the tesseract system

this post is not meant as hatred towards that sentiment , but just want to offer shoutout to collectives where this is not feasible .

some collectives find that willed members do not sustain presence , too prone to dormancy or collapse . some might find that even willed members who sustain differ from memory , might not share same relationship , might not even want to .

in spiritual collectives , world connections can not necessarily be used on purpose to just pull someone along - this can be especially true for those who arrive after death in particular . several among courtiers here deeply miss friends , but there is no way to make those friends appear . any attempts to will might feel like false puppet , more uncomfortable than to continue life without .

obviously, i don't think willing members is bad (i know a lot of people who do it with the proper care and respect to those who are the results of that, and we've even done it ourselves before), but i just think sometimes systems need to step back and assess why they're doing this and if they're treating those willed properly.

It’s okay if your art styles are the same, or your handwriting, or your speech patterns, or your system has some unique skill that you’ve never learned but you still know how to do. That’s normal. When you share a brain with others there’s bound to be some things that you all share. That’s ok.

You’re not faking, I promise

for a survey that wants to be comprehensive and inclusive, it sure doesn't seem to give a shit about accomodating those who aren't given any voice elsewhere. no it isnt reasonable to "act as a single body". that's a ridiculous request, and frankly, a gross mismanagement on the part of a survey runner. your commitment to usable data is clearly not strong enough if you think it doesn't matter whether headmates get to speak as themselves or not.

(note: previously thinking you were a singlet/not knowing plurality exsisted and actually being a singlet at one point are different things. This is about actually having been a singlet at some point)

everyone has parts of themselves; it's a colloquial saying for a reason. the qualities and interactions of those parts-of-self is what distinguishes a singlet identity from a plural one.

parts of self are typically experienced as distinct or unique. at work, someone may be expected to be formal, passive, and obedient. at home, someone may be expected to be casual, kind, and honest. in both situations, the presented self is the one in which the social relationship is formed. erring from it or its expectations is taboo.

plurality is basically that but experienced internally. various parts of self develop around shared internal experiences (values, emotions, interests, memories, etc), and are subsequently expressed thru social interaction (sometimes). anyone could develop a unique relationship to the various parts of themselves and choose to name them, give them a voice, a face, a presence.

this isn't a bad thing. it's just different from the norm of experiencing the self as singlet. there is no natural law stating humans must experience their identities in singularity, and we see this in how celebrities often have alter egos. these alter egos may or may not be authentic expressions of (part of) who they are, or seen as such.

it's all mish mosh. do what you want. be who you want. the more plural people the better. the brain is so complex. it'd be so boring if there were some natural law dictating singlet identity. something being a social construct doesn't make it any more or less real. and it also doesn't mean the dissotraumagenic experience isn't real or doesn't deserve to be treated with care.

It's lonely. Being pulled between two worlds.

I'm not a human being. When I look down, my thighs are built and compact, and they taper into a thin, fragile hock, which connects to my cannon bone, then my fetlock and hoof, pulled taut by almost nothing but ligaments and tendons. I can run faster than any human, and I'm stronger than most. My ears swivel to pick up noise. When I'm stressed, they flatten. When I'm happy, they perk up. My tail keeps me balanced while I run. I brush it in the morning and at night. I can't sit in chairs with a solid back. I can't wear clothes without a tail hole. I can't lay on my back without my tail getting squished. My waist down is all bristly fur. I'm not a horse. I eat at the dinner table at night. When I was a foal, my mom sung me lullabies. I go to school. I love and I hate and I cry. Horses aren't worried about being a heel, but I am. I don't graze on grass, and no one rides my back. I heed nobody. I am not domesticated, nor am I a feral animal. I don't fear predation. I don't have a herd. I don't live in stables and I probably won't die of colic. I make art, I write, and I post on social media. I only have two legs. My hands have five fingers each. My waist up is skin. I am my own distinct shape.

I would describe myself, in this world's terms, and only in a physical matter, as a satyr. It's the closest concept this world has to the anatomy of a "horse girl". I can't find any other satyrs---the horse kind, the original kind as ordained by Greek myth---anywhere. There are many horses. There are many humans. There is little of the inbetween, the mix. Again, it's lonely. Even if I found another satyr, they wouldn't understand. I had my own place in human society as a horse girl. I'm meant to live among humans, despite not quite being them. A human to the left. A horse to the right. A human with a horse's soul. We were a third kind, not a man, not a woman. A minority group with our own struggles. Whether it be tokenization, fetishization, discrimination, idolization. A satyr who is not explicitly a "horse girl" wouldn't know what I'm talking about. And that's ok. But it is lonely. There are many horse girls online. I still cannot relate to them. These horse girls are decidedly less "physically horse" than me. I am a deviation from the canon. If anyone is doing things wrong, it's me. I am sure in the worlds where my fellow girls were more human in anatomy, they still faced similar things as I. But it's not the same, I don't think. In my world, we were ever so slightly more "horse". This came with its own difficulties. It's hard for me to relate to those that hail from a more canon-like world. They don't remember the visits to the farrier, and the resulting community. They don't remember having to buy special, more expensive shorts and pants made specifically for the unguligrade anatomy of a horse girl. They don't remember being made fun of for shedding fur, or making too loud of clops when you walk, as a foal. The list goes on.

In this current body, we are mixed race. A lot of my feelings about not being quite horse or human probably stem from this. We know what it's like to not belong in either group. To look at someone and think that you're so close to being like them, but... you fall short somehow. I'm falling short of being a horse and I'm falling short of being a human, but I don't hate it. I do like being a horse girl. I just wish I saw more experiences like mine, of being a not-quite-human who yearns to be seen as such by the humans you're meant to live amongst. I live on a bizzaro Earth in a bizzaro society that's obviously missing an entire sect of people. It's an oddly specific experience, and I've yet to come across a post about it by another.

I'm here, but I'm missing half of me,