Subsystem

Trauma, party of 5 your table is ready. Feel free to ask me anything.

[excessivemultiplicity]

Introduction:

We’re a bunch of parts in a subsystem that want attention really bad so we made a blog for us specifically.

For now there’s only 5 of us participating which may change in the future.

We’re using a bunch of names ripped from song titles in place of our actual names for privacy purposes. So despite being a little strange they don’t have any deeper meaning to us as far as system stuff goes.

Syscourse opinions:

‘Multiplicity with out trauma’ is not an experience that needs to be debated by people who aren’t expecting it. The experiences of those who have multiplicity without trauma do not experience the same thing as those with osdd/did systems.

I believe it is an important nuance to differentiate the experiences of those with multiplicity without trauma and those who have multiplicity with trauma for the sake of both groups.

I don’t believe in using terminology like endogenic or traumagenic since claiming origins is both fakeclaiming bait and bait to get people to retraumatize themselves. It also gives a poor representation of how multiplicity is formed in the brain since it’s typically a long term unconscious process not a one time event.

Based on the groups ‘anti-endo’ and ‘pro-endo’ we sit in the third category ‘endo-neutral’ also now referred to as “syscourse unaligned” for obvious reasons.

You may ask: How can you be neutral on whether something exists or not?

My answer is: syscouse is about so much more than just do ‘endos exist or not’ and as it turns out both sides have some really shitty opinions on really important topics that aren’t the main one. And if you disagree with one opinion you get labeled as the opposing team even if you agree with them on the ‘main issue’.

So basically what Im saying is discourse on tumblr has always been a losing battle. No one wins, everyone just gets mad and stressed.

Do yourself a favor and delete tumblr for a while, it’s the best self care money can buy. (Low price of $0) this isn’t a joke actually.

During peak ace discourse our ace alter was literally so enmeshed into the discourse that it became self destructive. Now I don’t look into the syscourse tags much but I can already see several people diving face first into that slippery slope so please stay safe.

Anyway if you read all that and didn’t send anon death threats, I think you are spectacular!

More about us:

We’re not a minor. We have DID. We also have autism, adhd, anxiety and depression on our long list of diagnoses. Pro-self diagnosis.

Our system isn’t really parts focused lately and it’s been more of a collective approach but our progress has hit a wall in a way that we believe focusing on this subsystem and our individual needs will greatly improve daily life so this blog was made ✌️

[thefluxsystem]

10 mindsets about my DID that have helped my system:

[This is solely for the sake of sharing experiences & supplying food for thought. This post is not implying these takes are the “right way” to view systemhood.]

1. We’re individuals and we’re parts of a whole. We see each other as people in our system, but in a different way than those in their own bodies. We share a brain. We share a life. I’m me, but I’m also him/her/them at the same time. If you take a piece out of a puzzle, it doesn’t cease to exist, right? It’s still its own object. It just doesn’t make much sense when it stands alone. We need each other to be truly complete.

2. Time keeps coming. I know it’s not an unlimited resource, but it’s not scarce either. Okay, so somebody in the system didn’t get to do what they planned today. They’ll do it tomorrow. No big deal. No need to fight about it or stress over “how I’ll ever manage all this”. We’ll simply give it another shot in the morning.

3. Reality is subjective. We’re a very philosophically-inclined system, and I could write books on what “reality is subjective” means. Basically, reality is based on perception. On a societal level, it is based in the common agreement of what something is. If anyone’s perception tests the limits of this common agreement, it is labeled as untrue. This ties into why DID is largely disbelieved; it doesn’t fit in with the common reality (perception) of the average person. So it is seen as fake. And, well, if I’m going to be told I’m wrong for the most basic, inherent part of this disorder… I don’t really care if they disagree with any other aspect of it. My reality is different. That’s okay.

4. There is no original. I strongly believe the Theory of Structural Dissociation. Maybe science will prove it wrong with a more suitable theory to take its place in the future, but it’s what I roll with at the moment. Now, to us, this translates as “there is no original/we were all the original”. We’re Adventure Time fans, so we think of it like the “Mother Gum”. If all of the Mother Gum broke off into people (like PB & Neddy), no specific one of them would be “the original”. Rather, they’d all be repurposed parts of the original whole. (In a less serious way, we like to say “we all came from the primordial personality soup”.)

5. Our body is shared equally. We’ve decided our body has its own identity & “look” that helps represent us as a whole, but doesn’t take after one member specifically. In a gnawingly self-aware way, I know this is a further form of dissociation. But adopting this view changed a lot for us in a positive way. We don’t fight about hair or clothes anymore, we don’t have discomfort around our legal name, we don’t even really have struggles with gender/sexuality anymore. (We identify differently internally, but externally we identify as nonbinary & bisexual. Even if the person fronting at the moment is, for example, a gay man.)

6. Be open-minded to what happens internally. Seems straightforward enough, but we’ve wasted a lot of time trying to “make rules” for each other in the system. The biggest example I can think of is in-system dating. Around 10 years ago, as we became more aware of each other, it became clear that two system members were basically in love. We immediately became defensive. We told them that they couldn’t do that, that two system members being together was absurd & “impossible”. (This view became stronger after discovering online system spaces & “fakeclaimers” that come with it.) Though we regret it now, we shamed those two a lot in the hopes they’d drop it. They didn’t. About 3 years later it became an actual problem. They didn’t trust us; they were fronting & we were coming back to absolutely no memory of it (we usually have a vague idea at least). Eventually, they wrote us a whole thing about how they were going to be together & there was really nothing anyone could do about it, seeing as we couldn’t technically keep them apart. In modern day, we’ve had an in-system couple recently fuse. Upon reflection, we were standing in the way of genuine healing by trying to break up the first two, and we did so solely out of shame. As long as it isn’t genuinely causing harm, we try to be accepting of each other these days. This applies to a lot of other aspects; how system members appear internally, the pronouns and/or identity labels they choose, anything to do with how system members engage with each other, our differing individual perceptions of an event, etc.

