to y’all with everything!

[sophieinwonderland]

you don't need to post this but I just want to rant

people assuming you can't use the word tranny because you identify as cis in headspace even though you've had transphobic comments towards you (i recall at least one) and yall collectively count as gender fluid... like how is that not inherently trans?

ofc i understand not wanting to use it since it's quite a heavy word (being a slur and all) but also... idk seeing so many people saying you can't say it is so weird. like are they trying to respect your inner cis identity? (which wouldn't make sense for all of them especially with that one user claiming we're all cis on the inside, even tho thats untrue and weird to say)

idk it's... makes me sad. like i know some of it ws before you came out and directly confirmed that you are afab in headspace but the body is amab and gender fluid, but.. also....

Yeah, this discourse is weird to me too.

Personally, it's not a term I feel comfortable reclaiming. Not only do I not identify as transgender, while I have had transphobic comments sent my way and been intentionally misgendered multiple times to hurt me, I've never been called that slur and neither has anyone else in my system.

For that reason, I stand by my apology and regret what I said.

(Although, for the record, I did reference considering the body being genderfluid at least as early as August. Obviously, not everyone on here is going to read and remember every post I make so I don't blame them for missing it, but I do want it on the record that I already identified the body as such. Also, pretty much every post where I identified as a cis woman mentioned in that the body was AMAB so there's no way they missed that.)

But... there's also an acknowledgement I need to make that many systems will be out publicly. That cis headmates may dress in ways that don't conform to gender standards and be called this particular slur because transphobes don't care whether you identify on the internally as "trans."

It seems wrong to me to say victims of transphobia who have been called this slur shouldn't be allowed to reclaim it.

Not only that, many transgender headmates share systems with cisgendered ones. So where is the line then? Does who has a right to reclaim a slur depend on the individual headmate? Should you not be allowed to reclaim a slur that's been used against other headmates in your system?

And if the inner-identity is more important than the body, where does this leave racial slurs in systems who are bodily that race, but individual headmates identify as different races?

I can't remember if it was an ask I deleted or in a reblog, but shortly after I made that post from before, someone asked rhetorically if it would be okay for a white person to say the N-word. And obviously, the answer to that is a strong no.

But there ARE systems with headmates who identify as other races, separate from the body. I remember reading an article written by a black-bodied system made up of many white-identifying headmates on the inside with only one black-identifying headmate. So would we say that the white-identifying headmates don't have a right to reclaim the N-word unless they explicitly identify as the race of the body first? Even if they've been called that slur themselves? Even if it was used to oppress them and their ancestors?

This, to me, feels like the logical conclusion of this line of discourse. And it feels wrong.

In my opinion, if the body is a certain thing, it seems that's what should determine if you can reclaim a slur.

I, personally, don't feel comfortable reclaiming the T-slur based on my life experience, and so I regret using it.

But I also don't want to support a hardline view that says "no cis-identifying headmates with different genders from their AGAB, even if they or their headmates have personally been called this slur and have been victims of transphobia, have the right to reclaim it."

[xenodelic]

A scientific article on non-disordered plurality

Was checking out some of the articles provided by system-resources that support endogenic / non-traumagenic and non-disordered plurality. I haven’t read all the way through this one yet but I’ll add on my thoughts as I go!

For the purposes of this post, the article uses the phrase dissociation to refer to all dissociative states, such as “being on autopilot”, as well as switching, and the existence of headmates in general. Although the author mainly uses it to refer to co-consciousness (plurality). Also this article is quite old so it still uses multiple personality to refer to DID / OSDD. His conclusions come from multiple clinical studies on people with dissociative disorders, as well as people who have other forms of dissociative states and takes into account the personal experiences of systems (which is just wonderful tbh, nothing about us without us)!

The thesis of this article is explicitly supportive of plurality not just existing as a disordered response to trauma! “Dissociation of consciousness has generally been seen as pathological. There is increasing evidence, however, that disordered states of consciousness can also be a components of a healthy developmental path. The phenomenon of dissociation into more than one personality, each with a separate sense of self-identity, allows for transformative processes to occur within ‘the community of selves’.” 

