~ Plural collective of 5 ~ Blog by median headmates Thorn & Dimitri ~ they/them ~ Adaptive system | Fully endo-friendly ~ Other headmates: Kyra, Secile, Ronnie ~ Adult / Alterhuman / 🜃
protogenic is a weird term.
everyone is born plural that means nothing
to explain because i know some people will be weird, every person when theyre born has multiple parts of themselves in most cases these parts will combine into one person but in same cases they never combine or late in life split and thats plurality
That's not what a protogenic system is, at least typically. In that theory the parts don't integrate due to trauma or attachment disorders, whereas a protogenic system may not have gone through the trauma to disrupt this integration. Additionally, if a person failed to integrate their ego states or parts in this manner likely they'd still have the trauma aspect or disordered functioning while identifying as a singlet, while a protogenic system isn't necessarily going to have this.
No, if you're using the theory of structural dissociation (which it seems like you are?) a protogenic system isn't really a thing under that theory. Protogenic systems are non-traumagenic, not explained by the theory of structural dissociation. A person who is born with ego states and doesn't integrate them doesn't become a protogenic system under that theory, while you're trying to say the opposite. They're not the same.
you are intentionally being stupid. there are two types of systems, those whose ego states never fused, and those whose ego states fused but later separated.
you explained exactly what I did as to why protogenic doesn’t make sense and is inherently illogical, and then tried to claim I’m wrong. We agree with each other why are we fighting
Ego states as seen in traumagenic systems are not typically what being protogenic is referring to. You citing the theory of structural dissociation (where this theory comes from) doesn't make sense to explain protogenic systems, because protogenic systems are not traumagenic. Nobody is born plural under the theory, everyone is born with ego states.
you are intentionally being stupid. there are two types of systems, those whose ego states never fused, and those whose ego states fused but later separated.
A protogenic system would typically be neither of those, because a protogenic system is not traumagenic.
I don't agree that protogenic is "illogical", I'm saying your very idea of the term is wrong.
so like those formed from spiritual reasons, or those who formed from being otherkin/fictionkin, or those who were born as plural, or those who are mixed origin, or those who are daydreamers whose daydream characters develop personhood and sentience, or those formed from pleasant experiences that made them feel like different people, or those who have other disorders that make them experience plural or plural-like sensations/experiences that do not form from trauma or are not correlated to a CDD, or...
do you mean only formed from "non traumatic" stress and neglect.
spiritual plurality is real plurality, otherkin can cause plurality, your post on protogenic said that everyone is plural at birth so i dont get that, daydreaming can cause plurality, you like making stuff up now so i guess im with you on that, and okay
i know what endogenic systems are, more than you. anyway i love spiritual systems and willogenic/created systems and all endogenic systems. and traumagenic systems.
The only way to force plurality is through self harm
The myth of willogenics is the idea that anyone can become plural just because they want which is not only not true, but rooted in ableist sterotypes
it's very funny to say "this is impossible" and then go "well it'd be self harm" that's implying
that being plural is a form of harm or negative change to one's state
that it is possible but it would be harmful
you can just say "if you tried to force yourself to be plural it would just harm you" but you said "the only way to force plurality", which implies that it IS a thing you can do. like how the only way to bleed is to cut a blood vessel or whatever. vein. thing.
protogenic is a weird term.
everyone is born plural that means nothing
to explain because i know some people will be weird, every person when theyre born has multiple parts of themselves in most cases these parts will combine into one person but in same cases they never combine or late in life split and thats plurality
That's not what a protogenic system is, at least typically. In that theory the parts don't integrate due to trauma or attachment disorders, whereas a protogenic system may not have gone through the trauma to disrupt this integration. Additionally, if a person failed to integrate their ego states or parts in this manner likely they'd still have the trauma aspect or disordered functioning while identifying as a singlet, while a protogenic system isn't necessarily going to have this.
No, if you're using the theory of structural dissociation (which it seems like you are?) a protogenic system isn't really a thing under that theory. Protogenic systems are non-traumagenic, not explained by the theory of structural dissociation. A person who is born with ego states and doesn't integrate them doesn't become a protogenic system under that theory, while you're trying to say the opposite. They're not the same.
you are intentionally being stupid. there are two types of systems, those whose ego states never fused, and those whose ego states fused but later separated.
you explained exactly what I did as to why protogenic doesn’t make sense and is inherently illogical, and then tried to claim I’m wrong. We agree with each other why are we fighting
The only way to force plurality is through self harm
The myth of willogenics is the idea that anyone can become plural just because they want which is not only not true, but rooted in ableist sterotypes
it's very funny to say "this is impossible" and then go "well it'd be self harm" that's implying
that being plural is a form of harm or negative change to one's state
that it is possible but it would be harmful
you can just say "if you tried to force yourself to be plural it would just harm you" but you said "the only way to force plurality", which implies that it IS a thing you can do. like how the only way to bleed is to cut a blood vessel or whatever. vein. thing.