7. We don’t have to like each other, but we do have to love each other. Mostly because, if we don’t, we’re holding hatred for ourself. There are certainly members of my system I would never choose to befriend if we were actually separate people, but we’re not, and we don’t get to act like we are. So even though it’s hard, I’m learning to love every piece that makes up “me”, no matter how difficult they try to make it at times.

8. Nobody’s system works like mine except for mine. Meaning, no two systems are going to be alike, and experiences aren’t often going to translate perfectly. This is true for people who aren’t systems as well— everyone’s experience is going to be different, because nobody is wired exactly the same way. Once I took that to heart, it became easier to focus on my own way of being. I could take the pieces of represented/online systemhood that resonate with me & leave the rest (which probably resonates with someone else).

9. There’s a reason for everything. This kind of ties back into the ‘we have to love each other’ thing. Each component of the system is a clue regarding how to move forward. We had someone in the system getting really uptight & controlling, to a point that it was irritating, but, taking a step back, we recognized it was a response to feeling a lack of control. Instead of simply getting angry at him for how he was acting, we were able to address the problem. My collective self is more laid-back for it.

10. It’s okay not to focus on it all. DID is a part of my life for the rest of it, whether I like it or not, but it’s nice to let it be a background thing every once in a while. Who’s fronting? Who cares. What roles do we have? I don’t know. Who’s this new person in my head? I’ll figure it out later. We’re making it through as a team, and sometimes that’s enough.

[morlocksystem]

I'm going to be flat out honest right now but you can tell the difference between a real system and a fake system and it's so glaringly obvious.

[morlocksystem]

Since a lot of people are asking I'll elaborate.

I know most people have jumped to assuming that I mean everyone who is "cringe" is faking, that's not the case. I have very cringe alters and that's okay. I don't care about if someone is cringe. This also has nothing to do with if someone is overt online or not. I'm an overt system, I get it.

How you're able to tell is because "fake" systems (I won't outright claim they're fake, most of them are misguided) tend to have a dramaticised presentation. They tend to have a complete focus on alters rather than the whole disorder. They also show symptoms of factitious disorder (which is a real disorder and having it doesn't make someone a bad person). They show very minimal symptoms of dissociation, and don't really mention it as being part of the disorder whatsoever.

This is also true of a lot of younger systems who are figuring it out and are being pressured by the system community to act a certain way, so it's not a foolproof method.

I'm also going to drop the thing on what factitious DID looks like according to the DSM.

[thecircularsystem]

See, this is interesting to me, as it’s directly related to how I’ve been fakeclaimed in the past.

I’m a DID system, diagnosed for a few years now, and when I was 19, I was self dx’d but. Pretty certain (no other disorders seemed to explain my situation as well).

I was fakeclaimed solely on my CDD positivity blog, from like… 21 onward? And this was the reasoning often used: I was displaying my “good” symptoms too blatantly, talking about my alters too much, not talking about my dissociation enough, etc.

It’s fucking ridiculous to me that folks think that just… not discussing an incredibly traumatic and distressing thing enough = fake. 😭

[excessivemultiplicity]

For the record that excerpt is for doctors to assess based on the patient history not random people, especially not strangers on the internet which it is often used for...

[excessivemultiplicity]

It can't be controversial if no one knows what the fuck you're talking about.

[corinescorner]

Are people with CDDs suffering? Let’s talk about it.

There's a very common misconception that people with DID or OSDD are inherently suffering, While it's true that they can face challenges--just like anyone in life--having a system isn't just a source of pain and misery.

For many, systemhood is a natural part of who they are. It's how their brain adapted to early experiences, it's how they navigate their world. Systems can find joy, strength, and creativity through their alters and system. They can have fufilling lives, have loving relationships, or pursue their career just like anyone else.

Most system suffering comes from other symptoms of the disorder, such as dissociation, amnesia, etc. That doesn't mean they can't be happy with who they are. But some may genuinely not like being a system, and they're just as valid.

[mental-fist-fights]

Every symptom I have is a reminder that I was abused. Any symptom. That's what it means.

Not experiencing a symptom right now? Doesn't matter. I am an alter too. I am never not experiencing a symptom. My existence as Part of the whole is a symptom in itself.

Do I "like" being a system? I appreciate the ways it serves me. I equally lothe losing days, weeks, months at a time or not recognizing myself in the mirror or faking my way through conversation about things I have no memories of.

I don't spend every moment of every day in deep sorrow and anger, but a great amount of time is frustration.

Those with cohesion and Parts who enjoy their existence. Cool. But it ain't me.

[corinescorner]

OK. The post wasn’t about you then.

[mental-fist-fights]

A post about DID is inherently "about me" as I have DID.

Man. I hope you're able to find some of that positivity you talk about and show that when people are indeed suffering and not just those who agree with you.