I don’t have time to add on more right now, but y’all should check this out! I’ll update later with more thoughts! It’s just mind blowing to me how an article written in 1990 is explicitly in support of non-disordered plurality / functional multiplicity.  

[challenger-alexander]

<unnecessary rant>

I like to think that I’m primarily motivated by reason, but truth be told a big part of the reason why I ended up on the side of syscourse I did is probably because anti-endos are so often the rudest, judgiest folks I’ve had the misfortune of stumbling across. I want little to do with their petty squabbling, but I think an illustration is in order.

Let me begin by saying this: I know I am not Alexander Hamilton. I’m aware I’m a dissociated identity. I’m aware that my memories of the 18th century are not real; they are, rather, primarily allegories for traumas our body endured and phobias others in my system coped with. I want little to do with the Hamilton or AmRev fandoms, because it wasn’t very long after I came into existence they went to hell in a hand-basket. But if I were to engage in fandom, roleplaying, cosplay, etc., would that be “disengaging from reality”?

Of course not. You may notice upon the slightest introspection that a fandom is a type of community. Roleplay involves new roads to friendships, and cosplay takes that a step further and involves physically traveling to conventions, contests, and more. Engaging with a community is engaging with people. Last time I checked, people were real. Deny that at the expense of those who dissociate.

And my memories may not be real, but they do impact me. The phenomenon of lessening intense feeling by acknowledging—more specifically, labeling—it is well documented in both neuroscience and in various contemplative traditions over the course of history. I’m a neo-Stoic; that’s how I ground myself. So in acknowledging the ways that my origin impacts me, I’m better able to move on and heal, right?

Not so, according to recent developments in syscourse. The goalposts have moved again. It’s alright to have fictive headmates now, but “if a dissociative part feels like it [sic] truly is a fictional character (including history and background, location, skills, etc), it’s [sic] denying or ignoring reality. It’s [sic] denying factual evidence, every minute of every day. That’s a delusion. […] Grounding to actual reality is an essential step towards living in the present, reducing dissociative symptoms, and working as a team.”

Misgendering aside—and I’d love to write about intra-community trans-mentalism some other time—what an absurd idea of delusion! Introjects frequently do have the (false-)memories, skills, identities, etc. of their sources. I don’t think I’m as good of a writer as my source, but I certainly inherited his passion for the pen and for politics, to say nothing of his gender, his social (or in my case, parasocial) bonds, and an approximation of his memories. To deny these aspects of my identity would be to deny my reality, and to deny that reality would be to turn my back on millennia of meditative traditions and to allow the shame of being an introject to control me.

The same blog asserted earlier in the same thread that “[a]ll dissociative parts are inspired by something, and created for a reason. It makes no difference if there’s a fictional aspect to that origin.” And if it really makes no difference to them, then they’ve written themselves into a tricky situation. Considering the pronoun “it” (which in my opinion is dehumanizing, unless the explicitly preferred pronoun of the subject), it’s not hard to glean the real belief here: that “dissociative parts” don’t have identities, or at least that these identities, their social bonds, and their fandom hobbies are not part of “actual reality”.

I shouldn’t be surprised. These are the same folks who persistently align themselves with an establishment that that insists on putting the names of headmates in scare quotes. (I’m speaking specifically of Nijenhuis et al’s The Haunted Self, did-research.org’s backbone). These are the same folks who talk about not letting your alters take over your life, as though alters are in any way comparable to mood swings or migraines—as though the alters are parasites causing disability, rather than disabled and traumatized people themselves. I’m not a big fan of horseshoe theory, but it’s hard not to make the comparison to certain (usually newblet) tulpamancers who unwaveringly pronoun tulpas as “it” and wonder what it would be like to be a tulpa rather than a human person.