So I was, as recently as yesterday, on the fence about this. I'm a system diagnosed with DID from trauma, before anyone gets uppity.
I was like "I get being endo, saying something other than trauma formed your system, but I don't understand why someone would harm themself to make their own system."
Then I got forwarded this paper: https://pubs.sciepub.com/rpbs/5/2/1/index.html
And then my thoughts changed.
So, to give a very very brief summary of the paper. It surveyed around 60 systems with Tulpas and found that the majority of these systems had been diagnosed with a different disorder (borderline, autism, ocd, anxiety/depression, you name it) and that after diagnosis they focused on creating Tulpas. These Tulpas work as accessibility aids almost, with one Tulpa reported to have been able to help someone with Schizophrenia determine reality from hallucinations. In this manner, it seems almost to me like the next step up from "Internal Family System" therapy. These systems actively focused on creating an alter to help them through their difficult life, and that I can understand. Especially in the case of borderline, which is already a dissociative disorder, I understand the helpfulness in wanting to take those aspects of self and more fully realize them to strengthen communication between those parts.
What I'm still trying to wrap my head around is the 34% of systems who took the survey who reported just making their alters... for fun I guess? And I thought about it the same way as you, where you're cutting off an arm and you're sacrificing a sense of self to create something else, and you're optionally choosing to fracture your psyche, so why the fuck would you do that??
Then it got explained to me like this:
it's less like detaching an arm, and more like a branch of a tree growing off the main trunk. nothing is lost from the original by making a tulpa.
&
also with very very rare exception tulpas don't cause memory separation. at most there's "emotional amnesia" - this memory belongs to headmate A, this one belongs to headmate B, etc.
and that started to make a little more sense to me. But then the conversation switched to the sense of self: we don't know the full extent of the human mind. We, as scientists in the world, have not discovered the 'start' and 'end' of the sense of self. We simply don't know what that is supposed to mean.
And alters aren't really an accident- there's purpose in making one, willo or Tulpa. There's a constant retraining of muscles, remembering that you're remembering someone there until it's automatic.
But I think the common denominator conclusion is... people just want to experience another self, and people don't want to be alone. And I guess that's why Tulpas and Willos exist.
I still firmly believe these types of systems exist and are valid. I think it's just not my place anymore to dictate if what they've done to their minds and sense of self is morally "right" or not. But I certainly don't believe its ableist or playing pretend.
----
As a sidenote, thank you to those in the Syscourse Server who educated me a bit and shared their experiences. It's a very helpful/positive place to learn if you're willing to be respectful to one another.
The only way to force plurality is through self harm
The myth of willogenics is the idea that anyone can become plural just because they want which is not only not true, but rooted in ableist sterotypes
if someone were to actually hurt themself to become plural theyd still be plural. explain how they WOULDNT. it may not be a good way but trauma isnt either 🤷🏾
Origin labels are stupid. They dont tell you as much about the system as people think. Whats more important is how the system operates, and when it formed.
The only way to force plurality is through self harm
The myth of willogenics is the idea that anyone can become plural just because they want which is not only not true, but rooted in ableist sterotypes
it's very funny to say "this is impossible" and then go "well it'd be self harm" that's implying
that being plural is a form of harm or negative change to one's state
that it is possible but it would be harmful
you can just say "if you tried to force yourself to be plural it would just harm you" but you said "the only way to force plurality", which implies that it IS a thing you can do. like how the only way to bleed is to cut a blood vessel or whatever. vein. thing.
so like those formed from spiritual reasons, or those who formed from being otherkin/fictionkin, or those who were born as plural, or those who are mixed origin, or those who are daydreamers whose daydream characters develop personhood and sentience, or those formed from pleasant experiences that made them feel like different people, or those who have other disorders that make them experience plural or plural-like sensations/experiences that do not form from trauma or are not correlated to a CDD, or...
do you mean only formed from "non traumatic" stress and neglect.
The only way to force plurality is through self harm
The myth of willogenics is the idea that anyone can become plural just because they want which is not only not true, but rooted in ableist sterotypes
The only way to force plurality is through self harm
The myth of willogenics is the idea that anyone can become plural just because they want which is not only not true, but rooted in ableist sterotypes
The only way to force plurality is through self harm
The myth of willogenics is the idea that anyone can become plural just because they want which is not only not true, but rooted in ableist sterotypes
