Caught In Between

Interest Check!

From Within Our Heart - an Otherhearted Zine

There's not nearly enough talk about hearttypes, so we wanted to to get conversations rolling by making a collaborative zine about it!

Otherhearted describes a person who has a strong fundamental connection to a species or character which impacts their core sense of self. This is most commonly described in terms of identifying with a being as opposed to identifying as one, although this is not always the case. - Otherkin Wiki

This zine would be a collection of artwork, writing and more all about being otherhearted. Whatever that means to you - both fiction and nonfiction pieces would be accepted.

How it would work is we'd have a few month submission window and anyone could email us pieces they'd like added to the zine. No formal applications or try-outs. If you got something you wanna express about hearttypes, we'd love to hear it!

If you'd be interested in either reading or submitting to this potential zine please comment, reblog, like, or tell us in the tags!

If we get enough interest, we'll create a second post with more detailed instructions on how to submit pieces and deadlines.

Previous Community Zines:

Modern Draconity

My Gender is [NOT] Human

I don't think there is a label for it currently; we just call ourselves a daemian system. 🤷

For anyone who wants to learn more about daemonism as a whole, I highly recommend the blogs @daemonism-101 and @encyclope-dae-a!

those are very good questions! i dont have a lot of experience with the daemonism community as i prefer to do my own thing in my little corner, so take all of this with a huge grain of salt and keep in mind that im only answering with how it is for Atticus (my daemon) and me

The "animal companion as an embodiment of an aspect of your mind" kind of daemonism is what I've taken to calling a "conventional daemonism". That's the kind that has been most discussed and established in the community, especially after there was a push away from spiritual explanations (which was before I joined, so pre-2013 at least).

Not all daemians experience it like that, though. Sometimes folks meet their dae through ~conventional~ methods but then their daemon diverges from the established norm there. They might find their daemon has spiritual aspects, or that their daemon feels like an external guide taking a daemon role. Some daemians feel like their daemon is very literally an aspect or representation of their soul / higher self, or is a spirit bound to them (sometimes called a eudaemon iirc).

And other folks find that their daemon is actually less a part of their own self, and more a system member they weren't aware of yet (that's us!). Or their daemon might be another kind of mental presence that just doesn't quite fit into the "imaginary friend" version of the concept - or might grow into one over time, as they gain more autonomy and a sense of their own identity and personality.

And then there's other folks who already knew their daemon, and even if they don't match the conventional idea, they still feel like "daemon" is the best word for them!

Since daemonism is so personal and individual, having a different experience of it doesn't invalidate it or make it "not daemonism anymore". You get to choose that part! Sure, some folks might find "daemon" isn't the right word for their companion anymore - but that's not always the case. The community has a lot of members whose daemons don't fit the "conventional" concept, but are still daemons - and their person still a daemian. ^^

The way I personally define daemons are as a mental presence (whether thoughtform or otherwise) that is deeply and intrinsically connected to you, usually in a way that is uniquely affectionate and loving. Though ofc the shape that takes is varied - some daes are snarky tough love types! Some daes encourage you to confront difficult truths! And some dae/mians have a kind of sibling dynamic where the love can come in the form of being an annoying little menace COUGH COUGH Aka COUGH..

Daemonism is a practice. The concept of it can be used by anyone: alterhuman or not, plural or not. It can be pure playfulness. It can be imaginary, and that's okay! That's a beautiful experience in its own respect!

There's no universal daemian experience because we accept and embrace that our minds, and our experiences, are ours alone.

The community isn't built on a shared experience – just a shared idea which we all create unique versions of.

Some people stick closer to the basic idea we started with. Some just take what they like from it and throw out the rest. Some only take vague inspiration from it. Some people adapt it more than others, sometimes due to being neurodivergent, plural, and/or alterhuman.

It's still daemonism because daemonism isn't defined by us all "doing the same thing" or "having the same experience".

Daemonism is, for the most part, defined by a person deciding that they want to call what they are doing or experiencing daemonism.