[oopsallsyscourse]

Your experience is not universal. And same goes for the experience brought up by the OP. That's the whole point of the post. Saying everyone with CDDs suffers from their plurality specifically is inaccurate, just like saying no one with CDDs suffers from their plurality. There's a variety of experiences and each one is valid. That's what the post is trying to say. Not every post on DID is going to apply to you.

[mental-fist-fights]

Yes I'm glad we agree. Hence I made a rb expanding on my experience. Not implying my experience is everyone's.

[excessivemultiplicity]

Saying something that is in direct opposition to the original post is in fact debating the original post.

It is implying that the above statement cannot be true since you specifically aren't like that.

You have to choose your words more carefully if you don't actually want to have a conversation about it.

[mental-fist-fights]

I acknowledged the sentiment in the OP post and said how that's cool for those who have that experience.

Also opening a post with "let's talk about it" and then not wanting someone to talk about it is a little wild imo.

[excessivemultiplicity]

I do think, again, it's a matter of the words you chose, what you said was dismissive rather than conversational or constructive.

So needless to say conflict was unavoidable given all parties involved are those with trauma disorders. People have a tendency to react defensively to something perceived as dismissive of their own experiences.

[mental-fist-fights]

Sounds like something they should tackle with emotion regulation skills if that's the case .

My reply had no malice toward OP. Didn't directly attack OP or generalize my experience to being that of a whole community.

If my words are read in a tone they give it, it's out of my control. That's the nature of reading vs speaking.

[excessivemultiplicity]

I think it was pretty widely read as dismissive. That remark was mostly about the responses you got from it.

Like the OP did acknowledge that some people have experiences more like yours and that not everyone experiences it the same way. So specifically sharing your experience and explicitly stating that the other experience "aint me" was in fact not a conversational statement to make but a heavily dismissive one even if you thought it was an acknowledgment.

[mental-fist-fights]

Alright listen. I've said it nicely. But everyone is busy crying because someone felt a different way and now your fee-fees are hurt.

SKILL ISSUE. GET GOOD. GET THICKER SKIN OR GET OFF THE GOD DAMN FUCKING INTERNET GOOD LORD NONE OF YOU HAVE ANYTHING NEW TO SAY AND JUST CRY OVER ME SAYING MY TRAUMA IN FACT DOES SUCK AND CAUSE ME SUFFING. ME. NOT YOU. NOT ABYONE ELSE. ME I TALK ABOUT ME. YOU ARE MAKING IT ABOUT YOU AT THIS POINT.

[excessivemultiplicity]

Did that hurt your feelings? You know you don't have to respond, yes?

[mental-fist-fights]

My brother in Christ. No. I'm just begining to wonder if everyone on this site is actually just a 3rd grader who hasn't learned social context yet.

Trust me. Y'all have been nothing but entertaining but Im begging to see how dim the light is in all of you at this rate.

[excessivemultiplicity]

I mean you're reacting the same way as you're complaining about. Which I think you should take note of.

[mental-fist-fights]

You are no longer necessary in this conversation. Thank you for your time :)

[excessivemultiplicity]

I appreciate your time as well.

[corinescorner]

Are people with CDDs suffering? Let’s talk about it.

There's a very common misconception that people with DID or OSDD are inherently suffering, While it's true that they can face challenges--just like anyone in life--having a system isn't just a source of pain and misery.

For many, systemhood is a natural part of who they are. It's how their brain adapted to early experiences, it's how they navigate their world. Systems can find joy, strength, and creativity through their alters and system. They can have fufilling lives, have loving relationships, or pursue their career just like anyone else.

Most system suffering comes from other symptoms of the disorder, such as dissociation, amnesia, etc. That doesn't mean they can't be happy with who they are. But some may genuinely not like being a system, and they're just as valid.

[mental-fist-fights]

Every symptom I have is a reminder that I was abused. Any symptom. That's what it means.

Not experiencing a symptom right now? Doesn't matter. I am an alter too. I am never not experiencing a symptom. My existence as Part of the whole is a symptom in itself.

Do I "like" being a system? I appreciate the ways it serves me. I equally lothe losing days, weeks, months at a time or not recognizing myself in the mirror or faking my way through conversation about things I have no memories of.

I don't spend every moment of every day in deep sorrow and anger, but a great amount of time is frustration.

Those with cohesion and Parts who enjoy their existence. Cool. But it ain't me.

[corinescorner]

OK. The post wasn’t about you then.

[mental-fist-fights]

A post about DID is inherently "about me" as I have DID.

Man. I hope you're able to find some of that positivity you talk about and show that when people are indeed suffering and not just those who agree with you.

[oopsallsyscourse]

Your experience is not universal. And same goes for the experience brought up by the OP. That's the whole point of the post. Saying everyone with CDDs suffers from their plurality specifically is inaccurate, just like saying no one with CDDs suffers from their plurality. There's a variety of experiences and each one is valid. That's what the post is trying to say. Not every post on DID is going to apply to you.

[mental-fist-fights]

Yes I'm glad we agree. Hence I made a rb expanding on my experience. Not implying my experience is everyone's.

[excessivemultiplicity]

Saying something that is in direct opposition to the original post is in fact debating the original post.

It is implying that the above statement cannot be true since you specifically aren't like that.

You have to choose your words more carefully if you don't actually want to have a conversation about it.

[mental-fist-fights]

I acknowledged the sentiment in the OP post and said how that's cool for those who have that experience.

Also opening a post with "let's talk about it" and then not wanting someone to talk about it is a little wild imo.