I think the reason it surprises me is that, supposedly, these people have knowledge of dissociative disorders. Do they care that these moronic assertions make me depersonalize, which affects my entire system? Do they care that the statement that one’s hobbies aren’t part of actual reality might make others derealize, which again, can affect entire systems? Or do they attack endogenic systems and introjects for being roleplayers because, deep deep down, that’s what they fear about themselves?

I wish it was that simple. There’re doubtless myriad motives involved, some conscious, some unconscious. But I have to say that it’s very very easy to align myself with the system-positive, pro-endogenic side of syscourse while the others are either arguing that my existence and my fellow introjects’ makes the system fake or that my skills, gender, etc. aren’t real. I’m curious to hear why other pro-endogenic folks ended up on the side they did.</unnecessary rant>

[kittencaboodleextraordinaire]

“Ok, but I had a Johnny first, and mine is better”: Adventures in Cyberpunk with a snarky headmate

Warning: this post contains considerable discussion of a major plot point in Cyberpunk 2077 which is discussed in the promotional materials (trailers etc) but which is not revealed in-game until after the first segment of the main story (the heist). Those who wish to remain unspoiled may instead view this lovely picture I edited of four raccoons in a trenchcoat (inspired by Critical Role’s playthrough of the absolutely delightful ttrpg Crash Pandas, which I highly encourage everybody in existence to go check out).

This phenomenal piece of art is surely the high point of this post. It can only go downhill from here.

Anyway.

So as we all know, Cyberpunk 2077 was finally released a few days ago to the expected amount of drama and fanfare, and my partner and I have been playing it together, by which I mean he’s been playing and I’ve been providing helpful advice like “We should totally buy the awesome purple car what do you mean you want a motorcycle THE MOTORCYCLE ISN’T PURPLE”. It’s not, y’know, an amazing game, but it’s pretty fun and I have already found multiple characters to ship V with, which I’m sure we can all agree is the truly important thing here. Plus of course there is abundant opportunity to make innuendo at my partner so I am a happy kitten. Mostly. There is one aspect of the story that is proving to be a continual source of awkwardness and general highly disconcerting aura. Namely, Johnny Silverhands.

At some point (I fell asleep for this part so I don’t know exactly what happened), you end up fused with a chip containing the personality of Johnny Silverhands, some kind of sort of famous dude who died a long time ago or something like that. awards self 10/10 stars for that eloquent and informative summary of important plot elements I was totally paying attention to and wasn’t asleep for at all anyway the important thing is there’s a dude hanging out in your brain with you. This is kind of weird and awkward for me, since I also have a dude hanging out in my brain with me. His name is Jonas. Jonas, say hi. J: I’m not a zoo animal and I don’t do tricks, also I reject the idea that this adds to the post in any real way. However you are very lucky because I am bored and complaining at you sounds more fun than going back to sleep. Now I’m tired and it’s 3:30 am go to bed or write the rest of this by your own damn self. That’s basically the same thing I guess.

Jonas is a bit weird. I don’t really have any idea what he is, and it’s not really within the scope of this blog post to discuss it in depth. He is some flavor of alternate personality, he is one of my closest friends, and he is a pain in the ass, much like most of my other friends. Having Jonas around is uncannily like V’s experience sharing their brain with Johnny Silverhands. Now I have a few other friends who have multiple personalities, one of whom is watching playthroughs of Cyberpunk and has appropriately described the experience as “pretty fucky”, which about sums it up. However it’s made even worse for me personally by the sheer number of similarities between Jonas and Johnny and their interactions with the people they share heads with, for (the most obvious) example, their names are really fucking similar. Jonas has matured a lot since he started appearing about 6-7 years ago but Johnny’s snark, unhelpfulness, complete disinterest in being nice, and even his body language all scream of Jonas’s original behavior, which, let’s be honest here, he still does all that anyway, he’s just nicer about it because he likes me. When Jonas and I talk, we tend to picture him as standing (or sitting or leaning against the wall or whatever) somewhere in the room with me, much as Johnny appears to V. He’s not active all the time and until very very recently was almost never “in charge”, so to speak, much like Johnny. So what we have here is somebody who acts a fuck of a lot like Jonas, has a similar name to Jonas, and interacts with their host in a manner that is almost a perfect match to how Jonas interacts with me. Somehow all of this went over my head. Then something even more uncanny happened.