And a large part of that is often in connection to the community, whether directly or in a peripheral way, by taking inspiration from the practice, making use of the community's writings, and so on.

This is why I think daemonism is often misunderstood in an alterhuman context. Daemonism is not an experience, it's not an identity – it's just an idea we each take and make our own. And that's what it should be. That's the beauty of it!

Anyone could be a daemian if they want to. There's no requirements. A lot of people get started with daemonism purely because it sounds fun! A lot of people start with only their imagination, and many people remain so.

For others, it might become something else in time, or they might discover there was something underlying their imaginings all along. It's no more or less a practice of daemonism, either way.

A lot of alterhuman concepts don't apply to daemonism because of this. Fact is, there's plenty of daemians who are orthohumans too, and plenty of people who specifically see their daemonism as an orthohuman practice.

I see it get included under the alterhuman umbrella a lot, and I feel like it gives the wrong first impression to come at it from that angle by default.

Really, it's more comparable with being a furry. For some people, it is a deep, impactful, life-altering experience, and the people who feel that way are a vital part of the community. But equally, for some it is an exercise in whimsy, playfulness, or creativity – and those people are no less members of the community for it.

We're not united by being plural, or having thoughtforms, or being alterhuman. We're united by being a bunch of people who were inspired by some books (or a film or TV show) to play around with the idea of daemons, and ended up sticking with it for one reason or another.

I'd like to write some resources specifically for tumblr, but that'll take time. For now, I'm going to post the info I originally wrote for The Daemon Forum's discord server! It should work well enough as an introduction to the practice. ^u^

The dæmonism community has existed for over two decades, but through all that time has remained consistently niche and obscure. That means that finding information can be pretty tough outside of dæmian* circles.

The greatest amount of information can be found on The Dæmon Forum itself, and that would be a good next stop for anyone wanting to learn more!

*Dæmian: a person who practices dæmonism

**Daemon, daemonism, and so on, can be written with or without the æ symbol

this is not to discourage plural daemons and daemians from the community ofc, you're always welcome, but I'm getting a little sick of people considering this unique identity with it's own history and community as 'tulpmancy lite' or 'a fancy term for median system' or 'just another type of created plurality'.

Daski has a directory of different alterhuman prompt lists on deir website.

We've seen some posts lately where people are saying they feel too plural to be a singlet and too singlet to be plural, or that they feel certain plural-ish ways about their kintypes... And, well, we have news for you--there's (possibly) a word for that!

See, while a lot of people see "multiple system" and "plural system" as interchangable, they actually have nuance to their meanings. And there's a third term, "median system", that might actually apply to you!

Some descriptions of the terms, for reference!

This won't be the only term list in this post, but to avoid dumping a ton of terms at the start without context, they'll show up where relevant. For now, though, here's a few.

Singlet:

The state of being one singular person/identity in one body. Synonym for non-plural.

Plural:

More than one entity, self, identity or consciousness in a single body. Simply, being more-than-one in some way. This is more of an umbrella term for multiple and median.

Multiple:

Having more than one distinct identities or people within a body.

Median:

The state of being somewhere between "singlet" and "multiple" on the plural spectrum.

Now, that's pretty vague, especially if this is a new concept to you! What does "inbetween" of multiple and singlet even really look like? The answer is, well... Anything, almost! But that's also vague and unhelpful. So...

Some examples of what being a median system could feel like...

You're like a metaphorical hydra--all part of one dragon, but there's different heads. You might feel parts of yourself arguing or thinking different thoughts, and some might be more in charge at times than others, but in the end, you're all a part of one unit anyway.

You're like a metaphorical coin--you're all one single thing, but there's different faces. Depending on what angle someone looks at you from, they could see something completely different.

You're like a gemstone cut for a ring--all one stone, but there's facets of you that reflect light just a little differently.

You speak to your subconscious, but because that subconscious is you, you feel like you're an inbetween of being just one person and two people. (This can also include things like daemonism!)

You feel like your identity itself is a shapeshifter (not in a kintype way--your identity as a whole).