[excessivemultiplicity]

I do think, again, it's a matter of the words you chose, what you said was dismissive rather than conversational or constructive.

So needless to say conflict was unavoidable given all parties involved are those with trauma disorders. People have a tendency to react defensively to something perceived as dismissive of their own experiences.

[mental-fist-fights]

Sounds like something they should tackle with emotion regulation skills if that's the case .

My reply had no malice toward OP. Didn't directly attack OP or generalize my experience to being that of a whole community.

If my words are read in a tone they give it, it's out of my control. That's the nature of reading vs speaking.

[excessivemultiplicity]

I think it was pretty widely read as dismissive. That remark was mostly about the responses you got from it.

Like the OP did acknowledge that some people have experiences more like yours and that not everyone experiences it the same way. So specifically sharing your experience and explicitly stating that the other experience "aint me" was in fact not a conversational statement to make but a heavily dismissive one even if you thought it was an acknowledgment.

[mental-fist-fights]

Alright listen. I've said it nicely. But everyone is busy crying because someone felt a different way and now your fee-fees are hurt.

SKILL ISSUE. GET GOOD. GET THICKER SKIN OR GET OFF THE GOD DAMN FUCKING INTERNET GOOD LORD NONE OF YOU HAVE ANYTHING NEW TO SAY AND JUST CRY OVER ME SAYING MY TRAUMA IN FACT DOES SUCK AND CAUSE ME SUFFING. ME. NOT YOU. NOT ABYONE ELSE. ME I TALK ABOUT ME. YOU ARE MAKING IT ABOUT YOU AT THIS POINT.

[excessivemultiplicity]

Did that hurt your feelings? You know you don't have to respond, yes?

[mental-fist-fights]

My brother in Christ. No. I'm just begining to wonder if everyone on this site is actually just a 3rd grader who hasn't learned social context yet.

Trust me. Y'all have been nothing but entertaining but Im begging to see how dim the light is in all of you at this rate.

[excessivemultiplicity]

I mean you're reacting the same way as you're complaining about. Which I think you should take note of.

[corinescorner]

Are people with CDDs suffering? Let’s talk about it.

There's a very common misconception that people with DID or OSDD are inherently suffering, While it's true that they can face challenges--just like anyone in life--having a system isn't just a source of pain and misery.

For many, systemhood is a natural part of who they are. It's how their brain adapted to early experiences, it's how they navigate their world. Systems can find joy, strength, and creativity through their alters and system. They can have fufilling lives, have loving relationships, or pursue their career just like anyone else.

Most system suffering comes from other symptoms of the disorder, such as dissociation, amnesia, etc. That doesn't mean they can't be happy with who they are. But some may genuinely not like being a system, and they're just as valid.

[mental-fist-fights]

Every symptom I have is a reminder that I was abused. Any symptom. That's what it means.

Not experiencing a symptom right now? Doesn't matter. I am an alter too. I am never not experiencing a symptom. My existence as Part of the whole is a symptom in itself.

Do I "like" being a system? I appreciate the ways it serves me. I equally lothe losing days, weeks, months at a time or not recognizing myself in the mirror or faking my way through conversation about things I have no memories of.

I don't spend every moment of every day in deep sorrow and anger, but a great amount of time is frustration.

Those with cohesion and Parts who enjoy their existence. Cool. But it ain't me.

[corinescorner]

OK. The post wasn’t about you then.

[mental-fist-fights]

A post about DID is inherently "about me" as I have DID.

Man. I hope you're able to find some of that positivity you talk about and show that when people are indeed suffering and not just those who agree with you.

[oopsallsyscourse]

Your experience is not universal. And same goes for the experience brought up by the OP. That's the whole point of the post. Saying everyone with CDDs suffers from their plurality specifically is inaccurate, just like saying no one with CDDs suffers from their plurality. There's a variety of experiences and each one is valid. That's what the post is trying to say. Not every post on DID is going to apply to you.

[mental-fist-fights]

Yes I'm glad we agree. Hence I made a rb expanding on my experience. Not implying my experience is everyone's.

[excessivemultiplicity]

Saying something that is in direct opposition to the original post is in fact debating the original post.

It is implying that the above statement cannot be true since you specifically aren't like that.

You have to choose your words more carefully if you don't actually want to have a conversation about it.

[mental-fist-fights]

I acknowledged the sentiment in the OP post and said how that's cool for those who have that experience.

Also opening a post with "let's talk about it" and then not wanting someone to talk about it is a little wild imo.

[excessivemultiplicity]

I do think, again, it's a matter of the words you chose, what you said was dismissive rather than conversational or constructive.

So needless to say conflict was unavoidable given all parties involved are those with trauma disorders. People have a tendency to react defensively to something perceived as dismissive of their own experiences.

[mental-fist-fights]

Sounds like something they should tackle with emotion regulation skills if that's the case .

My reply had no malice toward OP. Didn't directly attack OP or generalize my experience to being that of a whole community.

If my words are read in a tone they give it, it's out of my control. That's the nature of reading vs speaking.

[excessivemultiplicity]

I think it was pretty widely read as dismissive. That remark was mostly about the responses you got from it.

Like the OP did acknowledge that some people have experiences more like yours and that not everyone experiences it the same way. So specifically sharing your experience and explicitly stating that the other experience "aint me" was in fact not a conversational statement to make but a heavily dismissive one even if you thought it was an acknowledgment.