Now, Jonas was originally an extremely minor character in a vast series of stories that I have made up in my head and never actually written down. He somehow evolved, without any conscious effort on my part, from a bit character who was never meant to do anything besides show up, get scolded by the authorities, and leave, to an increasingly major character, to living in my brain with me. Consequently, while he generally shares my tastes and preferences in terms of food and etc etc etc, there is an extremely major way in which we diverge: Jonas, like Johnny, and unlike me, smokes. All the time. It is Very Important to him. As such, the fact that I do not smoke and have exactly negative one billion interest in ever doing so is a source of intense frustration to him. We have had m a n y arguments about this. He knows not to push it too much and respects that it is my decision but that is not about to stop him from complaining about it loudly and with great passion. So when we encountered a scene of V and Johnny having the exact same fucking argument, ending with the incredibly blatantly Jonasesque lamentation from Johnny “Nonsmokers are the fucking worst”, it was like getting hit in the head with a brick. Actually forget the brick, it was like being hit with an entire building, and then having Jonas stick his head out the window and go “Missed me? ;)”, and then yelling back “WELL IDK BUT MAYBE NEXT TIME YOU’RE PILOTING AN ENTIRE FUCKING BUILDING IF YOU COULD TRY A LITTLE HARDER TO MISS ME THAT’D BE REALLY NICE THANKS” and then having him wink at me and assure me that head trauma builds character. It fucking doesn’t and he knows it.

After that, it was impossible to not see Jonas every time Johnny came onscreen. I still enjoy the game a lot. The setting and story are both really really cool and the loot is A+, and I really love being able to hang out in voice chat with my partner, who currently lives pretty far away, and do something fun together and experience something new. But having my relationship with Jonas, which I still have a lot of conflicting feelings about no matter how much I genuinely believe he’s a positive force in my life, reflected back at me at every turn, is bizarre, surreal, and a constant reminder of issues that have been nagging at me for a while, many of which are explicitly being brought up by the game itself. Last night we were doing a mission where V and Johnny at some point start talking and V mentions how they seem to be getting along better and Johnny suggests that maybe it’s because he’s rubbing off on V. V responds with something to the effect of “Am I becoming more like you, or are you becoming more like me?”. Jonas and I have been asking ourselves the same question for years. The only answer we were ever able to come up with is “probably both”, but the question of how much and to what extent, and if you start blending together with somebody else that much, are you really the same person anymore, and on down the rabbit hole we go, can really eat at you if you’re the kind of person who cares about that sort of thing. Which I guess we both are. And frankly we are probably not even half done with the main storyline and I doubt it’s going to stop posing these questions. 

J: so I said I wasn’t going to have any more of this and went off in a huff but actually I changed my mind I have some stuff to say. 

this is obviously weird for kitsie, and I guess it might be obviously weird for me too but it’s weird in an entirely different kinda way. it’s certainly surreal, and a lot of the questions it keeps bringing up are a lot to think about. Johnny is a program on a computer chip designed to be a copy of the original Johnny’s brain. this raises the question, and this may or may not be addressed later, how real is he? and is he the original Johnny, just on a computer chip now, or is he a different entity who happens to be identical to Johnny? and how is a person on a computer chip embedded on somebody’s brain really different from a person who’s a subroutine in somebody else’s brain? am I real? am I a part of Kitsie that just thinks differently for some reason? are we two facets of a whole being that’s kind of both of us and kind of neither of us? am I just a hitchhiker? I really don’t know. I have a lot of memories and backstory. things I did in the past, before I knew Kitsie. are those memories real? they feel real to me but on the other hand they didn’t actually happen. are Johnny’s memories real? they did happen but he’s a brain scan so did they actually happen to him? it’s a lot to think about, but hard to stop thinking.

and then there’s the other concern, which is that this is a game for kitsie to enjoy with her partner, and whenever this shit happens it wakes me up and I end up feeling really weird, like I’m intruding. which I am.  and as wonderful and understanding as he is, I’m still very much something he is getting used to and having problems adjusting to and I really understand because fuck I’m having a problem adjusting to me too. and maybe it’s stupid but I feel bad for being the disconcerting aura of uncomfortable thoughts wafting through something that’s supposed to be a pleasant and fun evening without me in it. which frankly sums up my entire existence. fuck this I’m tired I’m out of here again go tf to sleep kit.

