Given I got this ask over one of our little anger holders saying simply that we didn't support polyminds I am now going to clear up some misinformation surrounding them and whether they're ableist or not
So, to start, what is a polymind? :
According to their carrd a polymind is "a person that is capable of seeing their subpersonalities as unique individuals." but what does that actually mean? Well, the carrd describes subpersonalities as "different personality modes that activate in order to help a person cope with specific situations." and they claim that "Polymindence is simply the ability for a person to say “oh, Lover is active right now” whilst also assigning unique identities to each of them." to simplify, they're giving "unique identities" to normal human things, like acting a bit different around your friends or your lover.
It is important to note that a majority of the sources listed on the polyminds carrd describe subpersonalities as different behaviours, essentially. They are not described as beings or individuals but rather just different ways of acting or moods, for example they linked "Love and will : Subpersonalities – The Roles that We Play" which explains subpersonalities as different roles or parts of ourselves we take on in the day, by choice or not, examples given include being a mother, lover, having a flight response, etc. However, the reason I bring up this specific source is because of what else it says about subpersonalities "Subpersonalities are there to serve us. They developed when we were children to help us survive in our families, and they all carry a special quality. But the important thing to realize that you are not any one of them!" this makes an important note between the self and the subpersonalitiy, it notes them as tools to serve us, not as individuals. They do later on advise you to name them in order to help you identity them and sort out conflicts between them, but the important thing to note about this is that the end goal is to "move closer to our true Self and ultimately Joy." not to "be multiple beings", I believe the intention is you'll use this to deal with some inner conflict or issues you have and then move on, not that you will cling to the subpersonalities as unique identities, as it advised by polyminds. So to clarify, naming your subpersonalities is a practice, yes, but it's actually only used to help you communicate and understand your own behaviours and emotions better, it is not intended to be a thing where you pretend they're separate people, hell the names recommended are not names but rather descriptors, such as "work me", "the smart one", ect. Jokes are advised, not real human names like "Aliza" or whatever
But you know what? That source, and this whole thing actually, reminds me a lot of IFS therapy, and I believe this source and some of the others are talking about subpersonalities in the context of IFS therapy, so why don't we talk about IFS therapy?
What is IFS therapy and what does it have to do with polyminds? :
As described by Psychology today; "Internal Family Systems (IFS) is an approach to psychotherapy that identifies and addresses multiple sub-personalities or families within each person’s mental system.", it's a type of therapy that, sort of like described above, gives a name to your subpersonalities and helps you work through them and solve inner conflict caused by them. Subpersonalities, once again, are not individuals, they are parts of you, roles you take on, behaviours you have, suppressed emotions, etc. There is no separation between them and you, they are not different consciousnesses. They essentially come from the idea of "one part of me wants to do this but one part of me wants to do that". The goal of IFS therapy is to identify these subpersonalities, particularly the ones that are suppressed emotions, to work through your feelings about them and then release them so you are free to address the actual problem and learn to deal with conflict by yourself. It works to allow you to control over all your subpersonalities (so your unconscious behaviours such as your fight or flight response, repressed feelings, "roles" you've taken on and internalized such as being a parent, lover, worker, etc) and by the end you should be yourself, not identifying with multiple "unique individuals" that are your subpersonalities.
Polyminds claim they are different to IFS therapy in their FAQ, as they state that "IFS (Internal Family System) is a therapeutic model that functions off subpersonalities and system thinking, it is used in therapy and has the goal of letting all the subpersonalities work together in harmony. Polymindence meanwhile is a self identifiable label that simple describes one’s ability to distinguish subpersonalities. Additionally, subpersonalities in polymindence do not have to get along, let alone work together harmoniously." I find it interesting how they describe IFS therapy, but nonetheless, lets focus on the last line of that a little. "subpersonalities in polymindence do not have to get along, let alone work together harmoniously." which not only solidifies their intention here; to claim their subpersonalities are genuine people akin to alters, but also ENCOURAGES people to separate themselves from their "subpersonalities" by telling them it's normal or possible for them to apparently be whole ass beings with feelings that can dislike eachother. Let me remind you that subpersonalities are literally just parts of you, not beings, they're basically behaviours and feelings you have
Even so, what is the issue with polyminds? :
Outside of the point just above here, which is already fucked up, we have the below reasons;
Reason 01 : being based off of and clearly wanting to be systems :