[mental-fist-fights]

Alright listen. I've said it nicely. But everyone is busy crying because someone felt a different way and now your fee-fees are hurt.

SKILL ISSUE. GET GOOD. GET THICKER SKIN OR GET OFF THE GOD DAMN FUCKING INTERNET GOOD LORD NONE OF YOU HAVE ANYTHING NEW TO SAY AND JUST CRY OVER ME SAYING MY TRAUMA IN FACT DOES SUCK AND CAUSE ME SUFFING. ME. NOT YOU. NOT ABYONE ELSE. ME I TALK ABOUT ME. YOU ARE MAKING IT ABOUT YOU AT THIS POINT.

[excessivemultiplicity]

Did that hurt your feelings? You know you don't have to respond, yes?

[corinescorner]

Are people with CDDs suffering? Let’s talk about it.

There's a very common misconception that people with DID or OSDD are inherently suffering, While it's true that they can face challenges--just like anyone in life--having a system isn't just a source of pain and misery.

For many, systemhood is a natural part of who they are. It's how their brain adapted to early experiences, it's how they navigate their world. Systems can find joy, strength, and creativity through their alters and system. They can have fufilling lives, have loving relationships, or pursue their career just like anyone else.

Most system suffering comes from other symptoms of the disorder, such as dissociation, amnesia, etc. That doesn't mean they can't be happy with who they are. But some may genuinely not like being a system, and they're just as valid.

[mental-fist-fights]

Every symptom I have is a reminder that I was abused. Any symptom. That's what it means.

Not experiencing a symptom right now? Doesn't matter. I am an alter too. I am never not experiencing a symptom. My existence as Part of the whole is a symptom in itself.

Do I "like" being a system? I appreciate the ways it serves me. I equally lothe losing days, weeks, months at a time or not recognizing myself in the mirror or faking my way through conversation about things I have no memories of.

I don't spend every moment of every day in deep sorrow and anger, but a great amount of time is frustration.

Those with cohesion and Parts who enjoy their existence. Cool. But it ain't me.

[corinescorner]

OK. The post wasn’t about you then.

[mental-fist-fights]

A post about DID is inherently "about me" as I have DID.

Man. I hope you're able to find some of that positivity you talk about and show that when people are indeed suffering and not just those who agree with you.

[oopsallsyscourse]

Your experience is not universal. And same goes for the experience brought up by the OP. That's the whole point of the post. Saying everyone with CDDs suffers from their plurality specifically is inaccurate, just like saying no one with CDDs suffers from their plurality. There's a variety of experiences and each one is valid. That's what the post is trying to say. Not every post on DID is going to apply to you.

[mental-fist-fights]

Yes I'm glad we agree. Hence I made a rb expanding on my experience. Not implying my experience is everyone's.

[excessivemultiplicity]

Saying something that is in direct opposition to the original post is in fact debating the original post.

It is implying that the above statement cannot be true since you specifically aren't like that.

You have to choose your words more carefully if you don't actually want to have a conversation about it.

[mental-fist-fights]

I acknowledged the sentiment in the OP post and said how that's cool for those who have that experience.

Also opening a post with "let's talk about it" and then not wanting someone to talk about it is a little wild imo.

[excessivemultiplicity]

I do think, again, it's a matter of the words you chose, what you said was dismissive rather than conversational or constructive.

So needless to say conflict was unavoidable given all parties involved are those with trauma disorders. People have a tendency to react defensively to something perceived as dismissive of their own experiences.

[mental-fist-fights]

Sounds like something they should tackle with emotion regulation skills if that's the case .

My reply had no malice toward OP. Didn't directly attack OP or generalize my experience to being that of a whole community.

If my words are read in a tone they give it, it's out of my control. That's the nature of reading vs speaking.

[excessivemultiplicity]

I think it was pretty widely read as dismissive. That remark was mostly about the responses you got from it.

Like the OP did acknowledge that some people have experiences more like yours and that not everyone experiences it the same way. So specifically sharing your experience and explicitly stating that the other experience "aint me" was in fact not a conversational statement to make but a heavily dismissive one even if you thought it was an acknowledgment.

[corinescorner]

Are people with CDDs suffering? Let’s talk about it.

There's a very common misconception that people with DID or OSDD are inherently suffering, While it's true that they can face challenges--just like anyone in life--having a system isn't just a source of pain and misery.

For many, systemhood is a natural part of who they are. It's how their brain adapted to early experiences, it's how they navigate their world. Systems can find joy, strength, and creativity through their alters and system. They can have fufilling lives, have loving relationships, or pursue their career just like anyone else.

Most system suffering comes from other symptoms of the disorder, such as dissociation, amnesia, etc. That doesn't mean they can't be happy with who they are. But some may genuinely not like being a system, and they're just as valid.

[mental-fist-fights]

Every symptom I have is a reminder that I was abused. Any symptom. That's what it means.

Not experiencing a symptom right now? Doesn't matter. I am an alter too. I am never not experiencing a symptom. My existence as Part of the whole is a symptom in itself.

Do I "like" being a system? I appreciate the ways it serves me. I equally lothe losing days, weeks, months at a time or not recognizing myself in the mirror or faking my way through conversation about things I have no memories of.

I don't spend every moment of every day in deep sorrow and anger, but a great amount of time is frustration.

Those with cohesion and Parts who enjoy their existence. Cool. But it ain't me.

[corinescorner]

OK. The post wasn’t about you then.

[mental-fist-fights]

A post about DID is inherently "about me" as I have DID.