You're otherkin/fictionkin/etc, and your kintypes have juuuust a little too much separation from you to feel like they're still you, but they're you enough that they're not separate people. They're not entirely distinct from you, but they're also not entirely wholly you, either. (More on this one later!)

You feel too much like a singlet to be plural, but too much like a system to be a singlet.

You age or pet regress, and feel like your regressed self is a different version of you. Sure, they're still you! But they're just different enough that they fall in a grey area of being "you" vs "not you".

You feel like "you" are, in whole, a person wearing a lot of different masks. The masks might make you act a little different, or look a little to-the-left of your normal appearance. All the masks are a part of you, as much as you're a part of them.

You feel like you sometimes have a different "filter" put over you, like a photo being digitally edited. You're still the same base thing, but sometimes there's an extra layer on top that makes you a little different.

You don't feel singlet or multiple, but feel like a secret third thing that's in any way inbetween.

You feel like you're almost a system.

Now, that's nowhere near an exhaustive list, but it's a bunch of stuff we've experienced and/or heard from others in the community. That gemstone comparison is actually common enough for the median version of the term "headmate" to be a sort of reference to how it feels!

Headmate (also alter, system member):

An entity/person that is a part of a system.

Facet:

A type of headmate that is a part of a median system.

There's also a term for identities that blur the line between "fictive" and "fictionkin", because the experience of being median while having identities that feel like fictives and fictotypes simultaneously is so common! (There's now a factbased identity term for the experience too!)

Fableing:

A type of facet in a median system that shares experiences of both fictionkin and fictives, making them an inbetween, adjacent to both experiences, or both at the same time.

Factling:

A type of facet in a median system that shares experiences of both factkin and factives, making them an inbetween, adjacent to both experiences, or both at the same time.

Otherkinity and Median Systems

In particular though, we see a lot of otherkin who say a lot of very plural-y things about their kintypes. While not everyone who says these things is 100% plural and maybe just one or two of these points to nothing plurality related at all... These are things we think are pretty good indicators you should at least consider looking into median systems, even if you've looked into being multiple before.

Your kintypes can speak or communicate to you, disagree with you or each other, or interact with things separate from you. This doesn't need to include written or spoken language, either! Sometimes internal instincts clashing can feel a lot like median facets disagreeing.

Shifting causes you to experience memory loss, amnesia, or anything similar.

Shifting causes a complete gender change, even if previously and after the shift you disagree.

Shifting causes you to act "out of character" compared to your usual self.

Shifting causes a complete sexuality change, even if previously and after the shift you disagree.

Shifting causes you to want to change your name, even if previously and after the shift you disagree.

You don't feel like you're yourself while shifted.

You get thoughts that you don't feel belong to you, and feel like they belong more to your kintype.

You don't feel too much like you are your kintype, unless you're in a shift. (Also check out fictionflickering/otherflickering!)

Your kintypes do things that you're unaware of while you're shifted.

You commonly dissociate during or before shifting.

Your kintypes change your likes and dislikes (for example, while shifted you might hate apples while when not in a shift you love them).

You'd call your kintypes headmates or you feel like they'd be classified as headmates if you had DID/OSDD (spoiler alert, you don't need those to be a system!)

Your shifts cause a full or very strong personality change--especially if other people notice.

You feel disconnected from your body or lose control of your body while shifting.

You come out of a shift and are confused, distressed, or surprised at how you acted during it.

Like I said, not all of these point toward being median if there's just one or two--but, if you have the time to look into it, I'd recommend giving it some thought!

Misc FAQs

Do I have to call myself a median system if I fit a lot of/all of this?

Nope! Your identity is yours to label, and this post isn't meant to shove people into boxes. This is simply meant to inform people of what a median system is, and let people come to informed decisions themselves.

Can you be both multiple and median?

Absolutely! There's plenty of ways this can be a thing, too. Some examples:

Multiple system with median subsystems.

Median system with multiple subsystems.

A system that fluctuates between median and multiple.

A system with a bunch of headmates who are median or multiple (regardless of subsystems).

You could be both at once, which we've seen called "mediple"!

Can you have a CDD (like DID and OSDD) and be median?

