genuinely what the fuck

A common miscommunication I've seen inside and outside OEA spaces is the comparison of conditioning and programming. This is only made further complicated by the fact they exist on a similar scale, where not all conditioning is programming, but all programming is conditioning. This post serves to point out the differences between the two. Any sources may contain triggering content.

Context: as far as we know we are not a programed system, but due to how our system works we relate closely to the entire experience and sometimes see terms made exclusively for programmed systems that perfectly describe one of our own experiences/roles but do not wish to offend anyone by using said terms.

[PT: Welcome! Please, take a seat.]

I will leave this for any programmed system to respond to as I am not very informed regarding them!

Im sick of this. Im sick of everyone. Everyones able to fucking cope. Im not. Everything makes me angry. I want to cut everyone off and rip myself apart. I want to kill everyone whos ever laid a hand on me. And guess what? Im a child. Im 9. And that makes everyone treat me like im a REAL child and oooh no we cant let the little baby talk about sex(abuse. If any of you start littles consenting bullshit on this post i will personally make you wish you shut up) or violence nonono you have to go watch bluey and tawk wike dis :3 kill yourself. None of you have ever thought twice about how you treat littles because you can never be made uncomfortable by actually letting victims talk. You make spaces for victims and systems to talk and then shut up the ones who suffered the majority of what causes systemhood. Youre the same as the very people who turned a blind eye to me when i tried to get help. Youll never listen. You dont want to hear it. You dont care about the mentally ill and you dont care about victims the moment it becomes mildly uncomfortable. You dont want us to exist outside psych wards and therapists offices.

(Obligatory not at blogrunner.)

What is they're explanation for plurality/systems?

We phrased it explicitly like that since they have two different questions however we don't want to copy the carrd's format. The explanation for not being a system is that DID/OSDD (also known as systems) are mental disorders. Polyminds, however, are not. Due to, as it says and I will quote, "...functions off subpersonalities, which is something everyone has". We will not argue against that, subpersonalities is part of every single being (phrased that way specifically for alterhumans/nonhumans to be included, as they themselves will say they are not human (alterhumans/nonhumans, not polyminds)) On if they are plural, the carrd can only say it is up to the polymind. However we have an issue with that statement alone. Poly as a prefix means "many" or "several" or "multiple" and is derived from the Greek word "polys". Polymind then means many mind, several mind, or multiple mind. Plural means, from Merriam-Webster dictionary, "of, relating to, or constituting a class of grammatical forms usually used to denote more than one or in some languages more than two". By the literal definition, the term "polymind" means whoever would be it would be plural. By definition However we do have a bone to pick with part of this in the FAQ section of this carrd Response to "How do polyminds differ from IFS?" This carrd creator describes IFS, or Internal Family System, which is a therapy technique. It is not OSDD/DID, it is a technique used by therapists. IFS has the end goal of getting all of a person's subpersonalities to work together in harmony, something that trauma, stress, and many other factors can disrupt. The carrd reiterates that polymind just means that someone can distinguish subpersonalities and that "...subpersonalities in polymindence do not have to get along, let alone work together harmoniously". That sentence may, in fact, cause more harm then good

A person's subpersonalities are supposed to help them function in the world. If they do not have to "get along let alone work together harmoniously", as is a direct quote, that is harmful to a person. It stops a person to function in a smooth way, since fundamental parts of a person don't work together. The carrds acknowledgment on potential harm

This card does, thankfully, acknowledge that it can be harmful to overanalyze subpersonalities. However, they attempted to defend polyminds as "not about actively separating and distinguishing your subpersonalities, it is not about how one became polyminded. Instead, the term simply exists for those who have already distinguished their subpersonalities for any reason." You may be thinking that doesn't sound harmful however I'm going to use an example. Systems, those with DID/OSDD, is a term to describe those with different identity states due to trauma. Notice the fact that now we have those claiming you don't need trauma at all to be a system. Polyminds have already delved into, from things we've seen when we first were learning about the meaning, people asking how to do it, discussing how to do it, acting as if it's something fun and that should be praised. While it may not be the intention, this has already led to people purposely dissociating themselves to that point. Also, again, I will reiterate that this is something most people can do. They can recognize how they act different depending on who they're interacting with. That is why there is a common remark in media of someone going "I've only been interacting with this kind of person for so long, I forgot how to act with this situation". That's something most everyone can do, adding a specific term is not just unnecessary but many who use the term are actively pushing for people to dissociate or to claim they are automatically systems due to the ability to distinguish

Now we are about to address something that we have found to be the most key point to what we will address in our conclusion on our issues with polyminds: they, at this point, seem like nothing but another attempt at endogenic systems. We will explain more after this section. Terms and the suspicious correlation