Man. I hope you're able to find some of that positivity you talk about and show that when people are indeed suffering and not just those who agree with you.

[oopsallsyscourse]

Your experience is not universal. And same goes for the experience brought up by the OP. That's the whole point of the post. Saying everyone with CDDs suffers from their plurality specifically is inaccurate, just like saying no one with CDDs suffers from their plurality. There's a variety of experiences and each one is valid. That's what the post is trying to say. Not every post on DID is going to apply to you.

[mental-fist-fights]

Yes I'm glad we agree. Hence I made a rb expanding on my experience. Not implying my experience is everyone's.

[excessivemultiplicity]

Saying something that is in direct opposition to the original post is in fact debating the original post.

It is implying that the above statement cannot be true since you specifically aren't like that.

You have to choose your words more carefully if you don't actually want to have a conversation about it.

[mental-fist-fights]

I acknowledged the sentiment in the OP post and said how that's cool for those who have that experience.

Also opening a post with "let's talk about it" and then not wanting someone to talk about it is a little wild imo.

[excessivemultiplicity]

I do think, again, it's a matter of the words you chose, what you said was dismissive rather than conversational or constructive.

So needless to say conflict was unavoidable given all parties involved are those with trauma disorders. People have a tendency to react defensively to something perceived as dismissive of their own experiences.

[corinescorner]

Are people with CDDs suffering? Let’s talk about it.

There's a very common misconception that people with DID or OSDD are inherently suffering, While it's true that they can face challenges--just like anyone in life--having a system isn't just a source of pain and misery.

For many, systemhood is a natural part of who they are. It's how their brain adapted to early experiences, it's how they navigate their world. Systems can find joy, strength, and creativity through their alters and system. They can have fufilling lives, have loving relationships, or pursue their career just like anyone else.

Most system suffering comes from other symptoms of the disorder, such as dissociation, amnesia, etc. That doesn't mean they can't be happy with who they are. But some may genuinely not like being a system, and they're just as valid.

[mental-fist-fights]

Every symptom I have is a reminder that I was abused. Any symptom. That's what it means.

Not experiencing a symptom right now? Doesn't matter. I am an alter too. I am never not experiencing a symptom. My existence as Part of the whole is a symptom in itself.

Do I "like" being a system? I appreciate the ways it serves me. I equally lothe losing days, weeks, months at a time or not recognizing myself in the mirror or faking my way through conversation about things I have no memories of.

I don't spend every moment of every day in deep sorrow and anger, but a great amount of time is frustration.

Those with cohesion and Parts who enjoy their existence. Cool. But it ain't me.

[corinescorner]

OK. The post wasn’t about you then.

[mental-fist-fights]

A post about DID is inherently "about me" as I have DID.

Man. I hope you're able to find some of that positivity you talk about and show that when people are indeed suffering and not just those who agree with you.

[oopsallsyscourse]

Your experience is not universal. And same goes for the experience brought up by the OP. That's the whole point of the post. Saying everyone with CDDs suffers from their plurality specifically is inaccurate, just like saying no one with CDDs suffers from their plurality. There's a variety of experiences and each one is valid. That's what the post is trying to say. Not every post on DID is going to apply to you.

[mental-fist-fights]

Yes I'm glad we agree. Hence I made a rb expanding on my experience. Not implying my experience is everyone's.

[excessivemultiplicity]

Saying something that is in direct opposition to the original post is in fact debating the original post.

It is implying that the above statement cannot be true since you specifically aren't like that.

You have to choose your words more carefully if you don't actually want to have a conversation about it.

[rocambolesystem]

⚠️ UNDERRATED SYSTEM GAME ⚠️

Halloween is coming and you should play Pocket Mirror!! It's a beautiful horror j-rpg exploring the disordered systemhood of a little girl from the 19th century. The game shows, instead of talking about, her dissociative disorder. Despite her being traumagenic, there is some mysterious spiritual meddling with her life and system which brings more interesting stories to her journey. I don't know if anyone in the dev team is plural but I'd say they did a pretty good representation, and a great game overall! (Ps: it has animated cutscenes in the cutest art style ever)

Trigger warnings for classic horror stuff like blood and chasing sequences. But nothing remotely sexual-related, as far as I remember.

There's the classic and remastered version. I can't give opinions about the remaster because I haven't played/seen it.

The whole game looks like pure fairytale magic btw.

Pocket Mirror Classic

Pocket Mirror Remastered

[oopsallsyscourse]

Is the representation implicit or explicit?

[swanpaw]

i haven’t played it but a friend of mine has, iirc it’s attributed to schizophrenia and not DID so that’s a little . uh

[rocambolesystem]

It's been a while since I played it, idk what the devs said personally but since the game is set in the 18th century, I interpreted that the psychology mentioned would be outdated on purpose, since back then things were labeled as melancholy, hysteria etc. The girl, both on-screen and from backstop clues, doesn't exhibit any schizophrenic symptoms... I don't wanna give spoilers but there are more things that make me believe the devs researched DID while making it.

[excessivemultiplicity]

@oopsallsyscourse this reblog explains it well

[rocambolesystem]

⚠️ UNDERRATED SYSTEM GAME ⚠️

Halloween is coming and you should play Pocket Mirror!! It's a beautiful horror j-rpg exploring the disordered systemhood of a little girl from the 19th century. The game shows, instead of talking about, her dissociative disorder. Despite her being traumagenic, there is some mysterious spiritual meddling with her life and system which brings more interesting stories to her journey. I don't know if anyone in the dev team is plural but I'd say they did a pretty good representation, and a great game overall! (Ps: it has animated cutscenes in the cutest art style ever)

Trigger warnings for classic horror stuff like blood and chasing sequences. But nothing remotely sexual-related, as far as I remember.