Yep! It's commonly believed that most (not all!) OSDD systems often fall under the median umbrella, even! A system of any structure or origin can also have median members within it, regardless of other parts of how it functions.

Can you choose to be median?

As with plurality in general--yes, probably! We haven't seen any guides to specifically form a median system, but we're sure it's possible. Daemonism, for example, is usually counted as a nonplural experience by their community, as daemons are "you" in another font--for lack of better phrasing. But a lot of people do consider this to be a type of median plurality in their own experiences!

Is this an endo system thing?

No. Endogenic and traumagenic systems alike can both experience median plurality, and can also be disordered or nondisordered. The term didn't even originate in endogenic-specific spaces, nor did it originate recently either. "Midcontinuum" was presented as a term in around 1996-1997, and "median" was created in 2002. Some early plural communtiy mentions of the terms:

Us and Being Median:

This was co-written by a median subsystem (Dagger of Decay) and one of said subsystem’s QPPs in-system (Shrapnel). While we don’t reflect the entirety of our experience of having median plurality within our system, we can share what we personally know of our own life in the hopes that it resonates with others in a helpful way.

Being a median subsystem to me (Dagger of Decay), feels like I’m separate sides of the same metaphorical coin. (At least, that was an accurate descriptor until I discovered more facets than just the two.) You look at this coin, and one side might have a picture of one thing on it, while the other has something completely different–but you’d be wrong if you said that this was two separate coins just because it’s different depending on how you see it or how you hold it. You’d also be wrong in saying that the coin only had one uniform side–I mean, it clearly has different pictures on each side, they’re clearly different!

The faces of the coin are the fableings that make up me as a person. If I really wanted to, I could probably label myself as one person with very strong kintype shifts, but that doesn’t feel like it covers the full scope of my identity. I can’t talk to my facets, I also can hardly ever disagree with them because we’re so close to the singlet end of the spectrum. But even still, when I’m Tomura Shigaraki, I’m not really the other facets of myself anymore–it’s like you’ve spun that coin around and they’re the ones who are face down, hidden from sight for that moment. The same is true for when any other one is in control. The coin just sort of flips itself occasionally and oops! I’m the same base guy, but in a different font. A little bit to the left maybe.

The amount of separatedness between us fluctuates–sometimes I say “I” to refer to all of me, other times we say “we”. That’s one of the more noticeable fluctuations between my facets, but there’s plenty of other things that shift and change too–how distinct we feel, how much we can disagree with each other, how much we feel connected to other identities we hold… But in the end, we’re solidly sat in the grey area between “one singular guy with no extras” and “multiple guys in one head”--and it took our system a while to get a hold of what that can mean and feel like, so I hope some people who are questioning or struggling with their identity can get a little bit of something out of this post.

For further reading:

The Dragonheart Collective's "Am I plural" guide.

Allium House's "what is the self?" essay.

Endogenic Hub's "Medians" page.

Otherkin Wiki's Plurality page (section on median plurality included).

Beepbird's "Median is More than People With Parts".

Beepbird's "For Medians: Fronting and Switching Control".

By that I mean, there are methods you can use to become plural, of course. But if you want to be plural, you probably already are plural. You don't have to figure out headmates or names or roles or origin or separation levels or communication or headspace or anything right away to claim that as your own. You can just be plural. You can sit with that label for as long as you want without taking any other steps. Being plural doesn't mean you have to have all the answers. It doesn't mean you need to know a certain amount about your system. It doesn't mean you have to take any actions beyond identifying as plural. You can just be plural. You will, probably, eventually take more steps – learn who your headmates are, learn who you are, learn how things work for you, learn who you all want to be and what you want to do moving forward. But you don't have to do any of that if it would be too much for you. You don't have to push yourself to have a place here. If you want to be plural, you can just be plural, and you don't need to do anything else. [PT: If you want to be plural, you can just be plural, and you don't need to do anything else. / end PT]

Tried to write out my thoughts again about how a daemon can be us and their own person.

here me out.