The whole idea of polyminds is clearly based upon systems, as can be seen with the idea of giving their subpersonalities "unique identities" and even referring to them as "states" (eerily similar to alter, which stands for alternative states of consciousness), although apparently they also refer to them as "minds", but we can also see this in their terms and the way they're described. Particularly, we see in the collective terms, things such as "collective self" ("An identity that most, if not all minds feel represented by.") literally just their version of a collective identity (an identity all or most of the system can identify with or agree upon), "mindcount" ("The amount of minds a specific mind has.") which is a take on headcount (The amount of alters a system has), "fictling" ("A mind who is based off a fictional character.") clearly a take on fictive (an introject of a fictional source), infact all the "-ling" terms seem to be based on introjects. "Media" ("The certain thing that a fictling is based off.") clearly their version of a source (what an introject is based on). We can also see that their "jobs" are literally just already coined alter roles but "remade" to ft their imaginary "states". (especially sponge, trickster and keeper - which is 100% gatekeeper/holder mixed - I KNOW I've seen before with those exact definitions minus the whole "mind" thing). Also, the carrd for it directly states in the FAQ that polyminds can choose to identify as plural, or to quote what was said "Whether or not a polymind considers themselves plural is, ultimately, fully up to them. Polymindence by itself is not set to be inherently plural or not plural.". I should not have to explain why "identifying" as plural is bad, its literally just endo shit. The whole thing screams someone who looked at systems, wanted to be one but realized endos had controversy with them so they tried to make their own version of endos
reason 02 : it's harmful for the person :
Although the FAQ claims the term polymind is for "those who have already distinguished their subpersonalities for any reason." and that because of that it isn't harmful this is objectively false. If a person is already struggling with identity issues telling them that they can simply "identify as having unique individuals in their head" is going to make it worse. There is a reason that dissociation so heavy it creates alternative identity states is considered a symptom of a disorder, and it's incredibly sad that I have to keep repeating this. When talking about IFS, specifically the subpersonalities and identifying them part of IFS therapy, Psychology today states "IFS may not be appropriate for patients with severe mental illnesses that involve psychosis or paranoia, such as schizophrenia. Describing a person as having “parts” may be unproductive or harmful for those patients." and while not everyone who claims to have "distinguished subpersonalities" may fit under any of those terms or have those issues I still think it shows they have something going on, and I don't feel like telling them "go on, identify as plural- I mean polymind, unless you wanna be plural that is" is exactly helpful. This is the kind of thing someone should be dealing with privately with their therapist, not something they should be coining terms for on the internet so they can pretend to be a system without admitting that's what they're doing. Cause at the end of the day subpersonalities are not supposed to really be "separate" or "unique individuals", subpersonalities is essentially a different term for things like different emotional states, different ways of behaving due to different social contexts, repressed emotions, maybe trauma, ect. They aren't actually personalities or even parts of a person like you might see in DID/OSDD and yet the carrd seems to believe they are and encourages others to treat them as such. Also, let's state the obvious, this is dissociating themselves from their identity, it will have consequences on their mental health and if they already struggle with identity issues or dissociation it will make those issues worse. According to Webmd on Disscoiation, it is advised you "Talk to a doctor or health care provider if you experience recurring symptoms of dissociation, which can include having an out-of-body experience or feeling like you're a different person from time to time.", and the important part here is the "feeling like you're a different person" part that is being encouraged by polyminds, the takeaway being that polyminds who experience dissociation to this level are likely going to start struggling with their mental health and potentially develop a dissociative disorder of their own (and no, it won't be DID)
The fact is that even if polyminds claim not to be harmful there is no warning at all on the carrd about the potential risks of seperating yourself like this, infact they claim they assume you already have which only makes it worse. If you genunely feel as if you have "unique individuals" in your head or like you are "multiple people" or something plase talk to a doctor, don't engage in silly online shit like this, you're only going to hurt yourself more. I know i've repeated myself here but I do thing it's important to hammer in that feeling like you have multiple identites or "unique individuals" in your head or anything like that is not normal and it is something you should be seeking help for. The fact these polyminds try to normalise or even romantaise this is really disgusting
reason 03 : There is no real need for this term if it really isn't a "system thing" :
If the intention wasn't to be a system / endo equivlant term there would be no need for it. There would be no need to post publicly about your subpersonalities, no need to demand people acknloldge them or anything. Because the purpose of identifying your subpersonalities is meant to be a personal thing or a thing with your therapist. It is unhealthy to encourage people to have them seperate enough that they make others call them by those names or pretend they're different people and it is downright ableist. Because if it wasn't a system thing this would've never came up, the idea of unique indivudals 100% stems from systems and this is just the "correct" version of being an endo. If it wasn't why would there be a need for terms like "mindcount", "fictling", "collective self" ect
Polyminds are not only ableist for essentially just taking the symptoms of DID, changing a few words around and deciding "yeah thats me now" but they're also dangerous. They encourage people to ruin their own mental health by forcing dissociation where there is none.