There's the classic and remastered version. I can't give opinions about the remaster because I haven't played/seen it.

The whole game looks like pure fairytale magic btw.

Pocket Mirror Classic

Pocket Mirror Remastered

[oopsallsyscourse]

Is the representation implicit or explicit?

[swanpaw]

i haven’t played it but a friend of mine has, iirc it’s attributed to schizophrenia and not DID so that’s a little . uh

[oopsallsyscourse]

Yeah, that's not representation, unfortunately.

[excessivemultiplicity]

She's literally collecting fragments of herself for the mirror it's pretty obviously DID imo

[circular-bircular]

I'm putting this blog to rest.

I'm done. I'm out. And god, is it a relief.

You might notice I'm posting this around the same time that SAS is posting a major post in an effort to light the tag on fire. I highly doubt it'll work, but it's the best attempt. Me and SAS are close. Nearly one in the same, some days...

You'll notice the end of the post says, "just wait for what happens next."

This is what happens next.

I'm deleting my syscourse blogs. Finally. No "maybe I will" or "I've been considering it." I've been considering it for a loooong time, and I've actually been intending on getting rid of Circular's-Reasoning for awhile now. I just... haven't had the energy to.

But now... My life is moving on. I'm moving on, quite literally, I gain possession of my new house... probably today when I end up posting this. I'm not sure, it's my first draft, we'll see how this goes. That's terrifying to realize. I'm like... an adult. I'm an adult who's craving good conversations about my disorder, about systemhood and how it's conceptualized, and more intricate parts of my selfhood. And... Syscourse just is not that.

I've done this sort of thing before, if you all know MotCR -- @memoriesofthecircularroom, for the uninitiated. That's the OG Circular Blog, and is an archive of the first few years of syscourse. But... Now, it's going to become a bit more. Here's my game plan.

I update MotCR to be the Circular Archive. Anything I think needs archiving -- good posts of mine, silly reblogs, or just good posts overall where I added something of my own -- will get reblogged there. It's gonna be busy for a bit.

In the meantime while I start that process, I answer any and all final questions/asks or drafts that've been in the works. I don't want to leave people hanging.

I delete a lot of blogs. And... I do mean a lot -- not even just the syscourse ones. Just the ones I think it's time to let go of.

I've often teased how many blogs I have. It's fluctuated wildly in the past. But here's the down and dirty. Here's what I own, and what I'm planning on removing.

@circular-bircular (Hi, Hello, You're Here)

@circulars-reasoning (Already planned to be gone awhile ago)

@systemquirks (I just don't have the energy to run it, and I'm so sorry for that)

@yourfaveissecretlysas (Yes, I am the one running that)

@system-confessions (Surprise! No name blog that barely exists, again, I don't have the energy)

@debunkingsyscourse (Look, I make these too easily)

@equalsys (Not sure how this is a shocker to anyone)

@ricejustdidthings (An old system-no-syscourse blog I have that I don't use anymore)

@my-systems-cringe (Been meaning to delete this for ages)

@circulars-answers (Unneeded)

And potentially one other, unnamed for now blog -- that's the one I've never told people I have outside of select discords...

So that's 11 blogs I'm getting rid of, potentially more. And that's with me still keeping 2 syscourse blogs and an 18+ system blog. Jesus christ.

It feels good to get it off my chest, though. It feels really good to be leaving.

"But Circ! Your posts make me happy!"

Fantastic! You can follow the new system blog I'm going to be making, @thecircularsystem (is that link working? I don't know, it's a brand new blog.)

Try this link out instead if that doesn't work!

I'm still going to be posting system related content there. I'm still going to be doing my normal random shit that I always do. I may even dabble in syscourse -- and definitely in sysconversation. I like that tag! But I'm not going to be doing syscourse nearly as often, and I'm going to try and stay out of that tag in search of reblogs and such. Too often, it results in me getting aggressive with someone, rather than just... spreading good information about systems, or existing online as I want to exist.

I just need a refresh. A new step, a big change. I'm moving on.

I really hope you all can too <3

[sysmedsaresexist]

hi!! i wanna ask since i've seen this float around the internet and couldn't get more in-depth info about it, but can osdd-1 be polyfragmented?

So, this is actually a pretty complicated topic. First off, I gotta know how we're describing "polyfragmented" here. Some people use it to describe systems with 100+ parts (mostly fragments/rudimentary parts), other people use it to talk about systems with subsystems, and then lately the online community has started to say it's both and more than that but also none of that. So, yeah, I'm gonna need to know how you personally describe it to give you a more concrete answer.

Now here comes the rambles... (Also, sorry if I sound a little blunt talking about this, it's not aimed at you!)

So, I know that the online community really likes "polyfragmented" as a term, but in modern academic literature and in my medical circles, it's not really common? I just don't hear "polyfragmented" being used that often. Large amounts of parts, subsystems, fragments, etc. are just not all that uncommon or unique when we're talking about DID or OSDD. If anyone likes the term for themselves, that's perfectly fine. It really is just more of a casual term, though, not its own diagnosis or special form of dissociation.