cringe is defined as feeling embarrassed towards them. embarrassment is characterized by feeling a sense of shame towards them.

disability and insanity is regularly regarded as shameful. this is due to tribalism and being a social species, with it being instinctual for people to want to fit into the norm for that social group.

what is defined as normal? sanity. and what is defined as sanity? singlethood.

this is also the case for neurodivergence and disability as a whole. it is different from what is considered normal, and an ableist society teaches everyone that what is different is embarrassing.

anyone that does not fit into singlethood is considered by our ableist society as inherently insane, not normal. and thus, embarrassing. cringey to witness.

it does not matter how hard a system appeals to an ableist society. a system, regardless of any divisions we have among ourselves, will be viewed as inherently cringey because we are not a singlet.

and so, within this community, i am making a following statement.

since every system is cringey, then no system is cringey.

we are all equally embarrassing in the eyes of society. there is no pleasing someone who demands that we do not exist. and so, when you're laughing at other systems for being cringe? for being not as normal as you?

Funny you ask that because I wrote an entire essay about it right here: https://eeveecraft.tumblr.com/post/638147471205416960/here-we-go-again And here’s the follow-up post talking about people who read the first two blurbs and form their entire opinion around that and refuse to listen to logical arguments and evidence: https://eeveecraft.tumblr.com/post/638607043697278976/follow-up-post-on-here-we-go-again

EDIT: I’m adding this here, but this is a post  exposing the likely origins of what caused this myth to spread and why it’s not reliable in the slightest:

https://eeveecraft.tumblr.com/post/639853296099753984/likely-origin-of-tulpamancy-is-cultural

I’m going to sum up the first link for you:

-”Tulpa” wasn’t the original word, the original Tibetan word was “tul-ku” or “sprul-pa.” -Tulpa (as in the paranormal version, i.e. the old one) and tul-ku/sprul-pa both have completely different meanings.

-Tul-ku means to summon an incarnate deity while tulpa means a “magically produced illusion,” which this was from the 1900′s.

-Tulpa was translated like this due to figures like Kazi Dawa Samdup (who was very pivotal in translating Tibetan works for the west like the Tibetan Book of the Dead) who happened to be interested in English Theosophy and intentionally translated tulpa like that with Evan-Wentz.

-As such, this would be marked as cultural exchange and saying it’s appropriation ignores the agency of figures like Kazi Dawa Samdup just to fit the narrative of Tulpamancy being cultural appropriation, which in of itself is very sh!tty and hypocritical.

-Modern Tulpamancy simply means to create a new systemmate and has nothing to do with religion and the majority of the community sees it as a purely psychological phenomenon. For crying out loud, I’m an atheist.

-Literally anyone can create a tulpa and not know a single thing about Buddhism or Tibet, so why can a culture trademark something that literally anyone can do without realizing it? It’s a part of human experience. Literally 30% of Tulpamancers on r/Tulpas made their first tulpa without even realizing it.

-Actual cultural appropriation (Tumblr has watered down the meaning so bad, that practically anything can be appropriation by Tumblr’s standards) legitimately harms the culture it’s appropriating and takes from the culture without consent. Think of Native Americans having their artworks literally stolen and hung up in the homes of white people, THAT’S actual appropriation.

-Cultural exchange =/= cultural appropriation.

-The only link between Tibetan Buddhism and modern Tulpamancy is a single word that isn’t even appropriative.

-If taking a word from a language and transforming it is appropriation (fucking LOL), then the entire English language is appropriative of numerous other languages. That’s how ridiculous the logic of appropri-babies are.

-The reason why cultural appropriation isn’t hotly debated in the Tulpamancy community is simply because we know our community history and actually know what cultural appropriation is, thus it’s simply a non-issue.

And there you have it, anon. If you want sources, they’re linked in the first link I posted. In short: I actually do my damn research before forming an opinion on something and speaking about it like I know it. Appropri-babies act like they know the topic when they literally know nothing and just form baseless accusations that are easily debunked like I just did. They merely listen to popular opinion instead of actual fact, and it seriously pisses me off.

I hope this answers your question, anon.