"Hazy. A state where a polymind is unsure which mind or minds are active." Alright, the only explanation for this that is not just a version of systems are in the case of someone has been in a situation for so long that it is hard to immediately stop. Otherwise, there is no reason to be unsure which subpersonality is being used at that moment. However that does sound like what is commonly referred to as being "blurry" by systems, or when a system is unsure of who is in front. "Swap. When a mind switches in or out of being active." This just sounds like "switching" which is when alters switch who's in front in a system. However, in the case of polyminds, that should just be when someone is out of a situation if polyminds are just being able to label their subpersonalities. "Centered. A polymind whose minds are centered around a specific, singular mind." By the definition this carrd gave before, that is literally all that can happen. Polyminds are just those who can label the subpersonalities and see them as distinct individuals. Subpersonalities do all center around one mind, the person's. Unless you mean the subpersonality by that, and then that sounds even more like a system. In this case, the word "host" which is commonly seen as the alter most commonly/frequently in front. "Differian. A polymind whose minds are extremely diverse." Let's define the word diverse quickly. Per Merriam-Webster dictionary, you have one of two options. "Differing from one another" or "composed of distinct or unlike elements or qualities". A person's subpersonalities are not always exact copies of one another, however to be extremely diverse or extremely different, something should be a concern. There is a difference between have diversity from how you interact with a child then with your partner, that's normal. You should not be interacting with children and your partner in the same way. That does not make it extremely diverse, it just is part of existing. Instead, however, that sounds eerily similar to what people tend to think of as alters or as completely different identities. Usually without anything in common or very little. "Equalian. A polymind whose minds barely differ at all." Seeing as how the minds are supposed to be subpersonalities, by the definition, that would be concerning since subpersonalities (again, going off of even the example given by the carrd of a different woman) are all aspects of one person. If someone were to act almost exactly the same as with their children, with their employees, and with their partner, that is grounds for slight suspicion. However, that as well sounds eerily similar to OSDD 1-a (a subtype that is commonly used) or when the alters are more like different versions of the same person.

anyway: the woobification of my complex trauma disorder makes me so mad because now it's impossible to talk about it. like genuinely. i'll enter a "system friendly" space and the moment i sit down and start sharing my own experiences (diagnosed, btw) *I* get preached to about how "you seem to focus on all the bad parts :( not all plurality is a disorder :( that seems kind of bigotted :("

my siblings in christ, it is literally a mental illness. it IS disordered. it is an abberation from average, expected human psychology with a demonstrable origin in complex trauma. what the fuck are y'all talking about?

- a very angry EP who wants to bite someone.

Hi hi! Thank you, I am doing well!

I agree, the rise in spaces treating systems more like they're silly little guys rather than actual fucking people is disgusting. It's why I don't trust any space that isn't explicity anti-endo, cause every other space has this idea that systems shouldn't talk about their disorder seriously because then they "ruin the fun". Like. This is a disorder, it's not fucking fun, no shit.

It's espeically endos who get mad it at, because it reminds them that there are people who actual have this disorder and aren't just roleplaying it and that makes them mad and jealous, so they fucking sanatise everything and spread this idea that being a system is just "uwu silly friends in your head yayayay!" when it's not. It's a disorder caused by trauma. it ruins lives.

This isn't to say people with DID can't be postive or enjoy being a system, however, you have no fucking right to tell others discussing their struggles with it to shut up or to tell them they're bigoted or wrong for not being as happy as you.

Potentially triggering content

Double Sided

A headmate which may pretend to go alone with an abuser to gain trust or protection, which may lead to harm being dealt to the rest of the system.

They may also very easily abide to the commands/rules set by an abuser.

(end of post, start of terms of use)

If this term already exists, consider it an alt.

Like or reblog if you decide to use it, credits aren't a must but hugely appreciated. Please consider following my blog if any of these end up useful to you.

Tags for archival (comment to add or remove): @aemogai-archive, @resource-reblogging, @saintgores-archive, @systionary

Except you do see us.

We're on the front page of your favorite porn site. We're the tweaking homeless person you pretend not to look at on the street. We're your favorite political talking point. We're the infant in the emergency room screaming from a pain they can't comprehend. We're the black lines in classified files you make jokes about. We're buried in the backyards of farmhouses that have long since returned to nature. We're the ones who sold you drugs in high school. We're the classmate you bullied for growling and barking like an animal. We're the product of a $200 billion industry. We're the blood on your favorite politician's hands. We're alive and dead and existing as fragmented states in between.

so im not going to tag the blog im vaguing about - if/when you see this, i respect your trauma history and i am sorry the community mistreated you. i also agree that the community itself is not necessarily the most healthy or functional. i hope you find peace <3

however, i think that there are a whole bunch of things that should be demystified and explained better than they have been:

i talk about things like: paranoia and conspiracy, child abuse and torture as mentions and concepts and mention common program names

for the longest time, i felt completely alone in my experiences because i didn't match what they insisted was "normal." i didn't consistently have a headspace. my gatekeepers couldn't just summon alters to front at will the way theirs supposedly could. everyone around me seemed to experience things in the same neat & tidy way while i felt pressured into pretending that i was just like them to avoid scrutiny.

i had to redo my syscovery from scratch last year because so much of what they taught me (& what the community normalized in general) felt harmful and incorrect.

you know what happened once i did that? i could actually see experiences similar to mine reflected in medical texts, rather than feeling like i was forcing myself to fit some standard. funny, isn't it? somehow, i was more of a "faker" in their community than i ever was in ours.