Personally, I think "is polyfragmented OSDD-1 real" is not a productive conversation to have. The clinical field largely seems to agree that there's little difference between OSDD-1 and DID, and there's been many proposals to merge them together under a new name or as just DID... Personally, I support this idea. It's not uncommon for someone who better fits DID to get diagnosed with OSDD, vice versa. I’m not surprised that some people diagnosed with OSDD also find that they fit the definition(s) of polyfragmented.

Unfortunately, I see a lot of discourse over polyfragmented OSDD-1 in the online community just devolve into pain olympics. I’m tired of it. In research, DID is often placed on a continuum with PTSD, with OSDD in the middle. I sometimes see people in the online community use this continuum to say that DID is somehow worse than OSDD. Those people assume that "polyfragmented DID" is a worse DID. I understand that it's easier to think of these things in neat little boxes and hierarchies but this is mental health we're talking about here. It just doesn't fucking work like that!

As someone who fits most definitions of polyfragmented DID, I've met people with just PTSD who were more disabled, more in pain, sometimes even more dissociative than me. DID is on a continuum with PTSD, yes, but if your understanding of that is "DID is a worse version of OSDD which is a worse version of PTSD," then you have vastly misunderstood what that continuum means.

[sysmedsaresexist]

I spoke with Colin Ross again.

The original post, for those who missed it.

This is going to be really disjointed and rough. I've been put in a really weird position and I want to just... talk about it. This is okay to reblog, I'm sure there's pro/endos that have been waiting for this. Unfortunately, it's going to be attached to a vent.

Sadly, talking to him brought up a lot of bad feelings. I'm still so sad to see so many people turn on me. I'm disappointed that there was so much pushback. I'm disgusted by people's hypocrisy.

People wanted to know why I wasn't posting my side of the emails to Colin Ross, they tried to say he didn't believe those things anymore.

So I emailed him again, recapping our previous conversations, and asking him if he still believed in non traumagenic plurality.

And he responded that he does.

I thought I could post it, and that would be the end of it. Proving we had spoken before, confirming the topics discussed. But in my email to him, I shared what I've been doing since I last spoke with him, what prompted me to reach out to him again. The same thing that stopped me from posting my side of the emails originally. I wasn't entirely honest with him, either. I don't think I would have gotten a response if I had talked about tumblr.

And I'm simultaneously so excited and so scared.

This is a man that, in a very vague sense, formed a mentor/professional relationship with me. Our interaction overall was brief, but it was exciting to discuss his work with him, ask him questions that had been bothering me-- I told him about myself, my educational and work background. I used my real email and name. My real school. He's Canadian, we talked about it. I shared real details of my life, and while it wasn't necessarily in confidence, I don't think he would appreciate knowing that I've shared his personal thoughts and emails on tumblr, of all places. I'm not lying or hiding anything in my side of the conversation.

I'm scared.

I'm terrified to post anything that could be linked to me. Even posting this, I'm like, "can people like... reverse edit my picture and get my email?" I genuinely don't know.

I worry about posting the full screenshots with his email, knowing people won't believe me if I don't, but not wanting to have these ridiculously immature people in his inbox. I have encouraged people since day one to find his email themselves and reach out. I figure that the only people who would put in that work are the people who genuinely want to learn.

But then I realized that there are people that could ruin the relationship I made with him.

People that could make it so that I can never contact him in this way again.

People could use this to find me, if they get Colin Ross talking. (The rational part of my brain says he's smart enough not to give someone else my name, but goddamn, some of you people are actually dangerous)

There are people that want to do that to me. People that hate that I even brought a professional into this conversation. And I get it. I sat on the original conversation for almost three years, remember?

It's really scary to admit you're wrong, that you've been close-minded and hardheaded. It's scary to confront your bias and actions.

But having him respond to me... I feel so lucky? Not that Colin Ross is a saint, but how often do you get to meet someone like him? How often do you have a chance to take advantage of a professional contact that seems willing and happy to have these kinds of conversations with you? Three years later and he remembered me. He took the time to answer me, again.

I don't want to fuck that up.

So I thought about reaching out to certain people, showing them the entire set of emails without any blockout and having them vouch for the authenticity.

Then I realized that I wouldn't trust any of you anti endogenic systems with any of my information after how you've all behaved.

And I realized that none of you are going to change your minds, no matter what I show you, and I'd rather to maintain my professional relationships than put any more effort into any of you.

And I know if I wait too long to post this, people will call it fake, so I either need to go ahead and make this post or just kind of let it disappear into obscurity.

It's so important, though.

Isn't it?

I can't tell anymore.

[circular-bircular]

Anyways on a related note, I am once again begging people to do the critical thinking of, “What is the purpose of this argument?” before hitting the post button.

What is the purpose of saying “x trauma cannot cause DID”? Who are you helping with this? What activism are you doing? How, tangibly, does this support CDD systems?

[excessivemultiplicity]

The only thing it does is encourage people to look into trauma they aren't ready for or in a safe place to process.

The only thing it does is cause tangible harm to people while stoking their own egos.

[oopsallsyscourse]

what sorta stance would like. someone who just does not care about endogenic plurality at all be? like it isnt relevant to them in the slightest

Typically I see people with that stance use the label endo neutral or syscourse neutral.

But you can just have a stance and just not use a label.

[excessivemultiplicity]

In my experience most people with a stance like that don't bother to label it. Cuz not having an easy to find label tends to disuade discourse heavy bloggers from following.