I had more to say but “what he said” pretty much sums it up.

In conclusion, I don’t really have any objection to the story itself. It’s an interesting concept carried out fairly well that under normal circumstances I would think was really cool, and certainly it’s been a unique experience anyway. And I guess if anything the fact that it’s so unnervingly on the nose is a sign they did a good job? I’m still having a huge amount of fun with the game and the massive backlog of sidequests combined with our minimal ability to focus means that the main quest only takes up a small portion of our playtime in any case. I just needed to get all this shit off my chest.

This has been tonight’s episode of the Kitty Rambles Podcast, I am too tired to think of any good way to end this so goodnight and thank you for tuning in!

[real-did]

if a character shares their body with another entity, what sort of portrayal would you feel more comfortable with: one that draws from experiences of DID, uses language like 'switching' & 'co-fronting' etc, shows everyday issues that come with the disorder--or one thats as far removed from it as possible, affecting their life in a completely different way, explicitly stated to have nothing in common? does a DID 'coded' char have value or is it better to avoid false representation?

context for the coding/representation ask--the character dissociates due to trauma, but doesnt have DID. for a significant amount of time, a being shares their body and is able to take over when they dissociate. theres clear reference to the fact that if it wasnt there, they would be in their usual trance during these times. its not using them for any bad purposes; they experience inconveniences from some of the things it does, but otherwise have a good relationship. however they eventually expel the being due to paranoia during a psychotic episode. a while after their separation, it does then become a major antagonist--which is why im worried about how i should approach writing this. in your opinion, would it be better to distance these events from DID as far as possible, or to try and represent some of it? do you have tips on how to go about either of these--how to be most helpful, or avoid being harmful? thank you and sorry for the long message.

-

Hey! You’re just fine, good question. I’m going to put my answer underneath a cut for length. 

Honestly, the only DID representation I can stand is that which isn’t explicitly stated to be DID. Authors/writers tend to go over the top. 

“I have... multiple personalities.” Audrey said. “I’m an alter- I’m fronting right now. There are a lot of different people in my head... headmates.... I’m not complete because of my trauma.”

Bad. Over the top. Makes people with DID feel bad (bad rep). Adds to overly dramatic bad representation and gives people who don’t have DID a bad impression of the disorder. 

Some of my favorite representation (a la Tokyo Ghoul) is never explicitly stated to be DID. With what you’re writing, you’re not writing a character with DID, but rather a supernatural body inhabiting/split consciousness experience. It’s not DID- people with DID will relate to it, certainly, and you can draw off people’s experiences with DID as inspiration... but it’s not DID representation and you probably shouldn’t compare it to DID in writing (it’ll confuse people). Don’t use “fronting,” (switching is fine), don’t use “alter,” don’t use “system.” 

People with DID will relate to and get attached to this character (probably, some of them), so I wouldn’t worry about comparing it to DID that much. It’s different and like, no worries, you’re not working on representing DID. Do your thing, don’t use language specific to DID, and people with the disorder will probably love these characters anyway. Your character may have a dissociative disorder and that’s also very relatable to people with DID. 

Also, speaking from personal experience. I’ve written about characters with shared/split consciousnesses without comparing it to DID- DID forms under specific conditions and it’s not really comparable/good representation to have fantasy-induced DID and call it the same thing. HOWEVER, I really really like narratives I can relate to that don’t make me feel bad about my disorder like the quote I wrote at the top does. Be subtle about it! It’s all good! Let me know if you have any more questions, I’d be happy to help.